Of note regarding this is the Apoe 4 gene and the number of excess deaths as a result of enhanced AD. It just seems the sequences of note have much to do with something created in a lab, possibly to eventually deal with the financial crisis and risk to national security of AD and related dementias that were discussed at length a few years before the pandemic to be an upcoming disaster to the country. The grants offered to private investigators through USAMRID might warrant taking a closer look if we ever will do it. Looking at the effects leads back to the beginnings of the spread and the downplay of the contagion which was ramped up by a group in power denying the pathogenicity, whatever that was about. It bothers me that it was so obvious. I can't imagine a political leader of any country performing as some did without having prior knowledge and forgive me if that seems conspiratorial. Having seen and discussed this with friends and acquaintences, people with symptoms which probably had started quite a bit earlier in the USA where people thought they had become short of breath or experienced hallucinatory dreams, perhaps we have missed the boat on how to examine this. There was a plethora of unusual symptoms that seems to have been overlooked, including hallucinations, skin conditions, GI and even sleep patterns that were reported but not investigated. Yes, we definitely need a further look as these pathways would indicate those possibilities. I don't buy zoonotic transmission or accidental release but possibly intentional seeding as an unprecedented attack on some groups that had increased susceptibility enters my thoughts.

I would like to know if Dr. Garry ever responded to the letter from the Congressional oversight committee examining the COVID pandemic, sent to him on 2-3-22? That letter outlines statements made by others under oath (as well as FOIA-requested emails from Fauci) that Dr. Berry was on a call with Fauci in early 2020,where Dr. Kristen Anderson said " The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features
(potentially) look engineered . . . . Eddie [Holmes], Bob [Garry], Mike [Farzan], and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.” Dr. Garry also stated that "“I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario . . . . I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature . . . . Of course,
in the lab it would be easy . . . .” So, the consensus from several 'experts' was that the SARS CoV-2 genetic sequence looked odd and not natural, including Dr. Garry.

However, ~48-hours later, Dr. Garry was one of the participants in the 'Proximal Origin' letter to Nature in 2020, wherein the letter ignored any artificial possibilities and instead emphasized the wet-market theory. The Proximal letter led to the Lancet declaration letter which proclaimed that a consensus of scientists had decided that there was no possibility of a lab leak - this was later amended to disclose financial interests that were previously kept hidden, which is a weird thing to leave out in the original Lancet letter. Financial disclosures/grant funding contributions are a very common component of any kind of publication, so how someone as experienced as all of these Lancet contributors could somehow 'forget' to include that is concerning to me.

My point is that there is enough circumstantial evidence to suggest a closer look is needed, however Dr. Garry is certain he is right as is evidenced by his attacks on this article and the authors a few months ago. Why privately express one concern, and then publicly change that concern? We now know that NIAID and NIH sent federal funds to a 3rd party group (EcoHealth Allliance), who then sent the money to the WIV - this is proven in court and documents released under FOIA requests. When you couple this shady activity with the other bits, plus no cooperation from China nor any real willingness to push the USA, the WHO or China to share info, it looks really bad. Perhaps it is all smoke and no fire, but when we have researchers who chose to act more like politicians rather than objective scientists, it hurts our profession as a whole and breaks public faith. Dr. Garry has since stated that his earlier thoughts on the artificial origin of SARS-CoV-2 were incorrect, but there is simply not enough data to prove any of his statements, and the actions taken by Garry and those around him raise serious concerns about objectivity - Fauci himself stated that the focus on the artificial origins of SARS was a 'shiny object that would go away.' Still too many unknowns, and not a lot of drive from the scientific community to figure out what happened.

https://republicans-oversig...

We went to the moon or not, and if we did, do you really think we cant add up a few nucleotides here and there , more since we have scissors to do it ? The virus was engineered, period.

The most
parsimonious explanation is zoonotic spillover because we do have
phylogenetic evidence of that and it has occurred in the past with avian
and swine flu. Extraordinary claims required extraordinary evidence and we don't even have ordinary evidence that the virus was engineered.

But it isn't an extraordinary claim. That's a misrepresentation of the lab-leak theory. It's a less likely claim, but it isn't extraordinary (so long as the argument isn't a deliberate leak). I doubt we'll ever know where it came from.

All kinds of info in this article to compel an investigation but who exactly is making the call to do so?

Serial passages leave no trace of lab manipulation. CRISPAR also when used to manipulate leave no traces of lab manipulation.

