PDA

View Full Version : Covid 19 -is this the SARS virus re engineered?



roguemoon
3rd July 2020, 07:04
Hello folks, i don't post much more of an avid researcher but with 2020 being the year of the virus it seems i've been obsessively compiling something and i wonder if i'm correct about any of this. Here's the first part, do please correct me at any point.

SARS, , which appeared in China in 2002, was a respiratory illness caused by civets which spread to humans in more than two dozen countries killing 774 people.

To understand this virus the Wuhan lab in China began gain of function research in 2004 led by viroligist Zhengli-Li Sh.

Meanwhile, over in the US the NIH [National Institutes of Health), led by Director Francis Collins, funded gain of function research into the Sars virus at the North Carolina university lab

In 2012 MERS, emerged in Saudi Arabia and spread to 27 countries killing 858 people. This virus was spread by dromedary camels.

In 2013, Shi’s group identified two horseshoe bat coronavirus strains that were 95% genetically similar to the virus that caused SARS, providing the strongest evidence yet that, while the Sars virus likely jumped to humans via a civet, bats were the ultimate origin of the virus.

Back the US 15 researchers including: Vineet D Menachery, 1 Boyd L Yount, Jr,1 Kari Debbink,1,2 Sudhakar Agnihothram,3 Lisa E Gralinski,1 Jessica A Plante,1 Rachel L Graham,1 Trevor Scobey, Eric F Donaldson,1 Scott H Randell,5,6 Antonio Lanzavecchia,7 Wayne A Marasco, and Ralph S Baric

The team also consisted of Xing-Yi Ge and Zhengli-Li Shi, both had previously worked at the Key Laboratory of Special Pathogens and Biosafety, Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China.

When Obama’s administration got wind of the dangerous experiments taking place at the north Carolina lab The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy announced a pause on funding on October 16, 2014 of any experiments taking place on influenza, SARS, and MERS viruses that would increases the ability of any of these infectious agents to infect human’s and spiral into a pandemic.
The “pause” on funding remained in place for the remainder of the Obama administration,

Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist and biodefence expert at Rutgers University, told Nature this when he was told of the work being done at the lab. ‘The only impact of this work is the creation, in a lab, of a new, non-natural risk.’
Later in 2015, with their work halted Zhengli-Li Shi and Ralph Baric, a US virologist at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, described experiments in which they had engineered and inserted the spike protein from one of Shi’s SARS-like horseshoe bat coronaviruses called SHCO14 into another coronavirus that had already been adapted to infect mice. The engineered virus replicated easily in human cells, and antibodies and vaccines developed against the new SARS like virus were relatively ineffective in protecting mice from this new infection.
On Nov 10th 2015 the labs findings were published in Nature Medicine on the net which basically stated that a coronavirus from the Carolina lab closely related to the SARS virus appears able to infect human lung cells and jump from bats to people without mutation,
“Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system2, we generated and characterized a chimeric virus (a virus that has been modified from other parts) expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone. The results indicate that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV. Additionally, in vivo experiments demonstrate replication of the chimeric virus in mouse lung with notable pathogenesis. Evaluation of available SARS-based immune-therapeutic and prophylactic modalities revealed poor efficacy; both monoclonal antibody and vaccine approaches failed to neutralize and protect from infection with CoVs using the novel spike protein.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985.pdf?origin=ppub
chillingly in a footnote to the paper it stated, “Cells/additional proteins were originally obtained from Fort Detrick.” (this has since seemingly removed)

Fort Detrick was the place where the CIA developed its super-secret plans to wage germ warfare, Detrick is today one of the world’s cutting-edge laboratories for research into toxins and antitoxins, the place where defences are developed against every plague, from crop fungus to Ebola and hiv.
In Feb on the 27th 2017 with Trump now president the pause on funding was lifted enabling the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Led by director Dr. Anthony Fauci to fund scientists at the Chinese Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions to the tune of $3.7 million for work on further ‘gain-of-function’ research on bat coronaviruses. titled Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence. The program funded Shi Zheng-Li (who had now returned to China), and other researchers to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses in the wild.

