Covid Vaccine

endymion96

2nd Longest Active Member
Why do you think the leading proponents of the "zoonotic" evolution of the SARS-COV-2 virus pushed that lie to the media for as long as they did? They were the ones working on the GoF studies after all.

Answer: because THEY were involved in its creation in the lab to begin with! Their secrets must remain hidden from the public. Please! These people are covering their asses for as long as they can so that people will just forget about it. Their time is running out with the coming 2022 elections. The democrats don't want to get to the bottom of this mystery because their "guy" succeeded in bringing down Trump. Biden ran on a platform that he would defeat COVID! Laughable. More people died under his watch than under Trump's when nothing was available to fight this thing and nobody knew what it was. The first two possible treatments were sabotaged by Fauci and his ilk and vaccines were pushed as the ONLY solution. How many lives could have been saved with early treatments? What if we had just tried it? Why wasn't that done? Big Pharma has profitted billions from its vaccine takeover. Unfortunately, their "vaccines" don't work like all the other vaccines we've ever been given. I consider a vaccine good if it prevents transmission of a virus. All the other vaccines work like this, right? So these are not "vaccines". These are something else. But hey if people want to take them great! However, no experimental drug should be forced on any human ever. Its immoral, especially given the context I have just summarized.

Peter Dashak was the middle man between Fauci and Zhangli.
 
Last edited:

macgyver

Well-known member
I read some article (National Geographic?) about how in the beginning scientists thought there was something peculiar about the Covid virus in that it was 99.2 % DNA coded for humans (or something along those lines). This gave some credence to the idea the virus could’ve been engineered for gain of function in humans. But the same scientists looked at other viruses, in particular one species of bats from somewhere in Asia and it was extremely similar to Covid and had the same >99% DNA code for humans thingy. The article implied that the Covid virus is not unique and that it is a naturally occuring phenomenon.

Meanwhile…

8F228C45-EC1E-40CC-9115-03146F0E90B5.jpeg
 
Last edited:
1. I'm not clinical, far from it. I can conduct surgery on a chicken, quite well :)
2. My statement regarding Governments was with regard to Vaccines.
3. Treatments for covid have been tried and some succeeded, some not, such is the nature of drug development.
4. I did like the article on the Peptide and I agree it should get looked at as a treatment.
I am concerned that this is going places I don't want or need to go to, life is to short. My commentary is that of a person who is speaking to cases and their circumstance with occasional bits of information that I think people may be interested in.:)
 

endymion96

2nd Longest Active Member
@macgyver You are speaking of the RaTg13, sequenced from the horseshoe bat in the Yunnan province. It is the closest relative to the original SARS-COV-2 strain. It has a 96.2% identity to the overall genome sequence and an 89.3% amino acid identity in the receptor binding domain (RBD). But there are differences, its not a 100% match. One crucial difference appears in a 4 amino acid residue (PRRA) polybasic insertion at the S1/S2 cleavage site of the spike (S) protein ... otherwise known as the "Furin" cleavage site. Without this sequence, the virus would not be able to fuse its membrane to the cell and enter. Why is this piece of information so vital to understanding whether SARS-COV-2 naturally evolved or was man-made? THIS is the key to unlocking the riddle. I've done my homework. I have the receipts. More to come ...
 

endymion96

2nd Longest Active Member
Chimpanzees are the closest species to humans with a DNA match of 98.8%, closely followed by gorillas at 98.4%. Surprizingly, bananas share around 60% of our genes as well, but you can see how far afield we get when the matching goes off track. I say this to highlight the point that even though the RaTG13 sequence is a close cousin to the original SARS-COV-2 virus, even a 1% difference is a wide chasm in biological terms. This discussion brings to the foreground the concept of evolution. In order to determine where a virus came from, you have to know how it evolved and you have to have evidence of its progenitors. Without going into too much detail, which would involve running a Mesoblast software search in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) database, to provide the evidence ... I can tell you that the RaTG13 genomic sequence is the closest DNA match to the original SARS-COV-2 strain known to science at this time.

However, there are two odd things about this close "cousin". In the courts, we call one of these things circumstantial evidence, but when you put together the totality of evidence, you may start to see things the way I do?

Odd thing #1:
The sequence of the RaTG13 virus was entered into the database by Shi Zheng Li and her colleagues at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. See the reference authors below.


Odd thing #2:
The furin cleavage site (which is essential for viral hijacking of the cell) did not arise from this close "cousin", the RaTG13 sequnece. In fact, you would have to trace back to its great-great-great-great grandfather to find it. It was NOT passed on until it magically appeared in SARS-COV-2. In other words, you would have to trace back to the banana to find it. This article reflects on this curious point.


One might say that the PRRA amino acid sequence at the furin cleavage site was inserted into the RaTG13 virus to unlock its deadly potential? One might say that. Of course, one might also say that this mysterious mutation evolved naturally. In my next post, I will explain why the probability of this event is almost nil.
 
Last edited:

endymion96

2nd Longest Active Member
Odd thing #3:
Shi Zheng-Li was the one who originally discovered the RaTG13 bat-coronavirus, the closest relative to SARS-COV-2, in 2013. Yet she declined to publish this fact or the genomic sequence of this virus until 27-JAN-2020. In the very small world of virologists studying potentially infectious viruses, this is an astonishing and curious fact. Normally when one discovers a new virus, they rush to take credit, increase recognition among their peers, and publish a paper on their new discoveries. Why did this scientific exposure not occur until 7 years later? And why did the publishing of this sequence occur AFTER the SARS-COV-2 virus had started infecting people in Wuhan and the rest of the world and AFTER the SARS-COV-2 virus itself was sequenced and published by a team of researchers in Hong Kong? Well, I will answer this one for you ... as I explained previously, a naturally occurring virus just doesn't spring from thin air. It has to have a trail of ancestors that it has evolved from, otherwise it is NOT natural. Without RaTG13, there would not have been a trail to any conceivable nor believeable ancestor.