Evolutionary features of the viruses , geography, , past attempts to manipulate biogn in lab ( plenty of examples) ,and history of repeated escapes of wild deadly pathogens, of manipulated or weaponized pathogens are the areas from where the investigations should start and where investigation should focus .

Good luck! Your think they'll release the evidence implicating that they created SARS-CoV-2?

This is a very useful paper, although all data referred to have been known on twitter for more than two years. But it is good to see the truth emerging. Next and even more important will be to instaure a control of risky ("GOF") virology. This is crucial for the future of mankind. It should be done well, to avoid counterproductive measures against virology, a highly important scientific field. We are a few scientists trying to regroup to that aim. Contact me if interested.

·　 Well the first thing to do is ban all travel, quarantine china until they find the source of the origin of the cause of the outbreak of the corona virus, nee ~Sars, nee~ coronary pneumonia,
· But they didnt do that, instead the left the epidemic disperse to foriegn countries like spain and italy till too late, and for that the WHO needs to be persecuted, and not only to ignore lock down of china in january 2020, but wait till march 2020 to proclaim the virus is a pandemic after the fact of dissemination of the pathogen, then tell you to isolate and stay home for two weeks, and not the travelers and spewers all,
·

··

They did not close because and any given time there are millions of foriegn tourists, students and workers in China. When they released the genome of the virus mid January 2020 they told every country to start producing their own test kits to screen the returning travellers at authorized ports of entry. These countries did not do anything. I live in Canada and the government didn't do any screening for 2 months after we knew about the virus. Then it was too late. So blaming the Chinese government is just a scapegoat for the incompetence of your government.

SARS-CoV-2 furin cleavage site was not engineered

Robert F. Garry, PhD 1,2,3

1Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA 70112
2Global Viral Network, Baltimore, MD 21201
3Zalgen Labs, Frederick, MD 21703

Harrison and Sachs (1) call for further investigations into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 is premised in part on conspiracy theories and flawed interpretations of published scientific manuscripts. They note the similarly of a furin cleavage site (FCS) of human amiloride-sensitive epithelial sodium channel alpha subunit (ENaC) with the FCS of SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein (Fig. 1) (2). Although unnamed in the article, there is an assertion that Ralph Baric, a coronavirologist at the University of North Carolina (UNC), may have collaborated with Zhengli Shi at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to engineer a FCS into a bat coronavirus Spike, thereby creating SARS-CoV-2. Harrison and Sachs cite work on rat ENaC from UNC (3, 4) suggesting that Baric and Shi chose human ENaC FCS to make SARS-CoV-2 more infectious for lung epithelia. The clear insinuation is that for over 2.5 years these virologists may have covered-up activities that led directly to the COVID-19 pandemic and deaths of millions of people.

While the authors allow that the “molecular mimicry … might be a mere coincidence” they also assert it would be “one with a very low probability.” However, there are dozens of human proteins besides ENaC with a functional FCS. Human ENaC itself has three other FCS, which are very common in coronaviruses (5). Furthermore, 5 of 8 amino acids (Fig. 1A, RSVAS, underlined) in or near the ENaC FCS shared with SARS-Cov-2 Spike are shared with Spikes of sarbecoviruses unknown prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (Fig. 1A). The four extra amino acids (PRRA) in Spike were added by insertion of twelve nucleotides (Fig. 1B, box) (6).

A number of features of SARS-CoV-2 FCS demonstrate that it was not engineered to mimic human ENaC:
• The insertion created a codon for a proline not present in human ENaC (Fig. 1A).
• The insertion is out-of-frame (Fig. 1B, one of two possible out-of-frame insertions are shown) (6, 7).
• Except for one codon (cgu) each of these codons including two cgg codons are different in human ENaC and SARS-CoV-2 (Fig. 1B).

With regard to our earlier publication (7) Harrison and Sachs wrote, “In fact, the assertion that the FCS in SARS-CoV-2 has an unusual, nonstandard amino acid sequence is false.” We made no such assertion. Rather, we noted that the SARS-CoV-2 FCS is “suboptimal” and that engineering the insertion out-of-frame would be “an unusual and needlessly complex feat of genetic engineering.”

Another conspiracy advanced by Harrison and Sachs (1) is that scientists at NIH and elsewhere, including myself and colleagues, have suppressed theories of a laboratory origin of SARS-CoV-2. This is false. Such theories have been widely promulgated, while remaining without any scientific evidence.

