previously, virologists have seen no 'manufactured backbone' in the gnome of SARS-CoV-2...i.e. they don't believe the Wuhan Lab created COVID-19.

Here's an AI summary to help you...
-------------------

AI Overview
Yes, virologists and intelligence analysts view an accidental exposure to an already existing, naturally occurring virus as the most plausible scenario if a laboratory leak occurred. While the vast majority of the global scientific community maintains that the COVID-19 pandemic most likely began through natural zoonotic spillover at a wildlife market, those who evaluate or support the lab leak hypothesis generally distinguish between a virus that was genetically engineered and one that was collected from the wild. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

The Unengineered Lab Leak Concept
If the virus did originate from a laboratory setting, the prevailing consensus among experts is that it would have involved a naturally occurring pathogen that researchers had collected from wildlife (such as bats) for study, rather than a completely synthetic or deliberately manipulated bioweapon. [1, 2]

• Collection of Wild Viruses: The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) routinely gathered and cataloged field samples of coronaviruses from remote bat caves to study pandemic risks. A lab-leak scenario under this premise suggests a researcher was accidentally infected while collecting samples in the field, or while handling an uncataloged, naturally occurring virus inside the facility. [1, 2]

• Absence of Engineering Signatures: Peer-reviewed genomic studies published in journals like Science and Cell have continuously shown that SARS-CoV-2 lacks any signs of man-made genetic manipulation or deliberate engineering. Features once heavily debated, such as the furin cleavage site, have been identified as commonplace among wild coronaviruses and are genetically suboptimal in a way that suggests natural evolution rather than human design

Disagreements Over Evidence
Even when considering the leak of an existing virus, the virology community remains deeply divided from certain intelligence sectors regarding the probability of this event: [1, 2]

• The Scientific Consensus: Most virologists argue against a lab leak of any kind. They highlight that the earliest recorded human cases in December 2019 formed a strict geographical cluster centered precisely around the Huanan Seafood Market, rather than the vicinity of the institute. Additionally, the simultaneous circulation of two distinct early viral lineages (Lineage A and B) strongly aligns with multiple natural spillovers from animals in a market setting, rather than a single escape point from a lab.[1, 2, 3, 4]

• Intelligence and Institutional Appraisals: Various U.S. government entities, including the FBI, the Energy Department, and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) have leaned toward low-to-moderate confidence assessments that a lab accident was the likely catalyst. However, these agencies similarly point to a laboratory safety failure or accidental exposure involving a naturally collected sample, rather than the creation of a novel engineered pathogen
-----------------