nov 30th 2017 Zhengli and her colleague Cui Jie led a team which sampled thousands of horseshoe bats throughout China. Later they published their findings, indicating that all the genetic components of the SARS coronavirus existed in a bat population in a cave in Yunnan province, while no single bat harboured the exact strain of virus which caused the 2002-2004 SARS outbreak, genetic analysis showed that different strains often mix, suggesting that the human version likely emerged from a combination of the strains present in the bat population.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-017-07766-9

In late November 2018, just a year before the first covid 19 case was identified in Wuhan, China, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents at Detroit Metro Airport stopped a Chinese biologist with three vials labeled “Antibodies” in his luggage.
The biologist told the agents that a colleague in China had asked him to deliver the vials to a researcher at a U.S. institute. After examining the vials, however, customs agents came to an alarming conclusion.
“Inspection of the writing on the vials and the stated recipient led inspection personnel to believe the materials contained within the vials may be viable Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) materials,” says an unclassified FBI tactical intelligence report obtained by Yahoo News.
The report, written by the Chemical and Biological Intelligence Unit of the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate (WMDD), does not give the name of the Chinese scientist carrying the suspected SARS and MERS samples, or the intended recipient in the U.S. But the FBI concluded that the incident, and two other cases cited in the report, were part of an alarming pattern.

PART 2 is next taking the story to now. Hope you enjoy and correct me at any point.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

part 2

At the start of 2019 in Winnipeg, Canada Dr. Qui a renowned Chinese virologist helped develop a vaccine for the Ebola virus at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, her partner Dr. Cheng also worked at the lab as a researcher. Together they secretly exploited available medical research at the facility to study every component of Ebola and its relation to HIV. It was during the summer of 2019 that they proceeded to integrate the HIV component which had been obtained from Fort Detrick by splicing Ebola into the newly adapted SARS virus from North Carolina, altering the genomic structure of the virus altogether.

In response to a request in the spring from the Wuhan Institute of Virology for viral samples of Ebola and Henipah viruses, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) sent samples for the purpose of scientific research in March 2019. Qui sent Ebola and Henipah, and multiple varieties of it to maximize the genetic diversity and maximize what experiments in China could do with it, to a laboratory in Wuhan China that has links to the Chinese military."

The shipment was handed over to Dr. Sh. She was long considered a preeminent expert on synthetic application of the SARS virus, cross-species manipulation of the virus andd we already know she had already conducted extensive research on the SARS virus, splicing, and reverse engineering hybrid strains via multiple species to produce an eventual highly contagious “chimeric virus” capable of causing rapid respiratory infection in humans.

In July 2019 Chinese virologist Qiu Xiangguo and her biologist husband Cheng Keding were escorted from the National Microbiology Lab (NML) in Winnipeg, Canada’s only BSL-4, biosafety level-4, laboratory, certified to handle the world’s deadliest diseases, including Ebola and SARS. The samples they had sent months earlier to Wuhan were considered a possible “policy breach.” Qiu and Cheng, were reportedly concidered to be in fact agents of China’s biological warfare program.
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/cdc-shuts-down-army-labs-disease-research-66235
In august 2019 Fort detrick was shut down by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who decided to issue a “cease and desist order
“If the new virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,”
Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, told Nature.

Over the summer months Sh finalized the recombinant sequencing of the new super Sars virus

In april 2019 one of the emails uncovered from a stash of 25,000 emails addresses and passwords hacked from NIH, WHO, Gates Foundation the Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China april the first 2020. revealed that on the date October 19th 2019 , Dr. Zhengli Shi was caught on CCTV camera in Wuhan, exiting a bus she took from Wuhan’s Institute of Technology and She stopped one time half way through her journey, opened her suitcase and placed a suspicious block of dry ice right under the main air vent which feeds into the notorious wet-market in Wuhan: The location was a convenient nexus point not only to the market but, in light of the train station, a conduit to the outside world beyond the locale.
The event was captured on CCTV.

Later in May on the 9th, 2020 “three sources briefed on the matter”, revealed a private analysis of mobile phone data revealed that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been shut down from Oct. 7 through Oct. 24, 2019, due to a “hazardous event” that happened sometime between Oct. 6 and Oct. 11.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/report-says-cellphone-data-suggests-october-shutdown-wuhan-lab-experts-n1202716

THE VIRUS IS OUT

Late November 2019, U.S. intelligence officials were warning that a contagion was sweeping through China’s Wuhan region, the report was the result of analysis of wire and computer intercepts, coupled with satellite images.

