This is a fantastically written piece. I think, importantly, it finally shed some light as they why the NIH (and Fauci in particular) seem so dead set against entertaining the possibility that the virus is lab made: because they would feel the weight of responsibility too closely.

One of the things the article doesn't touch too much on is China's absolute obstructionism of investigations (though that has been written about extensively elsewhere). To me, this is some of the best circumstantial evidence of the virus's origins, because there's no shame in a naturally occurring virus. It's not as if they obstructed SARS investigations in 03. In fact, they signed a compact with other SE Asian countries to facilitate expedience in handling and investigating similar outbreaks.

Personally, I have very little doubt about the lab hypothesis. There may be no direct evidence for either scenario, but there's two steps in one case, each of which are easy to describe and perform (i.e. creation and release). And there are a dozen hypothetical and vaguely described steps to the other case. Occam's razor couldn't be sharper here.