From what I can read in that article, before the paywall kicks in, this claim is not peer reviewed and "Two recent publications appear to have bolstered the case for a natural origin connected to a “wet market” in Wuhan."
I assume it gets a bit more convincing afterwards? Must say, I'm surprised it's not been peer reviewed considering you say that most major medical and scientific institutions are on that side of the fence
I'm sure you'll be ok with me questioning this article, right?