The Chinese CDC first reported the virus outbreak as: “a cluster of pneumonia cases with an unknown cause occurred in Wuhan starting on December 21, 2019.”
The Chinese government did not admit that the virus was being transferred from one human to another until January 20. 2020.

The South China Morning Post reported that, according to government data it has seen, a 55 year-old may have been the first person to contract Covid-19 on November 17 in Wuhan, China. A much earlier date than any official accounts.


Wuhan virologist Shi Zhengli said on her WeChat February 2, in a response to an article by Indian scientists implying the novel coronavirus possibly originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab.
"The 2019 novel coronavirus is a punishment by nature to humans' unsanitary life style. I promise with my life that the virus has nothing to do with the lab."

January the 25th was the start of Chinese new year as 5 million Chinese people, many infected with covid 19, flew to every corner of the globe.

Because the Chinese Communist Party was afraid that the world would find out that the Virus came from Wuhan’s P4 laboratory, therefore violating the “Biological Weapons Convention” they ordered Shi to issue a fictious paper which she did January 27th indicating that Covid 19 is only 96% identical to RaTG13, a strain which her laboratory had previously isolated from Yunnan bats in 2013…
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1187293.shtml

The only problem was was that Shi Zhengli’s RaTG13 genome does not exist in nature, its sequence was completely fake.
As stated earlier two Indian scientists, found that covid 19 had iHIV and MERS proteins inserted into the virus. The finding of 4 unique inserts in the virus, all of which have identity /similarity to amino acid residues in key structural proteins of HIV-1 is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature.
The 4 insertions in the spike glycoprotein (S) which are unique to the 2019-nCoV and are not present in any other coronaviruses.
Importantly, amino acid residues in all the 4 inserts have identity or similarity to those in the HIV-1 gp120 or HIV-1 Gag. Interestingly, despite the inserts being discontinuous on the primary amino acid sequence, 3D-modelling of the 2019-nCoV suggests that they converge to constitute the receptor binding site».
Indian, Chinese and french scientists say covid 19 is a man made virus
https://www.dr-rath-foundation.org/2020/04/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-who-discovered-hiv-says-coronavirus-was-created-in-laboratory/?fbclid=IwAR2qnNVgAzIK4WdIHmDsypUUq1UjcF3yPSRjc-9PUCKNIsavhjcFEnpCh34

In the aftermath of the news of the Wuhan funding coming to light Dr. Fauci did not respond to Newsweek's requests for comment. Instead NIH responded with a vague statement that said in part: "Most emerging human viruses come from wildlife, and these represent a significant threat to public health and biosecurity in the US and globally, as demonstrated by the SARS epidemic of 2002-03, and the current COVID-19 pandemic.... scientific research indicates that there is no evidence that suggests the virus was created in a laboratory."


HOW THE VIRUS ATTACKS
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3052495/coronavirus-far-more-likely-sars-bond-human-cells-scientists-say

A Research team from Nankai University discovered Covid 19 has mutations all along its genetic sequence, these mutated gene are similar to those found in HIV and Ebola
Sars from 2002 entered the human body by binding with a receptor protein called ACE2 on a cell membrane. But the ACE2 protein does not exist in large quantities in healthy people, and this partly helped to limit the scale of the Sars outbreak of 2002-03, in which infected about 8,000 people around the world.
Other highly contagious viruses, including HIV and Ebola, target an enzyme called furin, which works as a protein activator in the human body. Many proteins are inactive or dormant when they are produced and have to be “cut” at specific points to activate their various functions. Covid 19 uses the same packing mechanisms as hiv, the mutation can generate a structure known as a cleavage site in the covid 19 spike protein. The virus uses the outreaching spike protein to hook on to the host cell, but normally this protein is inactive. The cleavage site structure’s job is to trick the human furin protein, so it will cut and activate the spike protein and cause a “direct fusion” of the viral and cellular membranes.
In a follow-up study, a research team led by Professor Li Hua from Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan, Hubei province, confirmed Ruan’s findings.
The mutation could not be found in Sars, Mers or Bat-CoVRaTG13 that the Chinese Communist party have been claiming was the only virus the wuhan lab was working on.
Covid 19 has no bat virus similar to it meaning only one thing, it was created in a lab, it is a construct.
BTW the Polybasic furin cleavage site known as PRRA was added into covid 19’s genome in a lab, this enabled the virus to infect humans.

