Dr. Fauci, the Director of NIAID, was under oath when speaking with Senator Rand Paul. He denied that the NIH funded the gain-of-function research in Wuhan.
Today the NIH provided a document to the US House of Representatives that claims that the NIH did fund gain-of-function research in Wuhan.
Most scientists think that SARS-CoV-2 underwent a natural process and evolved into a virus that could infect humans. The widely accepted theory is that, against all the odds, a bat coronavirus managed to get inside a pangolin and then get inside the exact same blood cell as a pangolin coronavirus, and then these two viruses gave rise to a brand new kind of virus that could infect humans. This is classed as zoonotic infection – this is where a virus is supposed to jump species and start being able to infect humans by acquiring specific mutations.
Over the last 20 years, there have been loads of outbreaks where a virus has jumped species and become a threat to humans – apparently, it just keeps on happening! Flu from pigs and birds…. SARS, MERS, and Ebola from bats.i But some scientists have dismissed the zoonotic theory for the origin of SARS-CoV-2; they think the bat/pangolin theory is very unlikely, for a whole bunch of reasons. These scientists are molecular biologists and geneticists who have studied the design of the virus and come to the conclusion that SARS-CoV-2 was carefully crafted in a laboratory, and that it either escaped from a lab accidentally or was released on purpose.
According to Yuri Deigin (Lab-Made? SARS-CoV-2 Genealogy Through the Lens of Gain-of-Function Research):
“If you hear anyone claim ‘we know the virus didn’t come from a lab’, don’t buy it — it may well have. Labs around the globe have been creating synthetic viruses like CoV2 for years. And no, its genome would not necessarily contain hallmarks of human manipulation: modern genetic engineering tools permit cutting and pasting genomic fragments without leaving a trace. It can be done quickly, too: it took a Swiss team less than a month to create a synthetic clone of CoV2.”
Deigin originally assumed it was bound to be a natural virus, and set out to prove the ‘conspiracy theorists’ wrong, but the more he looked, the more he started thinking they might be right, and that SARS-CoV-2 really could be a man-made virus. He says it’s “an obvious chimera” that’s based on a bat-CoV in which part of the spike (the RBM) has been replaced with the RBM from a pangolin-CoV. He also notes the unusual addition of a furin cleavage site which “significantly expands the ‘repertoire’ of the virus in terms of whose cells it can penetrate.”
This furin cleavage site is said to make the virus even more dangerous because of the way it gets processed by the body, but nobody can explain how it got there. It’s not found in similar coronaviruses so scientists can’t explain how SARS-CoV-2 came to have one. Lots of other viruses have got one, though, and the NIH came up with a solution called the pre-fusion technique, then spent several years perfecting the technique in secret tests with Moderna. In fact, all but one of the alleged outbreaks that have taken place over the last 40 years have involved a virus with a furin cleavage site. This includes HIV, influenza, MERS, Zika and Ebola; it was just SARS-CoV that didn’t have one. Moderna was secretly working with the NIH to develop vaccines for some of these viruses and this involved using viruses AND furin for testing.ii Reseachers have previously experimented with inserting a furin cleavage site into SARS-1 (e.g. in 2006 and 2008).
One of the most important reasons to study the design of the rona is that most of the changes that have aroused suspicion involve the spike protein, and it’s the spike protein that’s in the vaccines. A key feature of the spike is the RBD (receptor binding domain) because this is the bit that determines how a virus is able to infect a particular species, and the RBD of the rona is very suspicious indeed. It just doesn’t seem natural.iii It’s supposed to have evolved from a bat virus, and a pangolin virus, so it should be able to infect bats and pangolins better than it can infect humans, but in fact the SARS-CoV-2 virus is far better at infecting humans than any other species!
18 months before the pandemic, scientists in Wuhan, China submitted a proposal to release enhanced airborne coronaviruses into the wild in an effort to inoculate them against diseases that could have otherwise jumped to humans, according to The Telegraph, citing leaked grant proposals from 2018.