The SARS-CoV-2 FCS was certainly not engineered to mimic the human ENaC FCS. Natural evolution can explain the addition of a FCS in SARS-CoV-2 spike as is observed in numerous other coronaviruses. Several lines of evidence indicate that after evolving in a non-bat animal two related lineages of SARS-CoV-2 emerged via the wild-life trade at the Huanan Market in Wuhan China (8, 9).

Robert F. Garry, PhD
Department of Microbiology and Immunology
Tulane University, New Orleans, LA
Global Viral Network, Baltimore, MD
Zalgen Labs, Frederick, MD

1. Harrison NL & Sachs JD (2022) A call for an independent inquiry into the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 119(21):e2202769119.
2. Anand P, Puranik A, Aravamudan M, Venkatakrishnan AJ, & Soundararajan V (2020) SARS-CoV-2 strategically mimics proteolytic activation of human ENaC. eLife 9:e58603.
3. García-Caballero A, Dang Y, He H, & Stutts MJ (2008) ENaC proteolytic regulation by channel-activating protease 2. The Journal of general physiology 132(5):521-535.
4. Kota P, Gentzsch M, Dang YL, Boucher RC, & Stutts MJ (2018) The N terminus of α-ENaC mediates ENaC cleavage and activation by furin. The Journal of general physiology 150(8):1179-1187.
5. Stout AE, Millet JK, Stanhope MJ, & Whittaker GR (2021) Furin cleavage sites in the spike proteins of bat and rodent coronaviruses: Implications for virus evolution and zoonotic transfer from rodent species. One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 13:100282.
6. Andersen KG, Rambaut A, Lipkin WI, Holmes EC, & Garry RF (2020) The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Nat Med 26(4):450-452.
7. Holmes EC, et al. (2021) The origins of SARS-CoV-2: A critical review. Cell 184(19):4848-4856.
8. Pekar JE, et al. (2022) SARS-CoV-2 emergence very likely resulted from at least two zoonotic events. https://zenodo.org/record/6....
9. Worobey M, et al. (2022) The Huanan market was the epicenter of SARS-CoV-2 emergence https://zenodo.org/record/6....

Nobody is blaming any virologists but rather the responses that seemed deliberately delayed and denied. I'm just approaching this from a different direction and let the virologists keep arguing about the possibilities. From touting it as a hoax or a "leetle floo" or saying nothing and doing nothing, we had a bunch of people who reacted badly if not wierdly in charge or in leadership positions. However the limited species primates sharing human type ENaC regarding proximity to horseshoe bats is not explained here. Is it geographically possible? Where? How? Was it other bat species? Let us know.

I am glad that this well informed reply was allowed.

Here is more professional science;

Andersen, K.G., Rambaut, A., Lipkin, W.I., Holmes, E.C. and Garry, R.F., 2020.
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Nature medicine, 26(4), pp.450-452.

"Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus." And, "However, the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

Worobey, Michael
“Dissecting the early COVID-19 cases in Wuhan”
Science Magazine, 18 Nov 2021, Vol 374, Issue 6572 pp. 1202-1204
Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 virus history. Conclusion: not engineered, not from a lab escape.

Holmes, E.C., Andersen, K.G., Rambaut, A. and Garry, R.F., 2021. Spike protein sequences of Cambodian, Thai and Japanese bat sarbecoviruses provide insights into the natural evolution of the Receptor Binding Domain and S1/S2 cleavage site. Viralogical 621(840), pp.82-6.

Conclusions:
"Newly sequenced sarbecoviruses from bats captured in Cambodia, Thailand and Japan possess different combinations of spike motifs in the RBD and the S1/S2 junction that were first described in SARS-CoV-2. These observations are consistent with the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 and strongly inconsistent with a laboratory origin. Studies of coronavirus diversity in bats and other species must continue."

While I am a practicing physician, I am not a virologist and don't claim the knowledge base shared by either Garry, Harrison, or Sachs. That said, whenever I read immutable declarations such as Garry's "SARS-CoV-2 furin cleavage site was not engineered" I start to get nervous, especially when juxtaposed to Harrisons/Sachs approach: "We do not assert that laboratory manipulation was involved in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, although it is apparent that it could have been."

Additionally, Garry's choice of the word "conspiracy" radically undermines his entire argument. In essence, he attempts to character assassinate the authors by implying they are a part of a kook fringe, not to be listened to, and ignored.

I am not swayed by this.

Here's some advise for Garry et al: After 20 years of medical practice, using these kinds of words and attitudes may work for a while, but ultimately, your worldview will collide with reality. In my world, people get sick and die a lot. If humility isn't a mainstay of my character, I'm going to kill people. Let's all practice some humility and always be asking ourselves, "what if I'm wrong?"