Odd thing #4:
The RaTG13 virus is a SARS-like betacoronavirus that infects the horseshoe bat, aka Rhinolophus affinis. It is the most similar to SARS-COV-2. The original SARS-COV-1 virus is only 79% similar. So why is the RaTG13 virus the closest relative to SARS-COV-2? Except for its receptor binding domain (RBD) and furin cleavage site, it is almost an exact match to SARS-COV-2. The receptor binding domain that most closely matches SARS-COV-2 comes from a very specific species of pangolin not found with a 1000 km of the horseshoe bat's home in Yunnan province. Pangolins are solitary animals that live in hollow trees or burrows underground and feast mainly on ants, termites, and insects. In order to create SARS-COV-2 through a zoonotic process and make the jump to humans, it follows that BOTH the bat coronavirus and the pangolin coronavirus had to infect a single intermediate host at the SAME time! Then, through a very rare recombinant biological process, these two viruses had to merge to create SARS-COV-2. On top of that, this new virus would then have to MUTATE to create the necessary furin cleavage site at the exact spot in the genome between the S1/S2 boundary of the spike (S) protein to make it virulent in humans.

So if you believe in the theory that SARS-COV-2 came from nature, you would have to believe that a bat (whose normal habitat is a sparely populated area in South Western Asia) and a pangolin (which is an endangered species that lives in hollow trees or underground burrows far from the horseshoe bat's mountainous home) somehow met each other AND exchanged viruses or infected some unknown and undiscovered intermediate host AND the two viruses mixed together in a rare biological recombination event AND then the newly created virus mutated to create the furin cleavage site AND this random set of mutations occurred at a very specific site on the genome AND then this infected host walked its way into the VERY populated city of Wuhan (11 million people) AND infected everybody near the only BSL-4 lab in China, the one where Shi Zheng-Li was performing gain-of-function experiments on bat coronaviruses ... I'd have to ask you one question. What do you think the probability of all this happening is?

If you know anything about probabilities, just counting the number of ANDs in the previous statement means that the probability equation itself will lead to a very miniscule finding. But what makes this result a factor of magnitude even smaller is the probability that the furin cleavage site formed through a mutation process. For informational purposes, I'll state that furin cleavage sites are not found in any bat coronaviruses known to man at this time. In the next post, I'll explain why, but start by saying that this mutation event is a whole other probability equation nested inside this already improbable event.

 
Last edited:

endymion96

2nd Longest Active Member
Addendum:
This study on furin cleavage sites and their linage in coronaviruses, published 22-JUN-2021. The basic conclusion was that furin cleavage sites are not found in bat coronaviruses, but they are found in rodents. So is a third animal species now involved in the convoluted story to get to the "natural" evolution thesis? As you will soon discover, WIV was experimenting with humanized mice too.

 

endymion96

2nd Longest Active Member
Sorry, my mind is now in "work" mode and recalling stuff I should have included with the last post.

Odd thing #5:
When SARS-COV-2 first came on the scene, its spike protein was perfectly adapted to fit the human ACE-2 receptor. Experiments have been run using this virus against bat ACE-2, pangolin ACE-2, and many other animals. Curiously, the spike (S) from SARS-COV-2 had weaker binding affinity to every other species EXCEPT for humans. Now, how is this possible? If the virus were naturally evolved, shouldn't it have had the greatest binding affinity within its host species first and then when it supposedly jumped to humans, evolved from there? Well that is not what happened in reality.

Doctor Nikolai Petrovsky, famed Australian pathologist who was the first to bravely and publically suggest that a lab-made virus was the more likely event, explains how and why he came to this conclusion in this interview. Its a fascinating hour-long presentation, hope you enjoy it.

 
Last edited:

macgyver

Well-known member
@endymion96 Dang you’re a handy guy to have around😆 This information is incredible, if you hadn’t posted it I would be none the wiser and would probably have never known. I was going to suggest that maybe bat and pangolin meats were in close vicinity at the wet market in Wuhan and there was a possibility there could have been a mix between the two viruses they were carrying, but as you’ve pointed out that would be an extremely rare event if at all. I appreciate you sharing this, it’s a very fascinating read if a little chilling. I dearly hope you’re wrong, can humans really be that stupid? (rhetorical question, I already know the answer😅)
 

endymion96

2nd Longest Active Member
I know right! Very fascinating. I've got so much more to share ... figure I best just get it all out on paper for future reference. I am taking everything I've learned and condensing it into neat packets of info with supporting evidence. I actually have reached my limit on the number of open tabs on my iPad (which is 500). Its a daily struggle to figure out which tabs of information to delete and which to keep. So some of these links I'm deleting as soon as I post it here, lol. Not all of the tabs are on this subject, but I have at least 100.
 

macgyver

Well-known member
Lol, how on earth you manage 500 tabs on an iPad is beyond me🤣🤣 Solid effort though bro, look forward to reading more🤝
 

CUV Quote (Yesterday's close)

Time: 10:54AM AEDT
Price: 22.40
Volume: 45258
Top