New documents show that just 18 months before the first Covid-19 cases appeared, researchers had submitted plans to release skin-penetrating nanoparticles containing “novel chimeric spike proteins” of bat coronaviruses into cave bats in Yunnan, China.
They also planned to create chimeric viruses, genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily, and requested $14million from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) to fund the work.
The bid was submitted by zoologist Peter Daszak of US-based EcoHealth Alliance, who was hoping to use genetic engineering to cobble “human-specific cleavage sites” onto bat Covid ‘which would make it easier for the virus to enter human cells’ – a method which would coincidentally answer a longstanding question among the scientific community as to how SARS-CoV-2 evolved to become so infectious to humans.
Daszak’s proposal also included plans to commingle high-risk natural coronaviruses strains with more infectious, yet less deadly versions. His ‘bat team’ of researchers included Dr. Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as well as US researchers from the University of North Carolina and the US Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Center.
Scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), including British zoologist Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, were reportedly planning to release “enhanced airborne coronaviruses into Chinese bat populations” to inoculate them in the months before the pandemic. The scientists also sought funding from the U.S. to “create chimeric viruses,” which are “genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily.”
The Telegraph reported that the plans from the Chinese scientists were revealed in leaked grant proposals dating back to 2018, which a former U.S. official confirmed as being authentic, the outlet claimed.
“New documents show that just 18 months before the first Covid-19 cases appeared, researchers had submitted plans to release skin-penetrating nanoparticles containing ‘novel chimeric spike proteins’ of bat coronaviruses into cave bats in Yunnan, China,” The Telegraph reported. “Papers, confirmed as genuine by a former member of the Trump administration, show they were hoping to introduce ‘human-specific cleavage sites’ to bat coronaviruses which would make it easier for the virus to enter human cells.”
As you may recall from the early days of the plandemic, 27 “scientists” penned a letter published in The Lancet that claimed the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) did not originate in a Wuhan laboratory. Well, it turns out that 26 of these scientists have direct ties to the Chinese lab in question, making their claims entirely untrustworthy.
That letter, which was published on March 7, 2020, “strongly condemned conspiracy theories” related to the Chinese Virus that suggest it did not come about by chance from bat soup at a wet market. Chinese Germs, they insist, are a product of nature, not of genetic tampering.
This declaration was intended to be the end of the conversation, except for the fact that inquiring minds decided to look into the matter further. What they found is that almost all of the scientists in question have major conflicts of interest when it comes to telling the truth.
The Daily Telegraph discovered that 96 percent of the research team that authored the article for The Lancet have links to Chinese researchers or their colleagues or benefactors at the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), China’s only known level-four biosafety lab.
When Dr. Anthony Fauci confidently screamed at Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) in July – calling him a liar for accusing him of funding so-called “Gain-of-Function” (GoF) research in Wuhan, China to make coronaviruses more transmissible to humans, the argument ultimately faded due to Fauci’s unsupported claim that the research didn’t technically fit the definition of GoF.
Now, thanks to materials (here and here) released through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Intercept against the National Institutes of Health (which were unredacted enough to toss Fauci under the bus), we now know that Fauci-funded EcoHealth Alliance, a New York-based nonprofit headed by Peter Daszak, was absolutely engaged in gain-of-function research to make chimeric SARS-based coronaviruses, which they confirmed could infect human cells.
Back in May, President Biden gave the intelligence community 90 days to produce a report on the likely origins of SARS-CoV-2, and the president promised to share the findings with the public, no matter how inflammatory.
Well, the 90-day window is nearly up, and it looks like the intelligence community has made good on its promise. Case in point: the first details of the report have been leaked to the Washington Post, which reported on Wednesday that the ultimate finding is “inconclusive”.
This means the administration couldn’t find enough evidence to support both of the leading theories: That the virus hopped from an animal to a human, or that the virus leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. While the notion that COVID leaked from a lab was once hyper-sensitive (indeed, Zero Hedge was banned from Twitter for daring to suggest that the WIV played a role in infecting the world with COVID), it’s now reportedly become the leading scenario in the eyes of the intelligence community (though they seem unwilling to publicly admit this).
