Tag Archives: Wuhan Institute of Virology

Wuhan Denialism

Posted on by

From Tablet:

“Media sources that claim to refute the lab source hypothesis often refer to the public comments of zoologist Peter Daszak, the flawed correspondence of Andersen et al., or the emotional Lancet letter in which some scientists basically expressed their support and compassion with their Chinese peers. While there are some virus hunters like Peter Daszak who assert zoonotic transfer and discount the possibility of a lab leak, there are also leading microbiologists like professor Richard Ebright who assert that a lab or lab-related accident is a possible cause of the outbreak.

Notably, virus ecologists like Peter Daszak and Jonna Mazet have an inherent conflict of interest as they are involved in similar bat and wildlife sampling activity—and, in Daszak and Mazet’s case, in research with the Wuhan labs. As an example of such activity, Daszak and collaborators sampled 12,333 bats for viruses in a big wildlife surveillance project. A lab-related accident in China involving similar research would likely affect the funding for their work as it would demonstrate the risks involved. As it happens, the NIH recently cut the funding to Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance after realizing the risks involved in that research.

Daszak’s relentless and heavily amplified public assertions that the outbreak must have originated due to a zoonotic jump, and his denial of the possibility of a lab accident involving a natural virus, even long before the SARS-CoV-2 genome was published, would appear to be motivated by the apparent conflict of interest that he has denied. Daszak’s denial of his conflict of interest raised concerns of many scientists and experts, with many explicitly describing that denial as a bold lie. Daszak has presented no direct evidence that the outbreak started as a result of a zoonotic jump outside of a laboratory. In case the outbreak is a result of a natural zoonotic jump, that would underscore the importance of Daszak’s risky wildlife sampling and “early outbreak warning” work and increase their research funding. It is important to consider conflicts of interest when assessing anyone’s claims.”

Genetic-Manipulation Origin For SARS-CoV-2?

Posted on by

Is considering a genetic-manipulation origin for SARS-CoV-2 a conspiracy theory that must be censored?

Here is a new research paper  that considers the lab-origin of the virus the most likely explanation and suggests that it is being censored by scientific journals. The paper includes this telling paragraph on funding:

“In recent years, the field of corona-virology had been focused on pan-coronavirus therapies and vaccines, as evident from research conducted in the past five years,as well as from media reports. Synthetically generating diverse panels of potential pre-emergent coronaviruses was declared as a goal of active grants for EcoHealth Alliance which funded some of such research at WIV.”
Unfortunately, various intelligence/ex-intelligence operatives, some of them China hawks, have ignored the multiple ties the WIV has to Western public health bodies, private foundations, and agencies, and have tried to shift the blame solely to the Chinese government/lab.
Thus, the ex-chief of MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove has raised the possibility of demanding reparations from China.  But Dearlove’s support for the invasion of Iraq and his involvement in the Steele dossier (in the Russiagate hoax) diminish his credibility.
Very likely, some of these public statements are either limited hang-outs or red herrings.
The truth is Zhengli Shi the “Bat Woman” at WIV was not working in isolation. She was a French-trained scientist with research experience in the US; she was at the center of a web of scientific partnerships and networks extending to leading labs in France and the USA. Her research has ties to the entire scientific community and its funders, and to the climate-change-public-health nexus that drives projects like OneHealth and the EcoHealth Alliance.
If this network was not fully implicated in what happened, we would not be seeing the kind of coverage…and coverup…from the global media. This level of media subterfuge  suggests a transnational crime, originating from  the highest levels of money and power. At that level, it is not China, or America, or Russia.
It is the transnational power-elite, driven by the dangerously utopian environmental ideology with which they mask their lust for power.

 

Proof That Wuhan Virus Was A Bioweapon

Posted on by

A fascinating, very technical article at Nerd Has Power that explains why SARS-Co-V-2 has to have been engineered in a lab, and, given the nature and history of communist rule, was most likely a biological weapon.

Here’s the gist:

  1. In structure the Wuhan virus is 95% like 2 bat viruses (ZC45 and ZXC21), except that it has the proteins that allow it to bind to human ACE-2 proteins. The other two don’t and so cannot infect human beings. The binding proteins occur in the front half (S1) of the spike proteins that stud the surface of the coronavirus like a crown and give it its name. This kind of strong dissimilarity from other coronaviruses in only one part of the viral structure is very unusual, because it would normally take a long time for such a mutation, whereas  the similarity of the rest of the structure can only occur if the viruses aren’t far apart in time. This contradiction rules out natural development and suggests that the Wuhan virus is a chimera created in the lab. Furthermore, the sequence of proteins in S1 is exactly the same as the one which occurs in the SARS virus, which is infectious to human beings. Still odder, there is a piece in the spike protein that allows the protein to be cleaved by a host’s protease (protein-cleaving) enzyme, furin. This addition makes the Wuhan virus much more infectious, as the furin helps the virus divide faster.
  2. The only evolutionary event that could create such a striking mutation in only one part of the genome is something called recombination. But it would need a sequence of several highly unlikely-impossible events to occur. And there is not enough time for that to have happened, given that the Wuhan virus cannot have been around for very long, or it would be more markedly different than the other bat viruses (point 1).
  3. The evidence supporting a natural origin of the virus was most likely fabricated by Dr. Zhengli Shi of the WIV, in response to questions like that raised in point 1.  What was this evidence? Nothing physical, but simply the sequence – a string of letters – of a bat virus she claims to have come across years ago – RaTG13. But if she had indeed found such a virus with 95% similarity with the Wuhan virus, even to the spike protein, would she not have published something about it then, given the dangers it posed for human beings? But she didn’t. She didn’t even retain the physical evidence. That fact, as well as the fact that it is very easy to fabricate a sequence, and the fact that she, of all people, has a motivation to fabricate, suggests that indeed, RaTG13 is a fabrication.
  4. If we admit that the virus is a chimera, then it had to have been made by the CCP, because the 2 bat corona viruses ZC45 and ZXC 21 were both found by a military research lab of the Chinese Communist Party which published its findings in 2018. The CCP owns these viruses and no one else.
  5. Zhengli Shi co-authored a paper at the University of North Carolina in 2015 showing that replacing the spike protein so it could bind to ACE2 made coronaviruses infectious to humans. In 2006, there were experiments adding a furin-cleaving site to spike protein since such sites in influenza viruses make for greater infectiousness.

 

Independent Experts: Wuhan Virus Probably Came From Lab

Posted on by

In a long, well-sourced article at Independent Science News Jonathan Latham and Alison Wilson, both PhD’s, demonstrate that the Wuhan virus most likely came from a lab and that the vociferous denunciations of the lab theory come from experts at institutions tied by funding, collaboration, or partnership to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, including the W.H.O., the CDC, the NIH, the EcoHealth Alliance, and the Chinese Government.

Wuhan Military Games: Ground Zero?

Posted on by

More and more athletes are claiming that they contracted a Covid-19-like illness at the World Military Games, held in Wuhan in October 2019, from the 18th to the 27th.

9308 military personnel from 103 countries, including India, participated.

The first Corona case was identified on November 17th. But it was only 45 days later, on December 31, that China reported the spread of a pneumonia-like illness to the WHO’s local office.

While the US leadership has implied that a leak in October at the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s Level 4 lab (only 20 kms from the venue of the Military Games) might have been the origin of the pandemic, Chinese officials have pointed instead to an admission by a top US health official that he found the virus in some deceased pneumonia patients before November 2019. The Chinese have suggested that Fort Detrick in Maryland, a top pathogen research facility, might be the culprit.