“No Credible Natural Ancestor”: Virologists Say Genetic “Fingerprints” Prove SARS-CoV-2 is Man-MadePosted: 29 May 2021 04:51 PM PDTTwo notable virologists claim to have found “unique fingerprints” on SARS-CoV-2 samples that only could have arisen from laboratory manipulation, according to an explosive 22-page paper obtained by the Daily Mail.British professor Angus Dalgleish – best known for creating the world’s first ‘HIV vaccine’, and Norwegian virologist Dr. Birger Sørensen – chair of pharmaceutical company, Immunor, who has published 31 peer-reviewed papers and holds several patents, wrote that while analyzing virus samples last year, the pair discovered “unique fingerprints” in the form of “six inserts” created through gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.They also conclude that “SARS-Coronavirus-2 has “no credible natural ancestor” and that it is “beyond reasonable doubt” that the virus was created via “laboratory manipulation.” DailyMail.com exclusively obtained the 22-page paper which is set to be published in the scientific journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery. In it, researchers describe their months-long ‘forensic analysis’ into experiments done at the Wuhan lab between 2002 and 2019A ‘GenBank’ table included in the paper lists various coronavirus strains, with the dates they were collected and then when they were submitted to the gene bank, showing a delay of several years for someLast year, Sørensen told Norwegian broadcaster NRK that COVID-19 has properties which have ‘never been detected in nature,’ and that the United States has ‘collaborated for many years on coronavirus research through “gain of function” studies with China.One diagram of the coronavirus shows six ‘fingerprints’ identified by the two scientists, which they say show the virus must have been made in a labA second diagram showed how a row of four amino acids found on the SARS-Cov-2 spike have a positive charge that clings to human cells like a magnet, making the virus extremely infectiousThe paper detailing their months-long “forensic analysis,” which looked back at experiments done at the Wuhan Institute of Virology between 2002 and 2019, is set to be published in the scientific journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery.More via the Mail:Digging through archives of journals and databases, Dalgleish and Sørensen pieced together how Chinese scientists, some working in concert with American universities, allegedly built the tools to create the coronavirus. Much of the work was centered around controversial ‘Gain of Function‘ research – temporarily outlawed in the US under the Obama administration.Gain of Function involves tweaking naturally occurring viruses to make them more infectious, so that they can replicate in human cells in a lab, allowing the virus’s potential effect on humans to be studied and better understood. Dalgleish and Sørensen claim that scientists working on Gain of Function projects took a natural coronavirus ‘backbone’ found in Chinese cave bats and spliced onto it a new ‘spike’, turning it into the deadly and highly transmissible SARS-Cov-2.One tell-tale sign of alleged manipulation the two men highlighted was a row of four amino acids they found on the SARS-Cov-2 spike.In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, Sørensen said the amino acids all have a positive charge, which cause the virus to tightly cling to the negatively charged parts of human cells like a magnet, and so become more infectious. But because, like magnets, the positively charged amino acids repel each other, it is rare to find even three in a row in naturally occurring organisms, while four in a row is ‘extremely unlikely,’ the scientist said.‘The laws of physics mean that you cannot have four positively charged amino acids in a row. The only way you can get this is if you artificially manufacture it,’ Dalgleish told DailyMail.com.Their new paper says these features of SARS-Cov-2 are ‘unique fingerprints’ which are ‘indicative of purposive manipulation‘, and that ‘the likelihood of it being the result of natural processes is very small.’‘A natural virus pandemic would be expected to mutate gradually and become more infectious but less pathogenic which is what many expected with the COVID-19 pandemic but which does not appear to have happened,’ the scientists wrote.‘The implication of our historical reconstruction, we posit now beyond reasonable doubt, of the purposively manipulated chimeric virus SARS-CoV-2 makes it imperative to reconsider what types of Gain of Function experiments it is morally acceptable to undertake.The study concluded ‘SARS-Coronavirus-2 has no credible natural ancestor’ and that it is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that the virus was created through ‘laboratory manipulation’When Sørensen and Dalgleish floated their findings last year, it was ‘debunked’ with the thinnest of logic – however former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove pointed to the pair’s findings as an “important” development which could prove that the pandemic may have originated at the WIV.Sørensen and Dalgleish aren’t the first scientists to find unusual features within COVID-19. Last June, the Daily Telegraph reported that there are two unique features to COVID-19:First, the virus binds more strongly to human ACE2 enzymes than any other species, including bats.Second, SARS-CoV-2 has a “furin cleavage site” missing in its closes bat-coronavirus relative, RaTG-13, which makes it significantly more infectious – a finding we reported in late February.According to Israeli geneticist, Dr. Ronen Shemesh, the Furin site is the most unusual finding.“I believe that the most important issue about the differences between ALL coronavirus types is the insertion of a Furin protease cleavage site at the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2,” he said. “Such an insertion is very rare in evolution, the addition of such 4 Amino acids alone in the course of only 20 years is very unlikely.”