…In 1972 Biological Weapons Convention: From the outset, the BWC’s terms acknowledged the dual-use nature of biological agents: instead of prohibiting biological weapons specifically, it committed parties never to “develop, produce, stockpile, or otherwise acquire or retain: microbial or other biological agents, or toxins…of types and in quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes,” as well as “weapons, equipment or means of delivery designed to use such agents or toxins for hostile purposes.”5 This language also ensured that the BWC’s fundamental prohibitions would apply to all future scientific and technological developments in the life sciences and related fields, including in the nascent field of biotechnology. The biggest weakness of the BWC, however, is the absence of meaningful mechanisms for ensuring that countries comply with their obligations. In the late 1980s, U.S. officials began to speak publicly about a broader proliferation problem, claiming that the number of countries with biological weapons programs had increased from four to ten in the years since the BWC had been completed. Government departments were determined to limit the protocol’s impact on sensitive biodefense and threat assessment activities and on the U.S. biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. In July 2001, the new George W. Bush administration, whose officials had an antipathy to arms control in general and to BWC verification in particular
(love of depleted uranium for war). Under this program, which was created in June 2002, the G8 industrialized countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) committed to raise up to $20 billion over ten years to fund activities aimed at preventing terrorists or the states that support them from gaining access to weapons, material, and information that could be used in biological or other weapons of mass destruction. A few months later, five of the world’s leading gene synthesis companies formed a competing group, the International Gene Synthesis Consortium, to develop their own screening proposal. In the end, both industry groups, which together represented most of the global gene synthesis industry, agreed to screen all synthetic gene orders they received not only for sequences of known high-risk pathogens but also for reasonably similar sequences that could be used to create novel pathogens. They also agreed to screen all customers who placed orders, to maintain sequence and customer records, and to report potentially problematic orders to the appropriate authorities.15 https://www.amacad.org/publication/governance-dual-use-technologies-theory-and-practice/section/5
………………………………………………………..
7-23-21 since 1992 WIV and other laboratories around the world have inserted furin sites into viruses repeatedly as part of GOF experiments. “It is the only sure method that always works and always makes them more infectious,” Quay said. WIV was also known for their broad use of CGG-CGG codon pairs….
In the early days of the pandemic Richard Muller, physics prof. emeritus at UC Berkeley, called on an expert virologist friend to help him review literature suggesting there may have been a lab leak. The friend said no, so he asked if someone in his laboratory could do it. But the answer was no again. Muller pressed him on the refusal, to which he responded: “If anyone in my laboratory is discovered to be working on a laboratory leak hypothesis, China will label us enemies of China and the laboratory will be blacklisted and we will no longer be able to collaborate. We collaborate all the time with China. Nobody will take that risk.”
article by Dr. Mercola https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/steven-quay-richard-muller-facts-covid-leak-wuhan/
…………………………………………………
SEATTLE, July 26, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- Physician-Scientist Steven Quay and a group of international scientists have published a pre-print, available here, entitled "CONTAMINATION OR VACCINE RESEARCH? RNA Sequencing data of early COVID-19 patient samples show abnormal presence of vectorized H7N9 hemagglutinin segment." In the paper a forensic examination of the sequencing data from five COVID-19 bronchial lavage patient specimens reveals that the laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) was contaminated with a wide range of viruses, including Nipah virus genes in a cloning vector. Nipah is a BSL-4 pathogen with a lethality of 50% to 92%….
Five patient specimens were sequenced by the WIV in December 2019 and were part of an early report on SARS-CoV-2 published by Dr. Zhengli Shi and colleagues (Nature 579, 270–273 (2020). This paper has been viewed over one million times, making it one of the most highly read papers on the pandemic virus. The Nipah virus gene sequences were found in infectious cloning vectors of the type] used for genetic manipulation. Nineteen other contaminants, including Japanese Encephalitis virus, HIV, human T-cell leukemia virus, and hepatitis delta virus were found.
"It was surprising to find a menagerie of deadly viruses, strange pathogens, and even honeysuckle, plant genes in patient specimens sequenced at the WIV in December 2019, especially since this patient sequencing data has been publicly available to the entire scientific community inside of the US NIH GenBank database since February 2020," stated Dr. Steven Quay, MD, PhD. "The apparent widespread contamination of the laboratory at the very time the pandemic was just beginning is of course worrisome. But more important is getting answers to these questions: Why do these patient specimens contain an unreported influenza vaccine? What was the purpose of creating an undisclosed, apparently infectious clone of the deadly Nipah virus? Is this Nipah research part of another gain-of-function research project at the Wuhan Institute of Virology?" https://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/state/physician-scientist-steven-quay-forensic-examination-of-wuhan-institute-of-virology-covid-19-patient-specimens/article_44077c1b-4dcb-525e-b7fc-51850686bbed.html
………………………………………………….
