Is it now case closed on the Wuhan lab leak? After EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak appeared before the U.S. Congress last week and revealed himself as a man of dubious honesty, that’s what many are saying. Some of Daszak’s key earlier claims, such as that he knew what was in the hidden Wuhan virus database (he now admits he had no access to it and has never seen it) and that he had published every SARS-like virus from the WIV (he confessed he hasn’t published any discovered after 2015), collapsed under questioning. In response, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has now suspended EcoHealth Alliance from receiving federal funds and initiated debarment proceedings against it.
Daszak’s performance, as well as that of University of North Carolina virologist Professor Ralph Baric (the transcript of whose January closed-door session was released last week) has added to the sense that the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is now all but confirmed. Something like a consensus – at least among those not still wedded to the idea of a natural zoonotic origin – is emerging: that the virus was a product of Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) research into coronaviruses in 2019 that was inspired by Ralph Baric’s DEFUSE proposal (regarded as a blueprint for SARS-CoV-2) but in which Baric and other U.S. scientists were not personally involved.
DRASTIC’s Yuri Deigin gives perhaps the clearest account of this scenario in a lengthy post on Medium (handily summarised at the start and end). He also succinctly sums it up in a Facebook post, where he contrasts a lab origin with the obviously hopeless zoonotic theory:
Covid origin really comes down to which of the following is more likely:
1) The Wuhan Institute of Virology found the kind of SARS-like virus it set out to look for in late 2018 (with a ‘highly variable’ spike that is 10-25% different from SARS1 but still able to enter human cells while escaping SARS1-based immunity).
or
2) A SARS2 progenitor spilled over from bats into some unknown intermediate host in Laos/Yunnan that was then kept on a farm in Yunnan in large enough numbers for the virus to change from a gut virus to a lung virus, pick up additional characteristic respiratory mutations over the next few months or years, and then, out of the thousands of wet markets in China, these unknown animals were shipped 1,000-plus km to a single market in Wuhan, carrying the very virus WIV set out to look for only one year earlier. Oh and then the wildlife trade industry destroyed all traces of these infected mystery animals.
Virologist Alex Washburne – whose paper showing that SARS-CoV-2 bears characteristic marks of engineering was cited by members of Congress as they questioned Baric – agreed that SARS-CoV-2 has telltale signs of being a DEFUSE-related research product that was “perfectly suited” to the WIV’s 2019 research programme.
The case against the WIV seems to be becoming watertight. As Matt Ridley puts it:
The case for the lab-leak theory of Covid’s origins becomes ever more overwhelming with every further revelation, admission and concession. We are not quite there yet, however. The Chinese Government and its scientists have yet to admit they caused the pandemic. But in exactly the right city, at exactly the right time, they were playing with exactly the right kind of genetic insertion into exactly the right part of exactly the right gene of exactly the right kind of virus, in exactly the right way. And they showed exactly the wrong kind of openness about it afterwards. It would be a heck of a coincidence and awfully bad luck if somehow Covid broke out naturally, right there and at the same time.
In fact though, there is still one point at least on which dispute remains possible. While there seems little doubt that a DEFUSE-related virus escaped from the WIV in 2019, there is still a question of whodunnit. Was it made in China or made in the USA? We know that Baric and his team continued their own post-DEFUSE work on engineered coronaviruses, so it remains possible that it was made in the U.S. and was in the WIV for testing on Chinese bats rather than because it was engineered there. This is not farfetched: DEFUSE had explicitly envisaged sending viruses made by Baric to Wuhan for testing.
Here are three important reasons not to take our suspicions off the American scientists.
First, we have the apparent cluelessness of China’s response to the virus in the early weeks (a point I discussed at greater length in a recent article). The Chinese authorities’ initial response was to close and clean the Huanan wet market, and then to spend the next two weeks saying they weren’t sure if the virus was even spreading between humans. Certainly they took no obvious further action to contain the spread at this point. Insider information relayed to the Associated Press indicates that in these early days Beijing was being kept in the dark by local government officials worried about getting into trouble, suggesting this haphazard response wasn’t just some elaborate ruse by central Government.