“There are many reasons to believe that the COVID-19 generating SARS-CoV-2 was generated in a lab. Most probably by methods of genetic engineering,” he said, adding “I believe that this is the only way an insertion like the FURIN protease cleavage site could have been introduced directly at the right place and become effective.”Dr Shemesh, who has a PhD in Genetics and Molecular Biology from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and over 21 years of experience in the field of drug discovery and development, said it is even “more unlikely” that this insertion happened in exactly the right place of the cleavage site of the spike protein – which is where it would need to occur to make the virus more infectious. –Daily Telegraph“What makes it even more suspicious is that fact that this insertion not only occurred on the right place and in the right time, but also turned the cleavage site from an Serine protease cleavage site to a FURIN cleavage site,” he added.In January 2020, a team of Indian scientists wrote in a now-retracted paper that the coronavirus may have been genetically engineered to incorporate parts of the HIV genome, writing “This uncanny similarity of novel inserts in the 2019- nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature,” meaning – it was unlikely to have occurred naturally.The next month, a team of researchers in Nankai University noted that COVID-19 has an ‘HIV-like mutation’ that allows it to quickly enter the human body by binding with a receptor called ACE2 on a cell membrane.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.When looking at the genome sequence of the new coronavirus, Professor Ruan Jishou and his team at Nankai University in Tianjin found a section of mutated genes that did not exist in Sars, but were similar to those found in HIV and Ebola. –SCMPAccording to the Nankai University study, the furin binding method is “100 to 1,000 times as efficient’ as SARS at entering cells.“This protein cleaving protein is highly promiscuous, it’s found in many human tissues and cell types and is involved in many OTHER virus types activation and infection mechanisms (it is involved in HIV, Herpes, Ebola and Dengue virus mechanisms),” said Dr. Shemesh. “If I was trying to engineer a virus strain with a higher affinity and infective potential to humans, I would do exactly that: I would add a Furin Cleavage site directly at the original less effective and more cell specific cleavage site.”Meanwhile, Flinders University Professor Nikolai Petrovsky found last year either “a remarkable coincidence or a sign of human intervention” within COVID-19 telling the Telegraph that COVID-19 is “exquisitely adapted to humans.”“We really don’t know where this virus came from – that’s the truth. The two possibilities is that it was a chance transmission of a virus…the other possibility is that it was an accidental release of the virus from a laboratory,” he said, adding “One of the possibilities is that an animal host was infected by two coronaviruses at the same time and COVID-19. The same process can happen in a petri-dish.”“In other words COVID-19 could have been created from that recombination event in an animal host or it could have occurred in a cell-culture experiment. I’m certainly very much in favour of a scientific investigation. Its only objective should be to get to the bottom of how did this pandemic happen and how do we prevent a future pandemic.”Keep in mind – reporting any of this last year was punishable by social media banishment, demonetiziation, and hit-piece articles from propagandists peddling CCP talking points.Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permissionThe post “No Credible Natural Ancestor”: Virologists Say Genetic “Fingerprints” Prove SARS-CoV-2 is Man-Made appeared first on We Are Change. |
| Fauci in 2012: Gain-of-Function Research Worth Risk of Lab Accident Sparking PandemicPosted: 28 May 2021 06:14 PM PDTAmerica’s top virologist, Anthony Fauci, argued in 2012 that the risks of a lab accident sparking a pandemic are outweighed by the potential benefits of manipulating viruses via gain-of-function research, according to previously unsurfaced remarks reported by Sharri Markson via The Australian.“In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?” Fauci wrote in the American Society for Microbiology in 2012, adding “Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario – however remote – should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?”“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks,” Fauci continued. “It is more likely that a pandemic would occur in nature, and the need to stay ahead of such a threat is a primary reason for performing an experiment that might appear to be risky.”In the paper, Dr Fauci also writes: “Within the research community, many have expressed concern that important research progress could come to a halt just because of the fear that someone, somewhere, might attempt to replicate these experiments sloppily. This is a valid concern.”Dr Fauci has led the US response to the outbreak but is now facing serious questions about his role in funding the radical experiments being conducted inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology.