If it was not a lab leak, then the value of "such" much be very small. (I have no opinion on that beyond what I learned from your article on whether this is so.)

Some level of peril is necessary to allow infectious disease research to continue.

"Are allowed to proceed"? I didn't do it! "The passive voice conceals a multitude of sins" (I'm quoting myself). "Are allowed to proceed" should be rearranged to say, "Why does the Chinese government allow..." (if it turns out to be a lab leak) because the CCP is where the buck stops for that particular lab.

No one government should be in charge, making your passive more accurate.

The correct answer is this: we need an international agreement and strict monitoring of all dangerous laboratories, particularly biolabs, and a much more careful and universal discussion on what experiments are allowed in any given facility and what are too dangerous to be performed at all.

However, remember the anthrax attacks in the US in 2001 turned out to be anthrax that had been cultured by the US Army at Fort Detrick and then stolen.

So I unfortunately think it might be unlikely to get either the US or China's buy-in on any sort of international inspection and regulation to prevent this from happening again.