Bill Ryan
3rd July 2020, 12:11
Is this the SARS virus re-engineered?Lots of interesting information here, and many thanks indeed. :highfive:

But personally, I don't think so: it's a blood-clotting virus (basically — not a respiratory virus, despite the name it was given by the criminally incompetent WHO at an early stage: "SARS-CoV-2"). But engineered from a wild virus, 100% for sure.

:thumbsup:

onawah
1st August 2021, 19:42
Analysis Proves SARS-CoV-2 Lab Origin
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
August 01, 2021
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/08/01/bayesian-analysis-of-sars-cov-2-origin.aspx

0kFeOwNDB5Lm

There's another relevant video here: S4k3aLjO4zw

STORY AT-A-GLANCE
"An overly conservative Bayesian analysis shows beyond a reasonable doubt that SARS-CoV-2 is laboratory derived. There’s a 99.8% probability SARS-CoV-2 came from a laboratory and only a 0.2% likelihood it came from nature
None of the 80,000 samples from 209 different animal species has been found to contain SARS-CoV-2
Of the first 259 cases in China, not one was traced back to animal contact. All were human-to-human transmissions. This is the equivalent of going to Las Vegas and flipping a coin and getting heads 259 times, which is virtually impossible
When one combines these two statistical anomalies, the real likelihood of the virus coming from nature is less than one in all the atoms of the universe — 1080 — which is a very, very large number, making it virtually impossible
SARS-CoV-2 has a protein signature that is similar to that found in melittin, a bee venom toxin

In this interview, Dr. Steven Quay — one of the most-cited scientists in the world1 — discusses his Bayesian analysis,2 published January 29, 2021, which concludes beyond a doubt that SARS-CoV-2 is laboratory derived. Quay is an M.D. with a Ph.D. in chemistry. You can learn more about Dr. Quay on his website.

He did his medical residency at Mass General at Harvard Hospital and his postdoctoral work at MIT with a Noble laureate. He holds 87 patents in 22 fields of medicine, including the gadolinium used with MRI imaging.

During his career, Quay published 360 papers, which have been cited over 10,000 times. His COVID origin paper, however, has already been downloaded 170,000 times. Bayesian analysis,3 or Bayesian inference, is a statistical tool used to answer questions about unknown parameters by using probability distributions for observable data.

Quay's highly conservatively-skewed analysis shows there's only a 0.2% likelihood that this virus came from nature, and a 99.8% probability that it came from a lab. His 140-page paper can be downloaded from zenodo.org4 for those who want to dive into the nitty gritty of this statistical analysis. He presented these data to House Representatives during a June 26, 2021, subcommittee on the coronavirus crisis meeting.5

Instead of using the observed statistics of the data he gathered, he radically reduced the probability to 1 in 20. When one combines all the statistical anomalies from the 26 different data points he collected, the real likelihood of the virus coming from nature is less than 1 in all the atoms of the universe — 1080 — which is a very, very large number, making it virtually impossible.

SARS-CoV-2 Has a Protein Sequence Found in Bee Venom Toxin
As early as January 2020, Quay knew SARS-CoV-2 could be problematic.

"Nobody was paying any attention because there was no need to at that point," he says. "I saw this virus coming out of China. I looked at the sequence of it and I remember telling my wife, 'I know what this thing is going to do in cells,' because for five years at Stanford, I was studying and was the world expert on the toxin melittin, which is a bee venom toxin, the thing that hurts when you get a bee venom …

This melittin, this toxin in bee venom, has the same sequence that SARS-CoV-2 had … I run a public company, so I went to the board a couple weeks later and said, 'Look, I think we can come up with some therapeutics and some ideas around this.' We actually are in clinical trials with some products for therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2.

Then I started hearing some really crazy public health advisories around masks, social distancing and things, so I ended up writing a little book that was a No. 1 best seller for a few weeks called 'Stay Safe: [A Physician's Guide to Survive Coronavirus,]' on Amazon. That took me through the summer. Then I started going back to something. I was very concerned about what I saw as properties of this virus that had never been seen before.

