Wednesday, May 12, 2021

You Read It Here First: Vaccines And Covid Origins Version

I will confess that I sometimes lose track of what I've written, or only have a general recollection. However, when the Nicholas Wade article came out a week ago I knew that we'd covered that topic (and more) long ago. Not that I did any research that was original--as usual for areas in which I have no expertise I was only passing on the work of others. An email from a reader this morning prompted me to dig into the past of the blog a bit, and I came up with a post from March, 2020, that's still very relevant today--especially in light of the renewed controversies over Tony Fauci's role in the creation of Covid in the Wuhan lab.

As you'll see, in this old post I also deal with the connection that I pointed out yesterday--again--(Vaccines And Covid Origins) between vaccines and Covid. I'm republishing that post because I believe that connection is very much at the heart of the catastrophe that is ongoing in our entire way of life. The search for effective vaccines is legitimate, but it's also fraught with enormous risks. Those risks are twofold: first, escapes of experimental viruses pose a major risk to public health and the social and economic fabric of the entire world and, second, such research by its very nature has the potential to be used in bio-weapons by hostile nations or even terrorist organizations. This is especially true of "gain of function" (GOF) research that enhances or changes the capabilities of a virus.

The gof research that, in the 21st century, came to the fore in the US and other countries was ALWAYS controversial because of these risks. Eventually, in 2014, the Obama administration decided that those risks outweighed theoretical benefits and banned GOF research in the US. Tony Fauci took advantage of the turmoil in the early years of the Trump administration--and of a loophole in the ban on GOF--to personally decide to resume the research that had been banned in the US. It was resumed by funding it at the Wuhan lab. Fauci can quibble all he wants over the meaning of "gain of function", but that's the reality of what was going on. Scott McKay deals with the resulting issues today, although I repeat--THESE ARE NOT NEW REVELATIONS:

This Is Why Fauci Needed to Go

New revelations about the origin of the Wuhan virus point straight to America’s most famous mask-Nazi.

That an 80 year old bureaucratic grifter with no particular qualifications beyond longevity has been allowed to continue in place after such outrageous malfeasance is scandalous. Period. That our liberal Establishment has covered for him is beyond scandalous. It's criminal.

Feckless Republicans are finally making motions about taking the action that was warranted long ago:

Republicans propose bill to fire Fauci amid growing discontent with top Biden medical officials

Fauci has been National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director since 1984


"Few people have earned their termination more visibly," Davidson said in a statement to Fox News. "His excessively long tenure is emblematic of Eisenhower's farewell address caution against scientific-technical elite steering the country for their own ends -- at odds with truth and the national interest."

So, with that, here are excerpts the long post dated March 21, 2020. Overall, I think it holds up well--which simply illustrates that the current outrage is not based on actual new news or revelations and is long overdue. Fauci's personal culpability was clear well over a year ago. The only question is: How wide ranging is the culpability in the community of virus researches and, in particular, vaccine researchers? Please note in what follows the reference to using coronaviruses as part of an AIDS vaccine. Development of an AIDS vaccine has been Fauci's tilting at windmills project for decades, and the author quoted says that was going on in Wuhan.

Is Vaccine Research Behind A Leak From The Wuhan Lab?

As a followup to Did Covid-19 Come From The Wuhan Lab? I'm presenting a partial transcript (the conclusion) from a Youtube video that explains the lengthy blog Logistical and Technical Exploration into the Origins of the Wuhan Strain of Coronavirus (COVID-19), which formed the basis for that initial post.

I hope what follows will also raise awareness among readers regarding development of "herd immunity" and vaccines. Herd immunity is not inevitable, quick, and certainly not without serious and sometimes catastrophic risks. Vaccine development is not always easy--in the case of viruses it can be not only very difficult but also risky, as you'll see below.


Before we begin the presentation we should also note that there are a fair number of well known scientific journals that purport to debunk a lab origin for Covid-19. Sadly, we all know that these journals have a track record of deferring to both political correctness as well as to political pressure--especially when it comes from China. Here is a link to a takedown of Nature's claim that Covid-19 didn't come from a lab: China owns Nature magazine’s ass – Debunking “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” claiming COVID-19 definitely wasn’t from a lab.


The basic idea is that the Wuhan virus is quite likely the result of vaccine research. Vaccine research has for over a decade involved what's known as "dual-use gain-of-function" research. "Gain-of-function" research involves experimentation with the potential to enhance the pathogenicity or transmissibility of potential pandemic pathogens. Do this search to learn more: "dual-use gain-of-function research". As I noted earlier, Michael Osterholm--who views such research as justifiable--devotes an entire chapter in Deadliest Enemy to the very real risks of such research. That whole topic is the subject of VERY heated debates in the scientific world. The presenter in the video obviously disagrees with Osterholm:

The basic gist of it [the Harvard To The Big House article] is: This is likely a virus that came out of the laboratory in Wuhan. You can debate whether this is gain-of-function research or whether it was somehow naturally acquired, but the bottom line is that we had the technology for at least 20 years, we've been doing the research for at least 15 years, and the researchers didn't know how to do it [garbled: right?] in Wuhan.  
So the idea that this is a zoonosis [disease that can be transmitted from one species to another] is likely just an excuse to cover up for the fact that they've been doing gain-of-function research in the United States and in Canada and also in Australia and in China for about 10 to 15 years now. And the only question in China was, when was it going to get out. In Beijing they've had four separate releases of SARS virus since SARS was discovered in 2003.  
In the world after 2003 we've had MERS virus break in 2012, so there's reason to believe that zoonosis occurs. But generally speaking zoonosis does not release a superbug ... simply because, generally speaking, the mutation that allows the zoonotic jump is not a mutation that's specific enough to also be hyper-virulent in the new species that it jumps to.  
So, all this circumstantial evidence leads me to believe and Dan [author of linked blog] to believe, and his expert to believe, that this virus was a gigantic mistake. It was probably found, it was probably enriched, it might have even been created in the laboratory in Wuhan as a way of creating a vaccine for coronavirus--or a vaccine for AIDS or SARS.  
I have evidence that they tried to do coronavirus vaccine with AIDS [a vaccine for AIDS using a coronavirus.] I have evidence and Dan has evidence that they have done vaccines with coronavirus for SARS. The idea was to make a weakened virus which had a lot of the immunal properties of the virulent virus, so that your body would make antibodies to it and impart immunity on these hyper-virulent viruses.  
It was also the idea of using coronavirus to make an AIDS vaccine. If you could use a virus that was a fairly innocuous virus like the common cold, but then engineer it to have particular epitopes [Chemical entity which can be bound by an antibody] on it which would allow the body to make functional enzymes, sorry, functional antibodies for that HIV virus, then you could impart HIV immunity using a simple coronavirus vaccine.  
This idea's been around for a long time. The only time that I've seen evidence that they've tested it was in mice, where the mice--after the second attack of SARS, they immunized them [the mice] to SARS--when they [the mice] were again challenged by the SARS virus they [the mice] ended up developing an even more severe reaction, which included auto-immunity. So this could be the reason that people are falling in the streets in China and why the very severe cases of this virus end up to be death. 
So now the question is, How fast is it really spreading? The latest paper that's out gives the range anywhere from 2.7 to 6. Six would be crazy.And it does seem that at least in certain countries--Korea, China, and Italy--it's starting to go exponential. It's already in ten different countries in Europe, it's already in South America, so it's on every continent. The question now is how fast is it gonna spread and how much of a tax is it gonna put on our production system, on our commerce, and on our healthcare system. If ten thousand old people in Pittsburgh need to be in the hospital at once, we have a serious problem.

No comments:

Post a Comment