COVID-19 IS A PRODUCT OF A BIOWEAPONS LAB – THE RELEASE WAS EITHER ACCIDENTAL PURPOSEFUL BUT IT HAS ALL THE EARMARKS OF A BIO-ENGINEERED PRODUCT – ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU CONSIDER THEY JUST PULLED THE VACCINE OFF THE SHELF READY-MADE!! YOU ARE ALL LAB RATS IN THIS GLOBAL TEST RUN OF THEIR ABILITY TO CREATE, SUCCESSFULY, AN ANTIDOTE TO THIS WEAPON!!
It took me the better part of 3 days to read this posting in full detail – including citations. I find that I have to agree with it’s findings and conclusions as they are all as I had expected based on the confusing, inaccurate and deceitful “public relations” releases and the conflicting results of what I have been told by Big Pharma, NGOs and Media who like puppets just repeat whatever they are told by all the above.. investigative media is DOA today!! *** MUST READ***
Covid-19 being designed-developed in the United States and escaping from the Wuhan lab can both be true. They aren’t mutually exclusive. On the contrary, US based researchers and Chinese from the Wuhan lab were all involved in Coronavirus research, which converted a bat coronavirus into one which could cause a human epidemic, and pandemic. A researcher at a Swiss-Italian institute was also involved in providing monoclonal antibodies.
While we believe that someone let Covid-19 out of a lab (or multiple labs), we don’t know who did it. Most of the researchers probably simply suffer from hubris, but all researchers connected to coronavirus research must be investigated – not just Fauci.
Many government funded researchers had a motive, as big, or bigger, than the pharmaceutical and biotech companies, for letting Covid-19 escape and spread. In short, they could be like the fireman who sets fires. Their academic survival almost certainly depends upon grant monies. It is also possible that it was done by someone who lost their funding, for instance a foreigner on an F-1, OPT, or H1B visa, whose presence in the USA depended upon funding (cut under Trump). Then, of course, they could have been ordered or bribed by the Chinese government, or other parties, for socio-political reasons.
“The best-laid schemes of mice and men, Go oft awry, And leave us nothing but grief and pain…” (Robert Burns, 1785) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
In a research article “SARS-like WIV1-CoV poised for human emergence” by Vineet D. Menacherya, Boyd L. Yount Jr., et al., PNAS, pp. 3048–3053, March 15, 2016, vol. 113, no. 11 regarding biosafety and security and the Wuhan lab, it says: “Reported studies were initiated after the University of North Carolina Institutional Biosafety Committee approved the experimental protocol: project title: Generating infectious clones of Bat SARS-like CoVs; lab safety plan ID: 20145741; schedule G ID: 12279. These studies were initiated before the US Government Deliberative Process Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain of Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS, and SARS Viruses… Continuation of these studies has been requested and approved by the NIH”. They “thank Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology for access to bat CoV sequences and plasmid of WIV1-CoV spike protein.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Vineet D. Menachery was the lead author and a key researcher for coronavirus experiments (2012-2015), which turned a bat coronavirus into a human coronavirus, which could cause an epidemic (and pandemic). However, Boyd L. Yount Jr., University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, “designed the infectious clone and recovered chimeric viruses.”(See: “A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence” Nat Med: 2015 Dec;21(12):1508-13 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.
Vineet D. Menachery has continued with related research (2015 to present), as principle investigator (PI) and affiliated with the Galveston National Laboratory (GNL). According to the 2015 paper, their research found that while their proposed vaccine helped protect younger mice, it didn’t protect older mice and sometimes led to worse disease-outcomes. His current research has been focused on the impacts of coronavirus on aging mice and humans.
Will nursing home Covid-19 statistics be used as part of Vineet Menachery’s research?
Vineet D. Menachery was the lead author and researcher for the now notorious paper: “A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence” Nat Med: 2015 Dec;21(12):1508-13. However, there is a long list of individuals who participated in the research in the US, China, and the Italian part of Switzerland (Ticino).
