"The Lab-Leak Theory Meets Its Perfect Match"

A really interesting puzzle that I don't have the time nor the expertise required to even be a well-informed layperson about. All I really know is that the lab-leak theory was rejected for obviously weak reasons, at least in part because, as is so often the case now, it took on a political valence and progressives didn't like it--probably because they now tend to be oddly pro-China. And the lab-leak theory seemed more anti-China than did the wet-market (ugh...what a term) theory. (The former is more on the China is evil and incompetent end of things, the latter more on the China is gross end of things.)

   Anyway...no sleep again, so I just skimmed this Atlantic piece even.

   We could get the worst of both explanatory worlds if we combined the two into something like: Wet markets are hotspots for interspecies transmission...the virus leaked from the lab and then naturally gravitated to such a hotspot and then went crazy.  

   I don't care about the political quibble over this, except to the extent that it interferes with figuring out what happened. Anyway, the kinda-stupid suggestion above isn't quite the worst of both hypotheses. I mean, it doesn't require two origin stories. And it would explain why such the virus would originate near both the lab and the "wet market" (again...ugh). The idea is something like: you could have leaky labs without the leaked viruses necessarily causing trouble...unless one leaked into a wet market. But those things are hotspots for trading viruses among species, and so they exacerbate the problem...something something something. 

   Obviously I'm basically just bullshitting here. And if this were anything more than bullshitting, somebody else would have suggested it already.