Ummm, calling it a bio weapon IS an unfounded conspiracy theory.
You want an "unfounded conspiracy theory? How about this assessment:
COVID-19 was an early-stage and very unstable prototype for a bio weapon which was accidentally released from the Wuhan laboratory in late September 2019.
The original virus was derived from a "gain-of-function" research program at the University in Toronto, Canada, which program was abandoned in 2015 because the sponsors considered it too dangerous to continue. Chinese scientists were hired from the Toronto lab to work on a continued program at the Wuhan lab.
The US Government contributed $3.7 million dollars in funding to the Wuhan laboratory. There has never been any public explanation for why this money was given.
By some accounts, a lab animal bit a technician, who died in October,from the resulting infection. That person has a name, which has been widely circulated in China. The Chinese Government claims she is still alive, but does not allow any current interviews with her.
The original infection appeared to be moderately contagious and 100% fatal. A number of other patients died in October and early November. The Chinese bureaucrats were terrified that they had loosed a "slate-wiper" in their own country. A great deal of finger-pointing and organizational paralysis ensured. Many phone calls were made. Many intemperate e-mails were sent.
Western National Intelligence agencies have thousands of such intercepts, as well as first-hand accounts from local assets.
Concealment programs were fully in place by December 2019. Civilian doctors who encountered patients were quickly and strictly ordered to keep silent. Some doctors ignored these orders and were sanctioned. That did not stop the rumors from spreading.
The virus was unstable, and appeared to be mutating into less-lethal forms. The bureaucrats concluded that it might not be the feared "slate-wiper", but locking down the country would limit the spread until they could determine what treatment options might be effective.
Cancelling travel before the Chinese New Year celebrations was a very big deal. The Government relaxed censorship restrictions and let rumors of the virus persist. That made it much easier to promote regional lock-downs. They did insert misdirection into the rumor streams, attributing the virus to US Army sources.
In a classic demonstration of vindictiveness, the Chinese Government allowed its citizens to travel internationally for the Chinese New Year celebration, while prohibiting such travel within the country. This was a deliberate policy to "spread the misery", by seeding the virus into Western countries. It worked. Serious outbreaks followed in Ecuador, Italy, and Iran with many fatalities. The virus spread rapidly to the rest of the world.
That last topic of assessment ("deliberate seeding")would constitute a biological weapons attack, and under long-standing US policy, would be regarded as equivalent to a nuclear weapons attack. The US policy for such events calls for immediate retaliation with nuclear weapons.
Nobody in authority wants to escalate to that level. For that reason alone, the "deliberate seeding" topic could never be allowed to be "proven" - even if there were direct evidence that such conversations and orders occurred.
The COVID-19 virus has mutated into at least six distinct strains, each one less lethal than its predecessors. The most common strain extant now creates no symptoms in over 50% of patients and requires a lab test to detect it. There are several cheap, effective medications which will stop the infection in vulnerable patients. These must be given within the first few days of symptom onset in order to work.
Leftist political authorities in every Western country have claimed new and unrestricted totalitarian powers over their subjects and have no incentive to relinquish them. They are determined to "never let a crisis go to waste".
This assessment is for entertainment purposes only. It was derived entirely from open-source information. You do not need to believe a single word of it.
What do you call it?