Indeed. Methinks the lady doth protest too much, as Shakespeare said. Labeling alternative hypothesis as a "conspiracy" theory as well is all well and fine until you realize that the "theory" is based on the idea that a set of bizarre coincidences (a lethal coronavirus emerging in the same city as the only lab in china studying how to make coronaviruses more lethal (out of the best of intentions (?)) and just one or two years after said lab proposed adding features to the virus that remarkably appeared, again, within spitting distance of that lab, and all the while as Chinese authorities engage in a level of information suppression totally unlike their behavior with the first SARS virus, when they were completely transparent and quickly identified the index patient...). I mean...if this theory is a "conspiracy" it's the most reasonable conspiracy of the last 120 years..

Is it true that the codon usage for Arg in coronavirus is different from humans?
“The sequence encoding the FCS of the pandemic virus contained two consecutive CGG arginine codons,” Ebright explained “This codon usage is unusual for a natural bat SARS-related coronaviruses (for which fewer than 1 in 30 arginine codons are CGG) but is optimal for humans (for which most arginine codons are CGG codons).”
This would mean that the chances of SARS-CoV2 of evolving naturally to acquire this sequence would be minimal and the chances of having acquired it from a human sequence are very large. Does anyone have the NUCLEOTIDE sequence of SARS-CoV2 furin site aligned with the human ENaC? It would be great to have a look.

100% researchers (especially Chinese) would have performed nearly 90% of the experiments proposed in their grant applications. Please don't question this statement. We all know this. Why do you think most intelligent researchers were kicked out from competing grants from (notorious) NIH? We only propose a study, but could not provide preliminary data. Then, those arrogant Reviewers would triage our grants. Trust me on this. The furin site was already added to the viral genome by those people. The virus infected sloppy Chinese worker. S/He spread it. It killed more than 7 million people.
Dear authors, please do not give up on this issue.

Agree. I've submitted NIH grants and preliminary data is not enough. You need to have done most of the proposed experiments.

Dr. Sachs and PNAS should be commended for publishing this insightful article. Quite a number of virologists have raised serious concerns and questions about the origin of Sars-Cov2. Perhaps more obvious, is the likelihood of the Omicron variant having a lab origin considering the low rate of mutation in human hosts based on several million genomic sequences from Sars-Cov2 infected patients.
Unfortunately, these concerns appear to have been actively filtered out from public forums.

The furin cleavage site has been a sticking point before even the conspiracy theories. It has been shown to exist in bats in the wild, and while rare and coincidental, SARS-CoVid-2/covid-19 cannot be proven to be man-made.
All this nonsense about getting to the truth buried in documents warehoused at DARPA, NIH, et alia, can only create more confusion and paranoia.
IF (Big IF) any documents proving laboratory creation and leak of covid-19 existed, they would have been destroyed long ago.

A furin cleavage site does NOT exist in the wild in ANY beta sarbecovirus known to humankind. Never in history. Only in SARSCov2. Comparing this with other types of viruses that have them defies the logic of evolution and deceives regarding the virus's origin which is clearly NOT from a different genus, Mr. genius.

Where do you get your invalid information?
Here's mine:
Cell Research, 2020 Dec 9
50:102115.
doi: 10.1016/j.scr.2020.102115. Online ahead of print.
Furin cleavage sites naturally occur in coronaviruses

The spike protein is a focused target of COVID-19, a pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2. A 12-nt insertion at S1/S2 in the spike coding sequence yields a furin cleavage site, which raised controversy views on origin of the virus. Here we analyzed the phylogenetic relationships of coronavirus spike proteins and mapped furin recognition motif on the tree. Furin cleavage sites occurred independently for multiple times in the evolution of the coronavirus family, supporting the natural occurring hypothesis of SARS-CoV-2.

[The furin cleavage site has been a sticking point before even the conspiracy theories.]

Oh please, the old "conspiracy theories" shtick. Your whole comment now becomes suspect.

[All this nonsense about getting to the truth buried in documents warehoused at DARPA, NIH, et alia, can only create more confusion and paranoia.]

All of the deliberate hiding and redacting of the information creates the suspicion.

[IF (Big IF) any documents proving laboratory creation and leak of covid-19 existed, they would have been destroyed long ago.]

So further reason to distrust "DARPA, NIH, et alia."

Thank you for underlining the valid reasons for concern.

