> Besides RaTG13 and RmYN02, very recently SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses were isolated from two Rhinolophus shamelibats (RshSTT200 and RshSTT182). These animals were sampled in Cambodia in 2010, and samples were processed for sequencing recently.(55) The whole genome comparisons indicated that these viruses overall shared the nucleotide identity of 92.6% with SARS-CoV-2. The results suggest that the geographical distribution of SARS-CoV-2 related viruses is much wider than previously expected.(55)Another study found related viruses in Thailand, in Rhinolophus acuminatus bats, where near identical viruses were found in five animals from a single colony, suggesting a colony-specific sequence signature.(55a)The above-mentioned bat viruses differ in their ability to bind to the human ACE2 receptor from RmYN02, but both RmYN02 and RshSTT200/182 share part of the furin-cleavage site unique to SARS-CoV-2. There is evidence of recombination in the evolutionary history of these Thailand bat coronaviruses.

So now there's two bat sarbecoviruses which share part of the furin cleavage site with SARS-CoV-2 and which show genetic evidence of recombination.

Combined with the fact that HCoV-OC43 an HCoV-HKU1 both also have furin cleavage sites and either coronaviruses are naturally swapping genetic material via recombination or else there is parallel evolution happening due to selection for that genetic coding and its arisen multiple times naturally:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187350612...

That pretty much kills the idea that the furin cleavage site "diff" between SARS-CoV-2 and RaTG13 is necessarily evidence of human laboratory experiments. Nature has apparently done that in many coronaviruses, including SARS-related ones.