It's now public knowledge that the government identified one of my papers, so I was contacted by the State Department in the fall and basically was an adviser to their programs there, including a three-hour deep dive from all of the different committees or agencies there …

I continue to push this because … if it came from nature, there are certain things we should do differently to not have this happen again. If it came from a laboratory, there's a completely different set of things you need to do. It's not a blame game."

There Are Several Ways to Make a Virus More Dangerous
Quay recently published another paper in which he reveals that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is also working on another virus, the Nipah virus, which has a 90% lethality rate. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what might happen if a virus with that lethality got out. Quay explains:

"[The WIV] published an early paper on samples from COVID patients in the hospital … It's the most-read paper from the beginning of the pandemic. I did a deep dive into their raw data. The sequence is 30,000 nucleotides — the raw data's 55 million nucleotides. What you can see in there is a fingerprint of everything they've been doing for the last two years. They're doing a lot of crazy research."

As explained by Quay, the WIV has been around for about 40 years. In 2003, after SARS-Cov-1 emerged, the U.S. and France helped China refurbish the WIV into a more secure BSL 4 biolab, the only one in China. Since then, the WIV has become a primary laboratory for zoonotic viruses. It's also one of the top three laboratories for gain-of-function synthetic biology, which can be accomplished in several ways.

If you know what you want to alter, you can insert a new synthetic amino acid into the pathogen. If you don't have a precise idea of the change you want to achieve, but you want the pathogen to adapt from an animal to a human, you can do what is called serial passage, where the virus is passed through a series of animal and human tissues.

For example, you could start by infecting 20 humanized mice with a virus, then isolate the virus from the sickest mouse and give it to another 20. Humanized mice are genetically modified mice to have human lung tissue. After four or five passages like that, the virus will have mutated to attack and kill human hosts.

"The third way is to drop big chunks of material in there. For example, the part of the virus of SARS-CoV-2 that interacts with the cell is about 200 amino acids, so times three for nucleic acid, so that's 600. You can just drop a big piece of 600 in and instantly go from an animal to humans, or whatever direction you want.

So, those are the three [primary strategies]: Knowing what to do with single spots, randomly letting nature do it in serial passage, and then dropping big chunks in."

The Bayesian Theorem
As mentioned, Bayesian analysis is a statistical tool using probability distributions. The theorem was developed by Thomas Bayes, a 17th century Presbyterian minister and statistician-mathematician who published many papers during his lifetime. After his death, his estate discovered private notes detailing a process for understanding large complex events in a simple straightforward fashion. The Bayesian equation is A multiplied by B, divided by C. Quay explains:

"It's exactly the same thing we do when we have a favorite baseball team and we watch it during the season. Before the season, we know what they did last year. We know who the new players are, the new coaches, all those things, and we come up with what we call a prior prediction.

We rank the teams according to what we think will happen at the World Series, and that's what's called our prior, our posterior probabilities. Then the season happens and you start winning games, losing games, people get injured, new players, transfers, and you update that every week.

At the start of the World Series, you're probably quite far from where you were at the beginning of the season, because you're now down to two teams but, nonetheless, you still don't know the final analysis. One of the caveats for this 140-page work is, at the end, although I say there's a 1 in 500 chance it came from nature, but that means … 499 times out of 500 it came from a laboratory."

Bayesian Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Origin
With regard to SARS-CoV-2, "A" would be the prior estimate of the likelihood of it coming from a lab or from nature. "B" is the new evidence, the new probability that it came from a lab, and "C" is the probability that it came from nature. When you multiply A and B and divide it by C, you get a new A prime, a single probability. However, as new data accumulate, the answer changes.

"The first thing I did was assume the prior likelihood it came from nature or a lab, knowing nothing, basically. That has to be your starting point. Three papers informed that. One paper says that eight times a year, there's a natural jump from nature to a human.

Another paper said, once a year, there's a lab leak in Asia, so 8-to-1 [in favor of natural origin]. That's like 85% probability [that it came] from nature. I used three papers, and my starting point was a 98% probability it came from nature, knowing nothing else."

Quay did not include the three papers mainstream media and fact checkers have leaned on to debunk the lab origin theory, and in his paper he explains why they were excluded. In short, they relied on speculation and not science, so the clear bias and lack of scientific facts made them too unreliable.

Next, he entered 26 different pieces of evidence into the equation. The first piece of data was the fact that the virus first emerged in Wuhan, China, which has never happened before. Wuhan has a population of 11 million people. It's a very urban area with little man-nature contact. Wuhan also has one of only three biosafety level (BSL) 4 laboratories in the world that are conducting coronavirus research specifically. Next, he calculated probabilities.