…Dr Fauci on May 11 reversed his position on whether Covid-19 had leaked from the WIV, and said he was now “not convinced” the virus had developed naturally and authorities needed to find out “exactly what happened”.Gain-of-function experiments – often with bat-derived coronaviruses – centre on manipulating, splicing and recombining viruses potentially into strands of highly infectious and little understood diseases. -The AustralianThis and more on Fauci is from my book “What Really Happened in Wuhan”… you can pre-order it on Amazon https://t.co/od8I1zLUSh— Sharri Markson (@SharriMarkson) May 28, 2021And what’s this?This was incredibly hard to find.Here is the whole hearing and Fauci is caught dead to rights. https://t.co/J6WECrHL28— SCUBA MIKE? (@scuba2024) May 28, 2021Earlier this month, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) went to town on Dr. Anthony Fauci Tuesday during a hearing in front of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee. Paul alleged that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had used a middle-man to funnel money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology via EcoHealth Alliance – which worked with the lab on bat coronavirus projects.Paul specifically referenced “gain-of-function” research which in this case has been focused on how to make animal viruses more transmissible to humans – specifically bat coronaviruses.“Government scientists like yourself who favor gain of function research,” Paul began……only to have Fauci interject “I don’t favor gain of function research in China,” adding “You are saying things that are not correct.”Paul pushed back – continuing:“[Those who favor gain of function] say that COVID-19 mutations were random and not designed by man.”“I do not have any accounting of what the Chinese may have done,” Fauci shot back, adding that he’s in favor of further investigation, but that the NIH had nothing to do with the origins of COVID-19.“We have not funded gain of function research on this virus in the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” he added.“No matter how many times you say it, it didn’t happen.”As we noted in March, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) – headed by Fauci, “had funded a number of projects that involved WIV scientists, including much of the Wuhan lab’s work with bat coronaviruses.”Zhengli Shi got shipped out to Wuhan lab after her paper (2015) regarding attaching a sequence coding for a spike protein that attaches to human ACE2 receptors.Why?That’s gain of function research, illegal in the USA in 2014.Fauci and Peter Daszak funded her in Wuhan. Link— Noelle Smith (@425Noelle) May 28, 2021Via our May 11 report:In 2017, Fauci’s agency resumed funding a controversial grant without the approval of a government oversight body, according to the Daily Caller. For context, in 2014, the Obama administration temporarily suspended federal funding for gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses. Four months prior to that decision, the NIH effectively shifted this research to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) via a grant to nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance, headed by Peter Daszak.The NIH’s first $666,442 installment of EcoHealth’s $3.7 million grant was paid in June 2014, with similar annual payments through May 2019 under the “Understanding The Risk Of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” project.Notably, the WIV “had openly participated in gain-of-function research in partnership with U.S. universities and institutions” for years under the leadership of Dr. Shi ‘Batwoman’ Zhengli, according to the Washington Post‘s Josh Rogin.EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak toasts with WIV’s ‘Batwoman’ Shi ZhengliMeanwhile, Fauci ‘rammed through’ gain-of-function research in December of 2017 without approval.Via The Australian:Multiple Trump administration officials told The Weekend Australian Dr Fauci had not raised the issue of restarting the research funding with senior figures in the White House.“It kind of just got rammed through,” one official said.“I think there’s truth in the narrative that the (National Security Council) staff, the president, the White House chief-of-staff, those people were in the dark that he was switching back on the research.”The Weekend Australian has also confirmed that neither Mike Pompeo, the then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, nor National Security Council member Matthew Pottinger, was briefed.The experiments are also opposed by prominent scientists, including the Cambridge Working Group of 200 researchers which issued a public warning in 2014.“Accident risks with newly created “potential pandemic pathogens” raise grave new concerns,” the group’s letter read. “Laboratory creation of highly transmissible, novel strains of dangerous viruses, especially but not limited to influenza, poses substantially increased risks.“An accidental infection in such a setting could trigger outbreaks that would be difficult or impossible to control. Historically, new strains of influenza, once they establish transmission in the human population, have infected a quarter or more of the world’s population within two years.”And Steven Salzberg, of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, in 2015 said the benefits of gain-of-function research were “minimal at best” and they could “far more safely be obtained through other avenues of research”.“I am very concerned that the continuing gain-of-function research on influenza viruses, and more recently on other viruses, presents extremely serious risks to the public health,” he wrote.Worth the risk, Fauci says?Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permissionThe post Fauci in 2012: Gain-of-Function Research Worth Risk of Lab Accident Sparking Pandemic appeared first on We Are Change. |
DailyMail.com exclusively obtained the 22-page paper which is set to be published in the scientific journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery. In it, researchers describe their months-long ‘forensic analysis’ into experiments done at the Wuhan lab between 2002 and 2019
A ‘GenBank’ table included in the paper lists various coronavirus strains, with the dates they were collected and then when they were submitted to the gene bank, showing a delay of several years for someLast year, Sørensen told Norwegian broadcaster NRK that COVID-19 has properties which have ‘never been detected in nature,’ and that the United States has ‘collaborated for many years on coronavirus research through “gain of function” studies with China.
