So the non retarded Lab Leak Theory was mostly revitalized by a guy called Yuri Deigin. With a relatively small group they did some basic open source investigations related to this. They produced this paper...
https://yurideigin.medium.com/lab-ma...h-f96dd7413748
...it was about 16k words before revisions. It's really not relevant to read it for anyone. I did months ago, but i don't expect anyone else does.
This video from 7:40 mark explains his stance about deliberate release...
...by his own words. An accidental release more or less.
The paper mostly covers the background of the major players and some history of genetic engineering. For this the relevant parts are creation of chimeric viruses, reproducing/mutating viruses in labs and the current possibilities/speeds that exists.
Other things that some people feel are relevant are the conflict of interest issues. The people that know most about this have most to lose if there was an overreaction towards the whole field of study.
The people that have nothing to lose and know very little about this have been refuted several times. The same people also tend to have something to gain from mere exposure and usually something to sell for their newly gained audience.
What the paper does not have is any evidence. There are no known forensic markers in cov2 that indicate it was engineered. For several reasons that also doesn't give heavy support for the natural creation theory.
It does to a degree refute some earlier "claims" that led Druff to believe someone was saying Lab Leak is impossible. The Nature paper that actually outlines several of Deigin's discoveries. The difference is that the Nature paper came out a year before. From their point of view with then current knowledge their conclusions were logical. Things that remain are complete lack of any evidence.
The differences come from better knowledge of the available strains to create chimeric viruses. Information that came from the earliest possible infections. And other stuff of that sort. There are also factual errors with Delgin's paper, some revised and some still in it.
In the next post i'll compile a few quotes from the paper that i believe to be true and/or describe the findings.