[Grem] The Wuhan Virus may have been deliberately engineered ......
csakany
csakany at cs.bme.hu
2020. Ápr. 26., V, 21:46:05 CEST
Kedves Mindenki!
Ha a vírus mesterséges, akkor viszont bárhol készülhetett, nem biztos,
hogy Kínában. Ez egy Trump köreiből származó, de azért mégiscsak összeesküvés-elmélet.
Sziasztok Rita
On Sun, 26 Apr 2020, Reinisch Egon wrote:
>
> A jó öreg Luc ,már rájött erre .
>
> 2020.04.26. 19:47 keltezéssel, Emoke Greschik írta:
> How COVID-19 may have been deliberately engineered in a China biolab
>
> The Wuhan Virus may have been deliberately engineered in the laboratory by joining
> parts of different viruses together using what is called recombinant technology.
> Wed Apr 22, 2020 - 4:04 pm EST
> https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/how-covid-19-may-have-been-deliberately-engineered-in-a-chin
> a-biolab
>
> PETITION: Thank President Trump for halting U.S. funding to pro-abortion World Health
> Organization Sign the petition here.
>
> April 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Let’s start with the bats, the species known as
> Intermediate Horseshoe Bat, to be exact. The Chinese Communist authorities claim that the
> China Virus, called SARS-CoV-2, is a naturally occurring coronavirus that is carried by
> the Horseshoe Bat. They also claim that the virus “jumped” from its normal host to humans
> at the Wuhan “wet” market.
>
> Both of these claims are demonstrably false.
>
> Let’s start with the Wuhan “wet” market. As I told Jesse Watters on his FOX news show,
> “Watters World,” last week, if the “wet” market was actually “ground zero” for the
> outbreak, the authorities would have burned it to the ground. Instead, they have now
> reopened it.
>
> It is an open secret in Wuhan that, as a team of researchers from Wuhan noted in late
> February, that there were no bats in the market and that direct transmission from bats to
> humans in the market was “unlikely.”
>
> Two other researchers had reported the same thing a week earlier, namely, “[T]he bat was
> never a food source in the city and no bat was traded in the market.” But these
> researchers, both surnamed Xiao, went even further. They pointed out that there were bats
> in Wuhan--thousands of them—but they were being kept in two biolabs not far from the “wet”
> market where they were used for research purposes.
>
> [FORM]
> SUBSCRIBE to LifeSite's daily headlines
> [FORM]
> U.S. Canada World Catholic
>
> They identified the two labs as the Wuhan Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
> and the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). The Wuhan CDC is the national center for
> China’s bat coronavirus research. Wuhan Institute of Virology uses recombinant technology
> to create and study new coronaviruses. The conclusion of the two Doctors Xiao was that
> “somebody was entangled with the evolution of [SARS-CoV-2] … the killer coronavirus
> probably escaped from a laboratory in Wuhan.”
>
> Their word choice is a little awkward because the researchers were writing in what is for
> them foreign language. But what they clearly mean is that the China Coronavirus now
> plaguing the planet is not the result of a natural recombination of two different viruses
> in nature through an intermediate host, as many claim. Rather it was deliberately
> engineered in the laboratory by joining parts of different viruses together using what is
> called recombinant technology.
>
> More on the science of how this was done later. Right now all you need to know is that,
> within a few hours of its publication, their paper on “The possible origins of
> [SARS-CoV-2] coronavirus” was withdrawn. This same fate has since befallen several papers
> by Chinese authors who have attempted, at great risk to themselves, to reveal the truth
> about the origin of the outbreak to the world.
>
> Now back to the bats.
>
> China’s chief bat hunter is an employee of the Wuhan CDC named Tian Junhua. Mr. Tian’s
> full-time job since 2012 has been collecting bat viruses for research purposes. Over this
> time he collected thousands of live bats, as well as countless samples of bat urine and
> feces, from caves over six hundred miles distant from Wuhan. The tiny mammals obviously
> didn’t get to the city under their own power, but were trapped and transported to the two
> biolabs by the industrious Mr. Tian. As the two Drs. Xiao wryly noted, “The probability
> was very low for the bats to fly to the market.”