One diagram of the coronavirus shows six ‘fingerprints’ identified by the two scientists, which they say show the virus must have been made in a lab
A second diagram showed how a row of four amino acids found on the SARS-Cov-2 spike have a positive charge that clings to human cells like a magnet, making the virus extremely infectiousThe paper detailing their months-long “forensic analysis,” which looked back at experiments done at the Wuhan Institute of Virology between 2002 and 2019, is set to be published in the scientific journal Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery.More via the Mail:Digging through archives of journals and databases, Dalgleish and Sørensen pieced together how Chinese scientists, some working in concert with American universities, allegedly built the tools to create the coronavirus. Much of the work was centered around controversial ‘Gain of Function‘ research – temporarily outlawed in the US under the Obama administration.Gain of Function involves tweaking naturally occurring viruses to make them more infectious, so that they can replicate in human cells in a lab, allowing the virus’s potential effect on humans to be studied and better understood. Dalgleish and Sørensen claim that scientists working on Gain of Function projects took a natural coronavirus ‘backbone’ found in Chinese cave bats and spliced onto it a new ‘spike’, turning it into the deadly and highly transmissible SARS-Cov-2.One tell-tale sign of alleged manipulation the two men highlighted was a row of four amino acids they found on the SARS-Cov-2 spike.In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, Sørensen said the amino acids all have a positive charge, which cause the virus to tightly cling to the negatively charged parts of human cells like a magnet, and so become more infectious. But because, like magnets, the positively charged amino acids repel each other, it is rare to find even three in a row in naturally occurring organisms, while four in a row is ‘extremely unlikely,’ the scientist said.‘The laws of physics mean that you cannot have four positively charged amino acids in a row. The only way you can get this is if you artificially manufacture it,’ Dalgleish told DailyMail.com.Their new paper says these features of SARS-Cov-2 are ‘unique fingerprints’ which are ‘indicative of purposive manipulation‘, and that ‘the likelihood of it being the result of natural processes is very small.’‘A natural virus pandemic would be expected to mutate gradually and become more infectious but less pathogenic which is what many expected with the COVID-19 pandemic but which does not appear to have happened,’ the scientists wrote.‘The implication of our historical reconstruction, we posit now beyond reasonable doubt, of the purposively manipulated chimeric virus SARS-CoV-2 makes it imperative to reconsider what types of Gain of Function experiments it is morally acceptable to undertake.
The study concluded ‘SARS-Coronavirus-2 has no credible natural ancestor’ and that it is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that the virus was created through ‘laboratory manipulation’When Sørensen and Dalgleish floated their findings last year, it was ‘debunked’ with the thinnest of logic – however former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove pointed to the pair’s findings as an “important” development which could prove that the pandemic may have originated at the WIV.Sørensen and Dalgleish aren’t the first scientists to find unusual features within COVID-19. Last June, the Daily Telegraph reported that there are two unique features to COVID-19:First, the virus binds more strongly to human ACE2 enzymes than any other species, including bats.Second, SARS-CoV-2 has a “furin cleavage site” missing in its closes bat-coronavirus relative, RaTG-13, which makes it significantly more infectious – a finding we reported in late February.According to Israeli geneticist, Dr. Ronen Shemesh, the Furin site is the most unusual finding.“I believe that the most important issue about the differences between ALL coronavirus types is the insertion of a Furin protease cleavage site at the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2,” he said. “Such an insertion is very rare in evolution, the addition of such 4 Amino acids alone in the course of only 20 years is very unlikely.”“There are many reasons to believe that the COVID-19 generating SARS-CoV-2 was generated in a lab. Most probably by methods of genetic engineering,” he said, adding “I believe that this is the only way an insertion like the FURIN protease cleavage site could have been introduced directly at the right place and become effective.”Dr Shemesh, who has a PhD in Genetics and Molecular Biology from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and over 21 years of experience in the field of drug discovery and development, said it is even “more unlikely” that this insertion happened in exactly the right place of the cleavage site of the spike protein – which is where it would need to occur to make the virus more infectious. –Daily Telegraph“What makes it even more suspicious is that fact that this insertion not only occurred on the right place and in the right time, but also turned the cleavage site from an Serine protease cleavage site to a FURIN cleavage site,” he added.In January 2020, a team of Indian scientists wrote in a now-retracted paper that the coronavirus may have been genetically engineered to incorporate parts of the HIV genome, writing “This uncanny similarity of novel inserts in the 2019- nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature,” meaning – it was unlikely to have occurred naturally.The next month, a team of researchers in Nankai University noted that COVID-19 has an ‘HIV-like mutation’ that allows it to quickly enter the human body by binding with a receptor called ACE2 on a cell membrane.