"You know the area of China; you know the population of China. If the virus happened randomly, what is the chance it would happen in Wuhan? If there's a laboratory in Wuhan, what are the chances it would have escaped somewhere else in China and not appeared in Wuhan?

You do the flip. If it came from nature, why did it end up in Wuhan? If it came from Wuhan, what is the probability it could have first appeared somewhere else in China? That hits your probabilities pretty hard out of the box. That was item No. 1. Then you just work through the others."

Zoonotic Transmission
One key piece that makes a big difference in this Bayesian calculation is the question of zoonosis. In order for zoonosis to apply, you must have an animal with a backbone (vertebrae) that is infected with a microbe. Malaria, for example, is not a zoonotic disease, because mosquitoes do not have vertebrae. Malaria is a vector-transmitted disease.

The key to finding the origin of a zoonotic transmission is to locate the animal. If the animal is in the community, then zoonotic transmission occurs through a natural process. If the transmission occurs in a lab, then it's a laboratory-acquired infection, not a zoonotic transmission. Early on, we were told up to 70% of the earliest COVID patients had visited one or more markets in Wuhan, some of which have live animals for sale.

The problem is SARS-CoV-2 was not found in any of the more than 1,000 animal specimens collected from those markets. They also sampled more than 1,000 pieces of frozen food imported from outside of China, all of which came back clean. About 15% of environmental samples, however, did have the virus.

They also collected samples from all the other markets across the Hubei Province, where Wuhan is located. No virus. About 1,000 bats in Hubei were tested, and no virus was found. Over 80,000 animals representing 209 species from every province of China were eventually tested, and no SARS-CoV-2 was found.

For comparison, SARS-1 was found in 85% of animals tested. The original host was identified as the civet cat. MERS, which came from the Middle East, originated in a bat that had jumped to a camel before turning into a human virus, and it was found in 90% of animals. Yet, after the largest surveillance ever conducted in the history of the world, having tested 80,000 animal specimens, not one has been found to carry SARS-CoV-2.

"In my Bayesian analysis … even though I should drop 80,000 into the denominator of my equation, what I did was I degraded it to the standard in clinical trials of biology to a P of .05. I said, 'Despite the fact that zero out of 80,000 had this [virus], I'm going to treat this as if it's a 1 in 20 event,' because that's the only way I could keep doing the analysis. Otherwise, I was done at the get-go," Quay explains.

To be clear, this gives a very unfair advantage to the zoonotic origin theory, but Quay wanted to have a complete analysis of all the parameters. Diversity is a hallmark of nature, yet there's no diversity in nature for this virus. Zoonotic proponents have argued that the virus must be found in high concentration in an intermediate species, yet not one out of 80,000 samples from 209 different animal species is a carrier of the virus.

No Animal Reservoir or Intermediate Host Has Been Found
Another key piece of the analysis is the virus itself. Bats are nature's reservoirs for coronaviruses. The bats are never sickened by them, so the virus is never rooted out. It just lives in the bats for decades, mutating and recombining with other viruses along the way. Bat-to-human contact is very rare, so most of the time, the transfer occurs between the bats, the reservoir host and an intermediate host before it enters the human population.

Of the first 259 cases in China, not one was traced back to animal contact. All were human-to-human transmissions. This is the equivalent of going to Las Vegas and flipping a coin and getting heads 259 times, which is virtually impossible.
That's what happened with SARS-1 and MERS. Early cases of SARS-1 and MERS were divided evenly between human to human transmission, and transmissions that occurred between different animals and humans. This means both of these viruses were most likely zoonotic in origin.

As mentioned earlier, Quay cites research showing natural jumps from nature to a human occur eight times a year, and lab escapes occur once a year. That gives us an 8-to-1 chance of zoonotic origin. However, of the first 259 cases in China, not one was traced back to animal contact. All were human-to-human transmissions.

As noted by Quay, "This is the equivalent of going to Las Vegas and flipping a coin and getting heads 259 times. When you ask your statistician to do that, it's a P value with 84 zeros and a number, so again, that's absolutely impossible."

