1) They include observation from figures who started open to the idea that the lab leak hypothesis was plausible enough to explore, but have concluded that it's unlikely (and explain why)
2) They are more recent
1) They do not explain way, Worobey just assumes that first patient was different person, with connection to wet market, while it is known that both WHO and China identified earlier patient without connection to the wet market. If you read long enough you will find that he is being criticized exactly for that assumptions without any proof.
2) Does not matter.