>
> As a result of the efforts of Mr. Tian and others, China now boasts that it has “taken the
> lead” in global virus research. It claims to have discovered over 2,000 new viruses since
> the SARS Coronavirus epidemic of 2003. To give you a sense of the scale of China’s
> effort, the total number of viruses discovered over the last two hundred years is, at
> 2,284, only slightly more. China’s frenzied collection efforts have nearly doubled the
> total number of known viruses, and includes hundreds of new and possibly dangerous
> coronaviruses.
>
> That’s a lot of potentially harmful pathogens to keep track of. But it is also a huge
> cache of coronaviruses to harvest parts and pieces from if you are looking to make an
> already deadly coronavirus even deadlier.
>
> And that seems to be exactly what a group of researchers at the Wuhan Institute of
> Virology, led by a woman named Shi Zhengli, may have been intent upon doing right up until
> the end of 2019.
>
> We all know what happened then.
>
> The Technology
>
> Shi Zhengli received her master’s degree from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in 1990.
> After earning her Ph.D. in France, she returned to WIV to direct the Institute’s research
> project into bat coronaviruses. If Mr. Tian is China’s batman, Dr. Shi is China’s
> batwoman.
>
> Some of the articles published by Dr. Shi and her team of virologists describe naturally
> occurring SARS-like coronaviruses that, like the SARS virus itself, could infect human
> beings directly.
>
> But Dr. Shi’s group was not content to merely study existing coronaviruses. They were also
> genetically engineering new ones. In a 2008 article in the Journal of Virology, she and
> her team described how they were genetically engineering SARS-like viruses from horseshoe
> bats to enable them to use angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) to gain entry into human
> cells.
>
> In other words, more than 10 years ago, Shi’s team was already creating entirely new and
> deadly coronaviruses. They did so by inserting that part of the dangerous SARS virus that
> allows it to infect people into a second bat coronavirus, which was then able to attack
> human cells just like the original SARS virus does.
>
> But simply recreating a new SARS virus was only a first step. Shi and her team wanted to
> move beyond that to create completely new, and potentially even more deadly coronaviruses.
> For that she needed a new and more advanced recombinant technique. She may have found one
> in research being done at the University of North Carolina by Prof. Ralph S. Baric.
>
> Prof. Baric had developed a technique for quickly and easily producing what he called
> “infectious clones.” This involves taking coronaviruses from horseshoe bats and
> genetically engineering them to more easily infect human cells.
>
> Why would he--or anyone else for that matter--do such a thing?
>
> Baric explains: “In 2013 preemergent SARS-like Coronaviruses were identified in horseshoe
> bats and found to be poised for entry into the human population. … preemergent
> coronaviruses (CoVs) pose a global threat that requires immediate intervention. Rapid
> intervention necessitates the capacity to generate, grow, and genetically manipulate
> infectious CoVs in order to rapidly evaluate pathogenic mechanisms, host and tissue
> permissibility, and candidate antiviral therapeutic efficacy.” (italics added)
>
> Now all of this—preemergent coronaviruses … poised for entry … global threat … requires
> immediate intervention—all sounds very ominous. But what people need to understand is
> that the good professor is talking about coronaviruses that have not actually infected a
> single, living, breathing human being. Rather, he is talking about coronaviruses that
> might, possibly, at some point in the future, make the leap from bats to humans. Or they
> might not. Ever.
>
> This means that the phrase “preemergent coronavirus” is at best misleading, at worst a
> fiction. It is a fiction because neither Prof. Baric, nor Dr. Shi Zhengli, nor anyone
> else, can possibly know whether any one of these naturally occurring viruses will ever
> infect a single human being.
>
> In any event, Prof. Baric is very pleased to inform us, citing his own research, that
> “much of the [coronavirus] research over the last 15 years has been possible because of
> the capacity to generate infectious clones using highly efficient reverse genetics
> platforms, coupled with robust small animal models of human disease.”
>
> In other words, he and his team used the technique they created to easily construct
> unnatural coronaviruses and see if they will infect and kill mice. Dr. Shi Zhengli
> collaborated with Baric in carrying out some of this research, as highlighted in a 2015
> article in Nature Medicine in which they discussed bat coronaviruses that were potentially
> capable of infecting human beings.