If the virus had emerged from Chinese research, Beijing would surely have ascertained this at a very early point. Shi Zhengli told Scientific American that her first thought in late December 2019 on hearing it was a coronavirus was that she didn’t expect such an outbreak in Wuhan and wondered if it could have “come from our lab”, before checking her records. Had she found it there she would surely have told Beijing without delay; yet the Government continued to treat it as a market outbreak for several weeks, suggesting it was indeed not found in her records.
A second reason for suspecting an origin with an American rather than Chinese team is the timing of when China switched to treating the virus as a serious threat, which was straight after the genetic sequence was published on January 10th. That same day, Linfa Wang, the Singapore-based Director of Duke-NUS’s Emerging Infectious Disease programme, unexpectedly resigned from his post as Director of the Duke programme (a position he had held for nearly a decade) for reasons that have never been disclosed. Prior to the genome’s publication, Linfa told the New York Times he was frustrated that scientists in China were not allowed to speak to him about the outbreak. He later called January 10th “the most important day in the COVID-19 outbreak” because it was when the genome was published.
Did Linfa resign because he realised the virus was one that his colleague, Dr. Danielle Anderson (Dani), had been testing on animals in the high security BSL4 lab at the WIV? Did he inform the Chinese authorities of this? Certainly after this date the Chinese began treating the virus much more like a biosecurity threat. On January 14th, in a private teleconference with provincial officials, the head of China’s National Health Commission called the situation “severe and complex” as he signalled the pivot to suppressing the virus. It was also at this time that Major General Chen Wei, the Chinese military’s “top epidemiologist and virologist”, arrived at the WIV with her “team of top military scientists” to take over leading the response at the lab.
Linfa meanwhile flew into Wuhan that week, where he discussed Shi’s forthcoming paper claiming the virus to be of “probable bat origin”, based largely on the ‘discovery’ of a 96% similar bat virus held in the WIV, RaTG13 (this paper, making the case for zoonotic origin, is widely believed to be part of the cover-up). Crucially, in 2019 Linfa and Dani were involved in the American post-DEFUSE research, not the Chinese post-DEFUSE research. WIV researchers were left out of American post-DEFUSE research, but Linfa and Duke-NUS were integral to it, not least because of their links to the WIV where they could test the American-made viruses on Chinese bats. We also know that Baric had already been doing some of the DEFUSE work ahead of the funding application going in, with notes from DEFUSE-related calls stating that Baric had “already generated SARS-like chimeras [i.e., engineered viruses] with RBD [receptor binding domain]… which is 20% different than epidemic strains” – a bracket into which SARS-CoV-2 falls.
Perhaps the most compelling reason to suspect an American origin, though, is the telling fact that SARS-CoV-2 transmits efficiently in only five known mammals, and four of those five – American deer mice, Syrian hamsters, American mink and Egyptian fruit bats – are commonly found in U.S. labs, including Anthony Fauci’s high security Rocky Mountain Lab (RML) in Montana. (The fifth animal, American white-tailed deer, is prevalent across the United States.) On the other hand, SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t infect lab animals common in Chinese labs or present in the WIV, such as Chinese horseshoe bats.
Here’s chapter and verse on that:
- “North American deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) are susceptible and can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to naïve conspecifics, indicating [the species’] potential to serve as a wildlife reservoir for SARS-CoV-2 in North America.” Deer mice are experimented on at RML.
- “Syrian hamsters are highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and one of several animal hosts that have been naturally infected by this virus. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from pet Syrian hamsters to humans has also been reported. Currently, Syrian hamsters are the only rodent model in which airborne transmission can easily be tested.” Syrian hamsters are experimented on at RML.
- “American mink (Neovison vison) have gained notoriety due to their unfortunate susceptibility to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2)… Whole‐genome sequencing of the virus isolated from mink on farms in the Netherlands has provided evidence of both human‐to‐mink and mink‐to‐human transmission of the virus.” American mink are experimented on at RML.
- “Fruit bats showed characteristics of a reservoir host.” Egyptian fruit bats are experimented on at RML.
- But not Chinese bats: “Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] did not replicate efficiently in 13 [of 13] bat cell lines… SARS-CoV but not SARS-CoV-2 can replicate efficiently in R. sinicus [Chinese horseshoe bat] kidney cells.”
