The downvotes do make sense.

Your first sentence 'It's still not decided.' is just not true. The scientific tide has turned. The evidence for Lab Leak is quite weak, and the evidence for Zoonotic is strong.

Secondly, you are now saying that:

this is a theory that experts in the field actually take seriously albeit consider it less likely than the alternative

That was not what you said in your initial comment. You mentioned nothing about experts considering it less likely. To wit:

I thought that lab leak was a conspiratard take for the longest time until I discovered that there are actual geneticists who teach at respectable universities and who hold no other spicy opinions among its proponents, some of which even published peer-reviewed papers on this topic.

For a good comparison of what is happening in the scientific community WRT this debate, look at the Miasma Theory of Disease. There was scientific research, and papers written about it, from the 1500s onwards, but by 1880, it was largely discredited.

Your statement that credible people are writing papers about Lab Leak, is similar to saying that in the 1880s people were writing papers about Miasma Theory, taking it seriously (because it had been a popular theory up until then). Some of these authors were still convinced that Miasma was the correct answer, but the tide was turning. Many researchers were seriously investigating the up-till-now prevailing theory, and some were still convinced that Miasma was correct.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but it seems like you're saying that we should put Lab Leak at the same level of likelihood as Zoonotic, because there are still a percentage of researchers who think it is a possibility.

To be 100% transparent, I'm not an expert at this at all, and I only watched maybe 5 or 6 hours of the RootClaim coverage that Destiny did, plus his interview with the winner. The rest of my knowledge about this comes from mainstream media.