And thank you for demonstrating the loss of an open mind and pre-conceived biases.

This is what is known as a circular reasoning fallacy: "All of the deliberate hiding and redacting" Assuming the proof.

Nonsense? All the redacted documents cannot be destroyed. There's much to learn removing the redactions from those documents.

As was pointed out in the original, it would be EXTREMELY damaging to parties involved if their documents clearly demonstrated any intentional gain of function research which generated SARS-CoV-2 AND, through error or intent, released this virus.
Therefore, it is extremely unlikely that any documents of this nature would be allowed to remain -- they would not be merely redacted, at this point they would have been destroyed.
At best, this endeavor is a wild goose chase; at worst it is a manifestation of the intentional depredation by those who would disparage and diminish science.

EXTREMELY damaging to parties involved if their documents clearly demonstrated any intentional gain of function research which generated SARS-CoV-2 AND, through error or intent, released this virus.--- This is nonsense . This is not scientific argument .

It is like saying - I didnt commit the murder because all the evidences you are talking ,woukd have been destroyed by me. Since those evidences were not destroyed,the evidences are unimportant and irrelevant.

straw man argument: The above statement was NOT meant as an argument in defense of or counter to any research; it was merely an aside remark.
Rather than spend all this time and energy looking for the "missing element" which will PROVE your thesis, how about canvassing your neighborhood to make sure ALL people have gotten covid vaccines, wear masks, and manage their contact distances? It seems to me this would be a vastly more valuable endeavor than posting hypotheticals...UNLESS you think the covid virus is a HOAX, and over 1 million dead Americans is a propaganda lie and long covid could never happen to me....

I strongly disagree on several levels with the argument of "well, these documents would have been destroyed, so why bother looking for them?"

First, I don't believe that argument is necessarily true. Large organizations such as NIH, DARPA, etc. generally have data retention procedures - e.g., server backups that are periodically stored at secure off-site locations - that make it very difficult for a handful of officials to decide simply to "destroy" all traces of documents. A full-fledged attempt to destroy all such records would very likely require involving a wider range of people who would have to decide whether to go along with extremely unusual requests to destroy backups that would otherwise be retained. Someone ordinarily involved in retaining such records would almost certainly know that doing so could lead to to federal charges for destruction of records under 18 U.S.C. § 2071, resulting in up to 3 years in prison. (If ihe information has value greater than $1,000, then 18 USC §1361 specifies a sentence of up to 10 years in prison.)

Second, it's not nearly as simple as Psyolic supposes to scrub all relevant records about a specific subject in this age of email and other electronic records. It's very possible that even an attempt to destroy records by someone at NIH, DARPA, etc. would overlook some relevant records.

Third, if in fact records were destroyed, then the public should absolutely want an investigation to determine that this destruction occurred and what federal employees were responsible. Those people should absolutely be fired from government service and also prosecuted for federal crimes under relevant laws (such as the ones that I mentioned above).

How do you prove that non-existent documents had been destroyed?

If the "secret" information was NEVER recorded/documented in the first place, it would not need to be "scrubbed".

Two points raised by Realist50 actually disprove the premise:

1. Since there would be extensive cross-annotation (second point, above), surely something would have been found by now.

2. Re: data retention procedures (First point, above) - if the data was never documented in the 'normal process' of retention, it would be invisible. Think JFK and RFK assassinations -- were they really executed by 'lone gunmen'? Was there a paper trail? By
3. The third point (Third, above) is a hypothetical: IF records existed, and IF records were destroyed, Then the 'public' would want an investigation to find guilt and punishment. Here we have a counter-example in ex-president trump. There have been numerous EXPLICIT AND DOCUMENTED lapses in judgement, protocol, and lawful actions, yet he stands, counter to section 3 of the 14th Amendment, a candidate for presidential office.

The issue as I stated is NOT, why bother, but the distraction from FIXING the real and potential problems of gain-of-function research and inadequate biosafety regulations and protocols should be the PRIORITY. Fix the Problem, NOT the Blame.
While I have concerns about Peter Daszak (president of EcoHealth Alliance and ex-partner in Wuhan Institute of Virology), his arguments regarding lack of funded research would imply an absence of documentation: (https://theintercept.com/20...

How does someone who clearly does not want to know the truth posture themselves as a defender of science. Science is truth. We should seek it.

By all means, let's devote our resources to proving that the earth is not flat, and that the moon landing actually DID take place.
Some people NEVER learn.