WaPo says the Intelligence community will seek to de-classify the report in the coming days, meaning it will likely dominate the news cycle later in the week.
Biden asked America’s spy agencies to get to the bottom of the issue after receiving a report back in May from the intelligence agencies saying that they had “coalesced around two likely scenarios” but had not yet reached a conclusion. A group of scientists also published an open letter earlier this year declaring a lab leak to be the most likely scenario.
Throughout the world, scientific research and experiments involving ethical issues must first pass the scrutiny of ethics committees. In recent years, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has conducted many experiments in the field of biomedical and genetic engineering that break human ethical boundaries.
China began implementing the Ethical Review of Biomedical Research Involving Humans on Dec. 1, 2016. However, 122 Chinese scientists who co-signed an open letter in 2018 to oppose gene-edited babies criticized China’s biomedical ethics review as a “sham.”
In the United States, as ethical and moral regulations on animal research have become stricter, budgets and funding have tended to decrease in recent years, making China the most attractive place for such experiments. For example, in 2014, the U.S. government imposed a funding pause of gain of function research involving influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronaviruses, and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronaviruses. In 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it would stop conducting or funding studies on mammals by 2035.
In 2011, the CCP made it a national development goal to create primate disease models through cloning and other biotechnologies. According to the 2020 China Biomedical Industry Development Report published by Chinese Venture, “the overall biopharmaceutical market in China increased from $28.7 billion to $49.6 billion from 2016 to 2019, at a CAGR (Compound annual growth rate) of 20 percent. It is expected to reach $130.2 billion in 2025.”
A patent has emerged to show that the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) was hatched nearly two years prior to its public release, proving that it did not randomly appear in bats at a wet market.
Great Britain’s Serco Group approved the patent filing for the Chinese Virus a full 17 months before it first appeared, and the entities listed as its creators are many of the usual suspects: DARPA, Bill and Melinda Gates, Defra, the Wellcome Trust and the European Commission.
A filing with the United States Patent Office also lists The Pirbright Institute as a funder of the Wuhan Flu. Pirbright, as we reported before this whole thing spiraled out of control, is directly funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates “nonprofit.”
That patent, dated for approval Nov. 20, 2018, clearly states that the “assignee” of “coronavirus” is “THE PIRBRIGHT INSTITUTE (Woking, Pirbright, Great Britain), funded by Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, EU.”
This patent was filed on Jan. 23, 2017, which actually means that the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) was drummed up almost three years prior to when the news started reporting on its spread in Wuhan, and later throughout the rest of the world.
“The coronavirus patent was issued in just 17 months from initial filing – that’s almost unheard-of speed – with very little objection back from SERCO (U.K.)-managed patent examiner Bao Q. Li,” reports State of the Nation.
An Australian team of researchers has published a new study which found that SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes COVID-19, appears to be specifically adapted to attack human cells, according to the Daily Telegraph.
The scientists from Flinders University and La Trobe used powerful computers to model the protein receptors in a number of animal species to see how the coronavirus’s spike protein attached itself to them.
The theory was that if the coronavirus attached itself readily to an animal like a bat or a pangolin, it would have likely been the species that the bug used to make its leap into the human population.
However, the modelling found that the coronavirus’s spike protein was best suited to attacking protein receptors in humans.
“The computer modelling found the virus’s ability to bind to the bat ACE2 protein was poor relative to its ability to bind human cells,” said Flinders University epidemiologist and vaccine researcher Professor Nikolai Petrovsky, adding “This argues against the virus being transmitted directly from bats to humans.”
“Hence, if the virus has a natural source, it could only have come to humans via an intermediary species which has yet to be found.”
Other animals found to be relative susceptible to infection include pangolins, dogs and cats – all of which have been ruled out as an intermediary species between bats and humans.
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.