In this US government funded research and paper, which included not only US based researchers but researchers from both the Wuhan lab, and a Swiss-Italian researcher, they “examined the disease potential of a SARS-like virus, SHC014-CoV, which” [was] “circulating in Chinese horseshoe bat populations”. And, “Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system”, [they] “generated and characterized a chimeric virus 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.” Furthermore “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. On the basis of these findings, we synthetically re-derived an infectious full-length SHC014 recombinant virus and demonstrate robust viral replication both in vitro and in vivo. Our work suggests a potential risk of SARS-CoV re-emergence from viruses currently circulating in bat populations.”
More specifically regarding vaccination (NB – this vaccine appears different from the ones being given, but how different?), the vaccinated young mice got protection, but the aged mice weren’t protected and sometimes got sicker: “To evaluate the efficacy of existing vaccines against infection with SHC014-MA15, we vaccinated aged mice with double-inactivated whole SARS-CoV (DIV). Previous work showed that DIV could neutralize and protect young mice from challenge with a homologous virus14; however, the vaccine failed to protect aged animals in which augmented immune pathology was also observed, indicating the possibility of the animals being harmed because of the vaccination15. Here we found that DIV did not provide protection from challenge with SHC014-MA15 with regards to weight loss or viral titer (Supplementary Fig. 5a,b). Consistent with a previous report with other heterologous group 2b CoVs15, serum from DIV-vaccinated, aged mice also failed to neutralize SHC014-MA15 (Supplementary Fig. 5c). Notably, DIV vaccination resulted in robust immune pathology (Supplementary Table 4) and eosinophilia (Supplementary Fig. 5d–f). Together, these results confirm that the DIV vaccine would not be protective against infection with SHC014 and could possibly augment disease in the aged vaccinated group.” See p. 1510 of “A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence” Nat Med: 2015 Dec;21(12):1508-13. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.
A 2016 update to the 2015 article says: “In the version of this article initially published online, the authors omitted to acknowledge a funding source, USAID-EPT-PREDICT funding from EcoHealth Alliance, to Z.-L.S. The error has been corrected for the print, PDF and HTML versions of this article.” Z-L.S. is “Zhengli-Li Shi , Key Laboratory of Special Pathogens and Biosafety, Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China”. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
A related article “SARS-like WIV1-CoV poised for human emergence” by Vineet D. Menacherya, Boyd L. Yount Jr., Amy C. Simsa, Kari Debbink, Sudhakar S. Agnihothramc, Lisa E. Gralinskia, Rachel L. Graham, Trevor Scobey, Jessica A. Plante, Scott R. Royal, Jesica Swanstrom, Timothy P. Sheahan, Raymond J. Pickles, Davide Cortie, Scott H. Randell, Antonio Lanzavecchia, Wayne A. Marasco, and Ralph S. Barica, PNAS, pp. 3048–3053, March 15, 2016, vol. 113, no. 11 says that “Focusing on the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-like viruses, the results indicate that the WIV1-coronavirus (CoV) cluster has the ability to directly infect and may undergo limited transmission in human populations. However, in vivo attenuation suggests additional adaptation is required for epidemic disease. Importantly, available SARS monoclonal antibodies offered success in limiting viral infection absent from available vaccine approaches…” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Regarding safety, funding, and the Wuhan lab, it (pdf) says:
“Biosafety and Biosecurity. Reported studies were initiated after the University of North Carolina Institutional Biosafety Committee approved the experimental protocol: project title: Generating infectious clones of Bat SARS-like CoVs; lab safety plan ID: 20145741; schedule G ID: 12279. These studies were initiated before the US Government Deliberative Process Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain of Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS, and SARS Viruses (www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. We thank Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology for access to bat CoV sequences and plasmid of WIV1-CoV spike protein. Research was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and the National Institute of Aging of the NIH under Awards U19AI109761 and U19AI107810 (to R.S.B.), AI1085524 (to W.A.M.), and F32AI102561 and K99AG049092 (to V.D.M.). Human airway epithelial cell cultures were supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease under Award NIH DK065988 (to S.H.R.). Support for the generation of the mice expressing human ACE2 was provided by NIH Grants AI076159 and AI079521 (to A.C.S.).” https://www.pnas.org/content/