Engineered viruses are trained to become infectious using techniques such as ‘serial passage’ in lab animals, a specialism of Vincent Munster at the Rocky Mountain Lab. So it is well within the bounds of possibility that a Baric DEFUSE-type virus could have been trained at RML or another U.S. lab before being sent to Dani in Wuhan for testing on Chinese bats. Recall that the purpose of DEFUSE and other proposals submitted to the PREEMPT funding call, including those from RML, was to investigate ways of vaccinating bats against potential spillover pathogens (and thus ‘preempt’ or ‘defuse’ a pandemic). This entailed sending viruses for testing on bats in Wuhan. Such testing on animals is considered by researchers to be by far the most likely way a virus would escape as the animals breathe and excrete them all over the place and containment is a major challenge.
Yes, a WIV team could have created SARS-CoV-2. But in favour of it being the work of an American team we have the cluelessness of the early Chinese response, the unexplained resignation of a DEFUSE-linked Duke professor on the day the sequence was published, and the smokiest gun of all: the fact that the virus transmits readily in a range of American lab animals but not in Chinese laboratory bats.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
One.of the many epiphanies that the covid experience gave me was that the self appointed elites that rule us are as much a bunch of gangsters and thugs as the rulers any where else.
The hit on Slovakian prime minister Fico is yet another example.
Our lot just have better PR.
Yes….Juraj Cintula, the gunman, was apparently associated with pro-Russian paramilitary group Slovenskí Branci (SB), some of them trained by Russian ex-Spetsnaz soldiers.
‘Hungarian investigative journalist Szabolcs Panyi has unearthed Facebook posts reportedly showing Cintula as a sympathiser and supporter of the pro-Russian paramilitary group Slovenskí Branci, known for its links to the Kremlin.
Slovenskí Branci has been accused of attempting to recruit young men across Slovakia for its paramilitary organisation. In a post from January 2016, Cintula is seen holding a speech next to members of the group wearing camouflage.
In the accompanying text attributed to Cintula, he expressed extremist views in support of self-organised militias, who, according to him, should be allowed to protect “the inhabitants, the country, tradition, (and) culture” from migrants coming from outside of Europe.’
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg6761ggxz1o
Why would “pro Russians” want to eliminate one of only two European leaders vocally opposed to the western approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict?
He’s also apparently very nuch against the “vaccine” – and ordered an enquiry into excess deaths. Also ordered Slovakia not to endorse the WHO treaty.
You would have to pose that question to the individual himself.
‘(In the photograph) Cintula is seen holding a speech next to members of the group wearing camouflage.
In the accompanying text attributed to Cintula, he expressed extremist views in support of self-organised militias, who, according to him, should be allowed to protect “the inhabitants, the country, tradition, (and) culture” from migrants coming from outside of Europe.’
‘Cintula has written three collections of poetry and published two novels titled The Message of Sacrifice in 2010 and Efata in 2015, according to his literary club’s Facebook page. The latter is an overt attack against Slovakia’s Roma community, in which he criticises the state and accuses the Roma of abusing social protections.’
(In the manipulated photo). Fixed that for you.
I wouldn’t bother, I’m 99% sure the account is being driven by a form of AI.
Exactly! More anti Russian B. S.
The “smoking gun” photograph has been analysed and is thought to be. manipulated.
https://twitter.com/Matthew_Kupfer/status/1790800467280159050
‘I’ve done two Amazon Rekognition facial comparisons between a photo of the Fico shooter being detained and 1) a pre-existing photo of Cintula and 2) Cintula in the photo with the flags in this tweet.
It definitely appears to be him.’
Censorship is increasing so the PR must be faltering.
It’s quite extraordinary.
It seems certain that these people, and all those behind them, are directly responsible for millions of deaths, injuries, economic devastation, Clown World etc etc.. Not only are they still breathing but their devilish “research” continues apace in biolabs worldwide.
What beggars belief even more is the just dumb silence and acceptance of these matters.
For some reason these people remain unpunished. They are probably responsible for more human misery than the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Hideki Tojo put together.
MSM deafening silence. Worldwide “governments, silence.
The whole world is under some sort of spell.
For sure, the death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions just a statistic.
Too many people on the take. Too many pinned their colours to the mast at the time and don’t want to look stupid backtracking.
Ordinary people know they are essentially powerless. They rebel from time to time angrily and not very productively.