To understand how big this number is, the estimated number of atoms in the universe is 10 to the 80th power. Despite this showing it's more or less impossible for SARS-CoV-2 to have a zoonotic origin, Quay gave this a P value of just 0.5 (or a 1 in 20 chance) — again, just to keep the analysis going.

"It's not in the animals in nature. The virus is a pure virus … It hit the ground with one sequence, and it makes a mistake every two weeks randomly and if it's the kind of mistake it really likes, it keeps it and then that one takes off," he says.

"Again, SARS-1, MERS, every other zoonosis, when it jumps into humans, it's a two-step process. Initially, it jumps into humans, but it doesn't have all the things it needs. It can't make very many baby viruses, et cetera, and so it burns out, and then it tries again, and it tries again. It jumps back to camels, that sort of thing.

Eventually, it gets all the mutations it needs to support human to human transfer. Then you have the foundation for an epidemic, but that's a long process. With SARS-1 it took a year and a half. With MERS, it took two and a half years in camels before it got there. What does that mean though? Every time a human gets an infection … there is a record in their blood. They make antibodies to the virus.

Once you know that a zoonosis is going to jump into humans and leave a record in the hospital specimens and you have a test from the epidemic of the virus itself, you can go back into the hospital and find specimens. Typically, it can range from 1, to 4, to 7, to almost 20% of the specimens.

For example, people working in the market will have antibody evidence that they had the infection, whether they knew it or not.

This is a very powerful tool … Because of the unique capability of this virus to hit human to human transmission from the get-go, [Kristian Andersen, a virologist at the Scripps Research Institute in California who published a paper6 supporting zoonotic origin] predicted that there would be a lot of pre-epidemic seroconversion.

These are fancy words for 'go into a hospital, take samples out of the refrigerator, test them and find a high percentage.' Of course, people took him up on that and tested over 9,900 banked specimens from December [2020] and before in Wuhan. How many do you think they found that were positive?

My statistician says they should have had 100 to 400. They got zero. You run the crank on that, and that's a 1 in a million probability.

The virus has the incredible capability of being the most aggressive human to human virus that's ever been seen in the history of virology, but it does not have the hallmark of how you would build that in nature, which is pre-epidemic human contact. You can't have both of these properties in the same virus if it came from nature.

Now, if you take a mouse that's been humanized in a laboratory to have human lungs and you serial passage there, that is an effective way to do it.

Amazingly, two months after the epidemic broke out, we're February-March 2020 now, Dr. Shi at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Dr. Baric in America, the No. 1 synthetic biologist in the world of coronavirus research in North Carolina, published a paper saying, 'Hey, if you grow this virus in transgenic mice, it kills the mice and, by the way, they get brain infections, which is really unusual.'

I'm saying, 'Yeah, that's probably the experiment that was done in 2019 that led to the spill.'"

Again, using extremely conservative data, Quay's analysis shows there's a 99.8% probability that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory creation. If you want to read through it all, his paper can be downloaded from zenodo.org.7

Odd SARS-CoV-2 Proteins Suppress Your Immune Function
At the end of the interview, Quay delivers yet another bombshell. SARS-CoV-2 makes three primary kinds of proteins. The first are the structural proteins for a virus — the spike, envelope and nucleoplasm proteins. It also makes proteins that take over the cells' manufacturing process, thereby allowing the virus to replicate inside the cell. In addition to those, it also makes two very odd proteins that are excreted into your blood.

"These strange proteins, they're not the virus, they're not in the cell," Quay explains. "When you get an infection, you get a fever, you get sweaty and you get chills, you feel like crap. That's not the virus. That's your own interferon signaling and it helps you fight the virus and probably in prehistory it told your fellow tribe members to isolate you in your own tent. So, it evolved as a social signal for survival of the tribe."

+ Sources and References
1 PR Newswire/Yahoo! Finance January 29, 2021, About Steven Quay
2, 4, 7 Zenodo January 29, 2021
3 Bayesian.org
5 Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, Opening Remarks by Dr. Steven Quay June 26, 2021 (PDF)
6 Nature Medicine March 17, 2020; 26: 450-452

Matthew
10th August 2021, 20:11
I found a guy (Walter M Chesnut, @Parsifaler), a virus hobbiest who's been studying the virus. He had something to say. I don't understand any of it, except possibly the virus is more of a stealth weapon than we thought, and spike protein bad (?)