1-11-21 a state-funded project at the WIV in 2019 that involved infecting transgenic mice with bat coronaviruses. The scientist who headed this project is assistant researcher Hu Ben (胡犇), according to the National Natural Science Foundation of China….
In 2014 Shi, Hu and other WIV scientists began taking part in gain of function (GoF) experiments with Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina.
By 2017 the WIV published a paper in which it reported eight chimeric viruses that it had created from transplanted receptor-binding domains from SARS-like bat viruses collected over the course of five years from a cave in Yunnan: “Using reverse genetics technique developed for WIV1 we constructed infectious bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) clones with WIV1 backbone & variants of S genes from 8 different bat SARSr-CoVs," wrote the researchers.
After the WIV experimented with Vero E6 cells, they used transgenic "humanized mice" from Baric's lab, meaning the rodents had been genetically modified to express the human ACE2 protein. In 2019 just before the known start of the pandemic Hu began his work on a project titled "Pathogenicity of 2 new bat SARS-related covs to transgenic mice expressing human ACE2." https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4099020
……..…………………………………
8-25-21 a new Socialist world order. In fact the WHO, the IMF, and the UN are led by former Communists. The Wold Econ Forum is financed by global companies, including the pharmaceutical industry and the big tech companies. The WEF, for its part, significantly finances the UN's 2030 Agenda. The WHO is also significantly funded by pharmaceutical companies and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which spearheads global vaccination campaigns. During the covid-19 crisis, the pharmaceutical industry also exerted its influence on the WHO. And the IMF only aided nation-states if they complied with WHO recommendations. These interconnected supranational organizations see the covid-19 crisis as an opportunity to advance their agendas. The UN policy paper Shared Responsibility, Global Solidarity: Responding to the Socio-economic Impacts of COVID-19 views covid-19 as a turning point for modern society. The intention is to seize the opportunity and act in a globally coordinated manner. The major tech companies support these agendas. They are also members of the WEF and censored disagreeable information related to covid-19 on their platforms (Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook), just like the mass media. Videos critical of vaccination are particularly quickly deleted on YouTube.
The title of a keynote speech by IMF director Kristalina Georgieva, "From Great Lockdown to Great Transformation" also underscores the idea that supranational organizations want to use the corona crisis for their agendas. Klaus Schwab, founder of the WEF, argues that the covid-19 crisis represents a "rare opportunity" to "lay new foundations for our economic and social systems." In COVID-19: The Great Reset, coauthored with Thierry Malleret, Schwab speaks of a defining moment and claims a new world will emerge. https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/vaccine-mandates-great-reset
……………………………….........................
8-26-21 Gates Foundation is working with Chinese government on donations to its neighboring countries and African countries such as anti-malaria medicines, bed nest, diagnostics etc. More specifically, it helps Chinese companies to gain pre-qualification on medications so that Chinese company manufactured drugs can be sold outside China, helps the Chinese to establish bilateral collaboration with specific countries in Africa, teaches the Chinese how to do resource mobilization, and helps raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China. https://thenewamerican.com/new-niaid-e-mails-shed-light-on-wuhan-gates-china-role-in-outbreak/
………………………………………………….
19th December 2007 Mechanisms of Zoonotic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Host Range Expansion in Human Airway Epithelium by Sheahan T. et al. The authors describe “the synthetic construction and characterization of a SARS-CoV chimera bearing a zoonotic SZ16 S protein” and produce a pseudo-virus capable of binding to human airway epithelial cells.
30th October 2013 Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor, Xing-Yi Ge et al. (incl. Zhengli Shi). “Here we report whole-genome sequences of two novel bat coronaviruses from Chinese horseshoe bats (family: Rhinolophidae) in Yunnan, China: RsSHC014 and Rs3367. These viruses are far more closely related to SARS-CoV than any previously identified bat coronaviruses, particularly in the receptor binding domain of the spike protein. Most importantly, we report the first recorded isolation of a live SL-CoV (bat SL-CoV-WIV1) from bat faecal samples in Vero E6 cells, which has typical coronavirus morphology, 99.9% sequence identity to Rs3367 and uses ACE2 from humans, civets and Chinese horseshoe bats for cell entry.”
…………………….................................
Journalist J. Rogin added an additional point. The WIV is a large facility that hosts a lot of different labs studying different viruses. According to the unreleased information our intelligence community has gathered, the researchers who got sick in 2019 “were researchers working at the bat coronavirus lab.” https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2021/08/23/josh-rogin-the-sick-researchers-from-the-wuhan-institute-of-virology-lost-their-sense-of-smell-n411008
………………………………………….........................
(What is not in the following article is that most big pharma, banking, business want to make money and power out of gain-of-function, untested chemicals, genetic engineering, pesticide poisoning and GMO and patents worldwide thereupon. -r.)