Rather than spend all this time and energy looking for the "missing
element" which will PROVE your thesis, how about canvassing your
neighborhood to make sure ALL people have gotten covid vaccines, wear
masks, and manage their contact distances? It seems to me this would be a
vastly more valuable endeavor than posting hypotheticals...UNLESS you
think the covid virus is a HOAX, and over 1 million dead Americans is a
propaganda lie and long covid could never happen to me....

The sequence data the Chinese had asked to be deleted wasn't actually destroyed but rather removed from public access. The DARPA funding application spelling out research which would produce precisely what SARS-COV-2 turned out to be, is very compelling. There are many such 'coincidences' which are statistically improbable to deny a lab leak hypothesis.
This endevour is absolutely necessay to prevent a possible future lab leak. It has happened in the past and will most certainly happen again. Disparaging and diminishing science? It's not religion, stop treating it as such.

A. The deletion was done to prevent contamination and mis-attribution, CDC and medical researchers STILL have access to this data, and it does NOT prove intention or accident;
B. The funding application was quite straightforward, AND IT WAS DENIED.
C. All the regulations in the world will NOT prevent a dedicated bad actor (trump destroying Federal offices of

Energy, Agriculture, EPA, etc) , or total series of accidents (three mile island).

Rather than spend all this time and energy looking for the "missing
element" which will PROVE your thesis, how about canvassing your
neighborhood to make sure ALL people have gotten covid vaccines, wear
masks, and manage their contact distances? It seems to me this would be a
vastly more valuable endeavor than posting hypotheticals...UNLESS you
think the covid virus is a HOAX, and over 1 million dead Americans is a
propaganda lie and long covid could never happen to me....

China took the database offline because it was being hacked.
And the 'compelling' DARPA funding for 'covid19' REMAINS hypothetical, regardless of 'coincidences'.
EcoHealth Alliance has compelling arguments for why this is nothing more than 'conspiracy theorizing' (https://theintercept.com/20...
You cannot state that the 'coincidences' are "statistically improbable" without a frame of reference for the data fields.
Creationists use this logic to prove that 'Intelligent Design' was responsible for humans because random molecular and biochemical interactions could not have possibly created humans -- it is 'statistically improbable'!

Absolutely prevent gain-of-function 'research'. Absolutely, conduct all POTENTIALLY dangerous testing and analysis in Biosafety Level 4 sites with STRICT adherence to the rules.
This should be a Given!
And testing and analysis should be for PREVENTION and TREATMENT, not exploration into how much more easily we can make it spread!
The above has NOTHING to do with possibly hidden or redacted data.
The march should NOT be about what was hidden or accidental, but about preventing such issues from occurring:
Monkey Pox, Hantavirus , and existing bacterial Plague infections are real threats.

"statistically improbable" is NOT defined in this scenario; the phrase is a rhetorical device with NO analytic meaning.
Since you do not understand genetics, and have ignored the mutation rate of this particularly deadly virus, you cannot claim any validity for your statement.
Coincidences may be troubling, but they are not proof of intention.
There is a long line of troubled individuals seeking to ascribe political motivation or evil intent to covid19, even though there was no such throng for MERS or SARS or SARS-CoV-1. Or, for that matter, the influenza epidemic of 1918.
Further, as I indicated, since the repercussions of the slightest hint of gain-of-function are catastrophic, the likelihood of finding a SHRED of "proof" is as likely as finding conspiratorial culpability in the assassination of JFK.

MERS, SARS, SARS-CoV-1 all have clearly established animal vectors that prove zoonotic origins. It's been 30 months since the "first" documented SARS-CoV-2 case and NO animal intermediate host has been found, even though finding it would be extremely valuable to parties denying lab origin. Until the intermediate host is found, the lab escape scenario cannot be excluded and becomes more likely with time.

Because somehow the bats don't count?
Villagers living near bat roosts could easily have been infected and later spread the disease in the two or three sites identified as sources of infection.

The intermediate host was almost certainly (via serial passaging) a patented hACE2 transgenic "humanized" mouse--something that UNC virologist Ralph S. Baric not only uses in his coronavirus experiments, but which was actually developed in his lab! Although the public still isn't generally cognizant of this, I would have expected that Jeffrey Sachs would know about it, but I don't see any evidence of this in his recent articles and public statements on the matter of the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2.

Science does not move as fast as you might like: It took 50 years for Einstein's theories on Black Holes to be moved to known science, and more than 30 years for Higgs' 'particle' to be demonstrated.
Absence of proof is not proof of absence.