>
> Now, a sane person might think that the idea of creating dangerous new pathogens in the
> lab for which humanity had no acquired immunity, no vaccines, and no drug therapies might
> not be a good idea. The U.S. National Institutes of Health, under the direction of Dr.
> Anthony Fauci, however, initially funded Prof. Baric’s research.
>
> But then Dr. Fauci had second thoughts. In late 2014 he sent a letter to the University
> of North Carolina, notifying the university that Prof. Baric’s research project may
> violate a new moratorium on risky virology studies involving influenza, MERS and SARS
> viruses.
>
> The letter and the document from the “Public Health Emergency” office of HHS that it
> references, orders a pause on “Gain of Function” research into SARS-like coronaviruses.
> What is “Gain of Function” research, precisely? The document defines it as “research that
> improves the ability of a pathogen to cause disease … [by] “confer[ing] attributes to …
> SARS [coronaviruses] such that the resulting virus has enhanced pathogenicity and/or
> transmissibility (via the respiratory route) in mammals. … [that] may entail biosafety and
> biosecurity risks.”
>
> The original scientific rationale for “enhancing” the ability of certain coronaviruses to
> infect and kill human beings was to get one step ahead of the net pandemic. “We will
> create superbugs in the lab,” the scientists said to themselves, “and we will learn how to
> defeat them by developing drug therapies and vaccines. Then when the next superbug
> emerges from nature, we will be ready.”
>
> But what happens if you create a new superbug in the lab and, before you have devised a
> defense against it, it escapes from the lab. What then?
>
> The consequences of unleashing such an “enhanced” coronavirus on the world—a pathogen for
> which human beings had no natural defenses, and for which human science had no treatments
> or vaccines—would be incalculable.
>
> The U.S. pause on such research was not lifted until December 29, 2017, over three years
> later, when NIH put in place what it called “robust oversight” that considers the
> “scientific merits and potential benefits,” as well as the “potential to create ... or use
> an enhanced potential pandemic pathogen.”
>
> In other words, the brakes were put on the dangerous “gain-of-function” research being
> done in the U.S. for fear that it would “create” a pathogen that could, if it leaked from
> the lab, cause a pandemic. We decided that the risks associated with such research were
> generally not worth the benefits.
>
> Not so in China, however. There, in Dr. Shi’s laboratory, the creation of dangerous
> “pathogens of pandemic potential” apparently went forward without pause or effective
> oversight. Communist China is not known for its concern for human life.
>
> Since we are now dealing with exactly the kind of deadly and infectious SARS-like
> coronaviruses that scientists have been creating in the lab for at least the past ten
> years, it is reasonable to ask if the China Coronavirus is a naturally occurring virus.
> Or is it one of batwoman’s concoctions?
>
> Virtually everyone now agrees that the China Coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, leaked from Dr.
> Shi’s lab. But I would suggest that the virus itself is the product of Gain of Function
> research in which its potency was artificially “enhanced” to make it more infectious and
> more lethal using recombinant techniques first developed in the U.S., perhaps at Prof.
> Baric’s lab. The leak was an accident. The “enhancement” was deliberate.
>
> On March 30th of this year, an unusual, unsigned “Editor’s Note” was added to Shi and
> Baric’s original article in Nature Medicine. The oddly worded note read: “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.”
>
> Actually, the “most likely source” of the coronavirus is not just one animal but two,
> whose distinct but related species of coronaviruses were isolated from their hosts and
> then pieced together in the lab using recombinant technology to create a new and much more
> infectious variety.
>
> * * *
>
> In Part II I will review the evidence that the novel coronavirus is the result of what
> Chinese researchers themselves have called an “unusual insertion” in a Horseshoe Bat
> coronavirus that may have come from a Pangolin coronavirus.
>
> Steven W. Mosher @StevenWMosher is the President of the Population Research Institute and
> the author of Bully of Asia: Why China’s “Dream” is the New Threat to World Order.
>
> RELATED: Listen to minutes 10-15 of interview with Senator Ted Cruz
>
>
> [icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png]
> Mentes a vírusoktól. www.avg.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Grem mailing list
> Grem at turul.kgk.uni-obuda.hu
> http://turul.kgk.uni-obuda.hu/mailman/listinfo/grem
>
>
>
További információk a(z) Grem levelezőlistáról