8-26-21 Collins and Fauci in recent years have helped shape policy changes, directly and through their aides, that undercut the (oversight) committee’s authority, according to federal documents, congressional testimony and interviews with dozens of present and former officials and science experts. In 2017 a change made under their watch removed the committee’s power to block the projects, recasting the panel as strictly an advisory body.
Another change at that time redefined gain-of-function research, giving NIH leaders greater leeway to approve projects without referring them to the review committee. Some researchers had complained that far-reaching reviews would slow NIH approvals and scientific progress. Since then the experiments have continued to unfold amid secrecy, and HHS, which administers the review committee, has kept its work confidential: No agendas, meeting minutes or other records of its proceedings are public. Even the names of the federal officials assigned to serve on the committee, which has spanned the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations, are kept secret.
Collins and Fauci defended the resulting policy, which is formally known as the “Framework” for guiding gain-of-function research. “To the extent that we can be transparent, that the system would allow us to be transparent, we go overboard to be transparent,” Fauci said. Officials at NIH declined to say how many gain-of-function projects they have funded since the controversy over the experiments with ferrets peaked in 2012, other than confirming grants for two projects in 2018.
WaPo identified at least 18 projects that won funding from 2012 to 2020 that appeared to include gain-of-function experiments. Reporters examined research summaries in the database, along with articles published in scientific journals and conducted interviews with experts. Funding from NIH for the 18 projects totaled about $48.8 million and unfolded at 13 institutions. (Much much more funding has come through Pentagon programs like DARPA, plus a lot via State Dept, e.g., the Department of State’s Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, Office of Cooperative Threat Reduction (ISN/CTR) is funding cooperative agreements to identify and disrupt the ability of “revisionist proliferator states” to develop chemical and biological weapons capabilities. 10-27-20 https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/10/27/state-department-reducing-revisionist-state-biological-and-chemical-weapons-threats/ -r)
Kadlec, a physician who earlier had held biodefense roles with the Pentagon, the White House and the Senate, said that the high-risk research has not been adequately vetted. “Frankly, we didn’t have the scientific wherewithal,” Kadlec said of HHS, adding that the review committee’s capabilities were not “robust enough to make sure that bad things don’t happen.” Relman and other scientists said the federal policy governing the research is opaque and needs strengthening. Fauci continued in 2012 and beyond to marshal support for NIH’s handling of the experiments with the H5N1 strain and for other gain-of-function projects. He wrote that fall in the journal mBio that “all decisions regarding such research must be made in a transparent manner.”
On April 17, 2016 Lawrence Kerr, the biologist who had sounded an alarm about the first gain-of-function experiments while serving in the Obama White House, emailed six federal colleagues, warning of a boomlet of high-risk research with coronavirus strains. An HHS spokeswoman did not respond to WaPo’s request to interview Kerr, who has headed the department’s Pandemics and Emerging Threats Office since 2016.
Away from the spotlight, officials from NIH, elsewhere within HHS and other federal departments conferred from 2015 to 2017 about how to revise the policy for gain-of-function research, and when to lift the pause. The efforts were guided by Collins, who held sole authority to grant exemptions from the pause for NIH projects, and his chief of staff, according to those familiar with what unfolded. The private meetings included White House officials from the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the National Security Council, along with Collins, his aides and other federal staffers, those familiar with the sessions said. in December 2017, the policy was narrowed to cover only altered pathogens “likely capable of wide and uncontrollable spread in human populations.” The sweeping reference to mammals was eliminated. A review by the committee was not required, the policy said, unless the pathogen to be constructed is “reasonably judged” by NIH “to be a credible source of a potential future human pandemic.” Collins, pressed on why the change was made, said that he was “not able to fully reconstruct” the details but added that agency staffers evaluate the research proposals “from the most sophisticated perspective.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/interactive/2021/a-science-in-the-shadows/
…………………………………………...........................................
8-26 update: during this surreal press conference late on Thursday, Biden did not deny the report of U.S. handing over names of Americans to Taliban, saying 'There may have been.'
"There have been occasions where our military has contacted their military counterparts in the Taliban and said this bus is coming through...made up of the following group...let it through," the president said. "Yes, there have been occasions like that." Biden added that to his knowledge, the "bulk of that group" has been let through but can't say with "certitude" that there was a list of names passed to the Taliban. In short, yes, the Biden admin handed "kill lists" to the Taliban. https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/outrage-after-biden-admin-provides-taliban-names-americans-afghans-allies-evacuate
…………………………………………...................................
Science is not consensus. Ten, one hundred or a million people, all draped in lab coats and saying the same thing, does NOT make it so. In fact it matters not at all. It’s nothing but theater, and it’s anti-science. All science is, really, is a process of testing ideas; it is not an organization, it is not based upon authority (it’s inherently anti-authority), and it is very certainly not allied with (worldly) power. All that matters in science are verifiable results. https://freemansperspective.com/the-weaponization-of-medicine/#more-11301…………………………….
WIV WIV team, Shi Zhengli (center). (Weixin photo)
No comments:
Post a Comment