Most ordinary people just do a simple evaluation, subconsciously. 1. What is the cost of doing something about all this and how likely is it to accomplish something. 2. What is the cost of just putting up with this on top of all the other shit I already put up with.
In the end 2. is the lowest cost by far for most.
Sadly only too correct, – as evidenced by what’s not happening.
Niki Campbell on Five Live this morning. Talking about cyclists colliding with people, said, “you must have compassion for people”…..I sent a message saying where was his compassion for us who refused the vaccine, because I never heard him speaking up against those maligned in 2021. I know the BBC like all MSM are captured but the brass neck knows no bounds!
I’ve always believed the US was behind the whole thing. I can slightly modify Will’s argument to explain my rationale…
I believe that the US is behind almost everything that is bad in this world.
That song ‘We Didn’t Start The Fire’ goes through so much of US foreign policy apart from omitting the tasty bits like the role of the CIA, that now seems to be an out of control Mafia like organisation.
“30 March 2020 Editors’ note, March 2020: We are aware that this article is being used as the basis for unverified theories that the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 was engineered. There is no evidence that this is true; scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus.”
I wonder if another note will be added to this infamous paper highlighting the change in view?
https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985
I consider the Scientists who created this virus to be no better than Mengele.
They should be charged with mass murder and tried in a Nuremberg-style Court, along with the senior military personnel and politicians who funded them.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/stuck-in-the-covid-dark-ages/
Guy Hatchard reporting from New Zealand on increased mortality. “Vaccines?”
Without a doubt.
Ron Unz has been saying from the very start that it was made in the US and “deliberately” released in China.
https://www.unz.com/page/covid-biowarfare-articles/
That is certainly new information, does that mean the virus exists now?
I have no idea. I have no direct evidence it exists and I am not sure any other “ordinary” people do either – though some people say that they got an illness they had never had before, but I wonder if that’s because it was suggested to them and they were looking out for it. My issue with articles like this is that the focus is on a “scary virus” and not on the reaction to it/things done with it as an excuse.
If it doesn’t exist then maybe the various parts that get mentioned like the Spike Protein are nothing more than a computer simulation.
If I had to bet money I would say it does exist, but I would also say in many ways it doesn’t matter. If it exists it was evident from the start that it was just another flu type thing, nothing to see here. I know of nobody that I have actually met in person who “died from/of/with” “covid” and while 98% of everyone we know has apparently had “covid” (so they tell us) not a single one was ill enough to go to hospital.
Let’s just bear in mind that the WHO’s Plandemic Treaty and IHRs want to further develop and legitimate biowarfare ‘research products’ like this. The gods help us all.
On reading the methodology sections of the 5 papers cited as demonstrating transmission, none of them actually do anything of the sort.
1.The first fails to show that the sample of virus used is really a virus causing any disease and takes it on trust that the vial of whatever is what they the supplier says it is. They then add this unknown substance to a some vero kidney cells and injected the muscles of some mouse embryos with the substance. Curious thing to do with a supposedly respiratory virus, instead of the lung. None of the methodology appears to involve a valid control using a sample without a supposed virus, but use of the word control appears to give the impression that this was a valid scientific procedure. Various other anti-body and flourescent procedures were conducted on the tissues of the mice embryos after they had been killed, but at no time did they demonstrate the mice actually got sick or had any transmissible disease as in transmissible from mouse A to mouse B by a natural infection route.
2.Similar methodological defects as 1
3.Not an actual experiment, so not evidence of transmission at all
4.Similar methodological defects as 1
5.Similar methodological defects as 1
In short, none of these papers support the contentions claimed.
The problem is that the methods adopted by virologists, such as Enders and on to modern scions of the art, are not valid science. This has been well documented by the Perth Group for HIV, Stefan Lanka for measles and, more recently, the likes of Drs Sam and Mark Bailey who have reviewed the base papers of early virologists based on their own expertise as medical practitioners and background in medical research.
Mark Bailey’s paper A Farewell to Virology lays the fraud of virology bare and Steve Falconer’s series based on Mark’s work provides an easy intro:
None of the papers claiming to demonstrate transmission of virus do anything of the sort. Of the four papers that provide a methodology, none establish presence of a virus in the sample provided by infecting an animal using a natural infection route and observing symptoms of the claimed disease. All lack valid scientific controls.