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.When looking at the genome sequence of the new coronavirus, Professor Ruan Jishou and his team at Nankai University in Tianjin found a section of mutated genes that did not exist in Sars, but were similar to those found in HIV and Ebola. –SCMPAccording to the Nankai University study, the furin binding method is “100 to 1,000 times as efficient’ as SARS at entering cells.“This protein cleaving protein is highly promiscuous, it’s found in many human tissues and cell types and is involved in many OTHER virus types activation and infection mechanisms (it is involved in HIV, Herpes, Ebola and Dengue virus mechanisms),” said Dr. Shemesh. “If I was trying to engineer a virus strain with a higher affinity and infective potential to humans, I would do exactly that: I would add a Furin Cleavage site directly at the original less effective and more cell specific cleavage site.”Meanwhile, Flinders University Professor Nikolai Petrovsky found last year either “a remarkable coincidence or a sign of human intervention” within COVID-19 telling the Telegraph that COVID-19 is “exquisitely adapted to humans.”“We really don’t know where this virus came from – that’s the truth. The two possibilities is that it was a chance transmission of a virus…the other possibility is that it was an accidental release of the virus from a laboratory,” he said, adding “One of the possibilities is that an animal host was infected by two coronaviruses at the same time and COVID-19. The same process can happen in a petri-dish.”“In other words COVID-19 could have been created from that recombination event in an animal host or it could have occurred in a cell-culture experiment. I’m certainly very much in favour of a scientific investigation. Its only objective should be to get to the bottom of how did this pandemic happen and how do we prevent a future pandemic.”Keep in mind – reporting any of this last year was punishable by social media banishment, demonetiziation, and hit-piece articles from propagandists peddling CCP talking points.Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permissionThe post “No Credible Natural Ancestor”: Virologists Say Genetic “Fingerprints” Prove SARS-CoV-2 is Man-Made appeared first on We Are Change.
Notably, the WIV “had openly participated in gain-of-function research in partnership with U.S. universities and institutions” for years under the leadership of Dr. Shi ‘Batwoman’ Zhengli, according to the Washington Post‘s Josh Rogin.
EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak toasts with WIV’s ‘Batwoman’ Shi ZhengliMeanwhile, Fauci ‘rammed through’ gain-of-function research in December of 2017 without approval.Via The Australian:Multiple Trump administration officials told The Weekend Australian Dr Fauci had not raised the issue of restarting the research funding with senior figures in the White House.“It kind of just got rammed through,” one official said.“I think there’s truth in the narrative that the (National Security Council) staff, the president, the White House chief-of-staff, those people were in the dark that he was switching back on the research.”The Weekend Australian has also confirmed that neither Mike Pompeo, the then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, nor National Security Council member Matthew Pottinger, was briefed.The experiments are also opposed by prominent scientists, including the Cambridge Working Group of 200 researchers which issued a public warning in 2014.“Accident risks with newly created “potential pandemic pathogens” raise grave new concerns,” the group’s letter read. “Laboratory creation of highly transmissible, novel strains of dangerous viruses, especially but not limited to influenza, poses substantially increased risks.“An accidental infection in such a setting could trigger outbreaks that would be difficult or impossible to control. Historically, new strains of influenza, once they establish transmission in the human population, have infected a quarter or more of the world’s population within two years.”And Steven Salzberg, of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, in 2015 said the benefits of gain-of-function research were “minimal at best” and they could “far more safely be obtained through other avenues of research”.“I am very concerned that the continuing gain-of-function research on influenza viruses, and more recently on other viruses, presents extremely serious risks to the public health,” he wrote.Worth the risk, Fauci says?Republished from ZeroHedge.com with permissionThe post Fauci in 2012: Gain-of-Function Research Worth Risk of Lab Accident Sparking Pandemic appeared first on We Are Change.
