A failed experiment? Maybe a bit more likely, but still I don't think so
Sars-Cov-2 looks like pretty much what it is: a zoonotic virus that "doesn't know what's going on"
Hence why only the recent mutations made its transmission more efficient.
Now, if it escaped unbeknownst from a research lab, that I would put on the plausible category. Would be more possible if it wouldn't have had a perfect virus breeding ground right next to it.
How about this possibility: (1) You've got this lab that uses a lot of animals and does experiments. (2) There is a 'wet' market nearby that deals in animals from A to Z. (3) Maybe some animal from the lab carrying a zoonotic virus (origin unknown) somehow got disposed of for cash in the market? How could WHO or anyone uncover such an occurrence a year or more later? Would it be possible that such a thing had happened and no one ever had had any idea that it had happened?
Or maybe it was in humans a bit before it took off. I see Daszak's kind of changed his tune a bit these days to not mention anything like that lab stuff.
I mean stability in that the sequence of the virus is much the same as it was a month before. That's not true when a virus jumps species - they evolve rapidly to the new species.
A failed experiment? Maybe a bit more likely, but still I don't think so
Sars-Cov-2 looks like pretty much what it is: a zoonotic virus that "doesn't know what's going on"
Hence why only the recent mutations made its transmission more efficient.
Now, if it escaped unbeknownst from a research lab, that I would put on the plausible category. Would be more possible if it wouldn't have had a perfect virus breeding ground right next to it.