But he had something to say, so I thought I would relay it in case somebody reading understands half of any of it


http://wmcresearch.org/

...
I am an amateur researcher who has always been fascinated by rare diseases. I find COVID-19, regardless of its origin, to be one of the most complex diseases mankind has ever faced and one that, I believe, induces many rare diseases. I hope to provide helpful insights and further our understanding of this novel coronavirus.
source: https://twitter.com/Parsifaler/status/1424904783761117185



~-----========+',--@###@---.,"'+++=============-----¬

Walter M Chesnut
@Parsifaler
I have now realized we are dealing with an extinction level event. What escaped in Wuhan is far worse than anything even Stephen King has conjured up. I apologize in advance for this post. The respiratory symptoms belie a hidden terror.

1) MURDER MOST INGENIOUS: THE DEATH SPIKE
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8ZDpVeXEAU8s0d?format=jpg&name=small


2) Our DNA has acquired built-in counters at the end of our chromosomes that are snipped off with each reproduction. When the counter reaches zero, reproduction stops and death is inevitable. Without this counter (and probably other throttles as well), cancers occur and bodily
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8ZEcjcWUAMn7ln?format=jpg&name=small


3) tissues stop cooperating. Multi-celled life uses death to harness independent cells that are still inclined to compete with each other.

And this is what was latched onto by the researchers that were from and/or converged on Wuhan.

The hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA)

4) axis is perhaps the most influential way to affect telomere length. And it reiterates the same litany of those who have been most afflicted. The down trodden. The stressed. The unhealthy.

This is why each infection and reinfection of SARS-CoV-2, and each exposure to the
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8ZETa4WUAkYsjb?format=jpg&name=small


5) Spike Protein progressively chips away at the telomeres on our chrmomosones. And it is stealthy. So stealthy that it tries to hide its intent under a veil of respiratory illness that is JUST fatal enough to have one believe that is all to be feared.

Not so. And China (at the


6) very least) knows this.

I beleive they execute the infected. I don't believe those instant "hospitals" were meant to treat anyone. And look at the data out of China. If the data is true, then they have tried to murder their way out of this. They thought they could contain


7) it. They could not.

Now they observe us (they do not use the spike protein) injecting the very element which invades the brain stem and causes the dysregulation and the terrible process of slicing off our lifespans, little by little. Cancers, neurodegeneration, whatever fate


8) our telomeres shield us from for as long as they can, is laid bare and put into play. Our GENETIC immunity is stripped from us.

Unless there are those (as in leprosy) who are simply immune to SARS-CoV-2, humanity is facing extinction.

Will the medical community stop this?


9) I honestly believe if every third person dropped dead (immediately) after the jab, the medical community would still insist that the program is best and must continue.

I do not want to see a response about "No fatal adverse events occur in jabs after six weeks."

These are


10) NOT traditional jabs. Those "rules" do not apply. A foreign protein is being manufactured by us. It may be severely harming us.

I implore doctors to demand an end to this. We need to find a way to NEUTRALIZE the virus (spike), or there may be no one left to treat.


11)
http://www.unpopularideas.com/journal/the-death-gene.html

The Death Gene
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2009
Is death an acquired trait? We like to think of death as unavoidable. We believe that all things must die. It makes our own mortality easier to bear. Yet single-celled life forms don’t necessarily ever die. They can beat the odds and indeed every surviving amoeba on earth has been alive billions of years.
...


12)
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.23.21255973v1

EVIDENCE FOR BIOLOGICAL AGE ACCELERATION AND TELOMERE SHORTENING IN COVID-19 SURVIVORS
View ORCID ProfileAlessia Mongelli, View ORCID ProfileVeronica Barbi, Michela Gottardi Zamperla, View ORCID ProfileSandra Atlante, Luana Forleo, Marilisa Nesta, Massimo Massetti, Alfredo Pontecorvi, View ORCID ProfileSimona Nanni, View ORCID ProfileAntonella Farsetti, View ORCID ProfileOronzo Catalano, View ORCID ProfileMaurizio Bussotti, Laura della Vecchia, View ORCID ProfileTiziana Bachetti, View ORCID ProfileFabio Martelli, View ORCID ProfileMaria Teresa La Rovere, View ORCID ProfileCarlo Gaetano
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.23.21255973
This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice.
...