Everybody's talking today and rightly so about the Fauci emails. A huge treasure trove of emails, where we now get to look inside of Fauci's mind, his communication with people on the inside. And we realize that what's been going on with Fauci and with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is something very different than what Fauci has been saying publicly.
So publicly, we've been getting the idea that the evidence all points in one direction. This virus, this COVID-19, came out of a meat market. And that's where the evidence points. But it turns out that Fauci was well aware that a whole bunch of other stuff was going on. He was well aware that there were virologists at the Wuhan lab making deadly viruses. Not only was he aware of this, but he also supported that research, and he supported American researchers like Dr. Ralph Baric, doing similar research, and let's talk about what they're doing. They're taking these deadly viruses, and they're making them more deadly. They're doing it extensively for the purposes of learning about the virus figuring out better ways to develop ways to counter the virus. But there's also obviously the risk. This is kind of like, you know, mixing chemicals or making atomic bombs. The simple fact of it is, you could set off an explosion. You could make the virus that causes the pandemic that you're supposedly trying to prevent.
Now, the big story is that Fauci was hiding the ball. He was not letting the country know; he never said, "By the way, we've been making these deadly viruses ourselves. And by the way, one of those might have gotten out. And by the way, the things that I've been telling you that I'm the problem solver, I could actually also be the problem creator, I have helped to create the problem."
All of this has been kept from the American public.
I want to focus on a remarkable study that's just come out that purports to offer real evidence, the first real evidence, that Chinese scientists created COVID 19. Created it possibly with, certainly with American collaboration, but possibly with American taxpayer money. This is really the bombshell aspect of all this.
Recommended
Now, let's remember that this notion of the virus being created in a lab was dismissed for many months and was dismissed by not just the media but also by people in the health community by virologists who knew better. Some of them had a direct stake in this so-called "gain-of-function" research. They were involved themselves in making deadly viruses. So obviously, when a deadly virus gets out, they want to make it really clear, "This didn't come from us." So what did they do? They offered what I would call bogus evidence that the virus must have come from a meat market.
And what was this bogus evidence? Well, the bogus evidence, which was exposed by Nicholas Wade, the former science writer of The New York Times, the bogus evidence was to say, "Hey, you know, guys, when we look at this virus, we don't see any evidence of genetic cutting and pasting." And this has been the straw man argument; you act like, "Well, wait a minute, if anyone had humanly manipulated this virus, they must have done some cutting and pasting. And if we don't see any signs of cutting and pasting, we can safely conclude that the virus was natural; it wasn't manmade."
Now, this turns out to be a fraudulent argument. Why? Because modern techniques of gain-of-function research don't involve this crude cutting and pasting. These modern techniques involve what is called "seamless transition" so that you're able to create these deadly viruses, but it doesn't leave that kind of a signature. But, does human manipulation of viruses leave any signature at all?
British professor Angus Dalgleish, a London oncology professor who has done breakthrough work on HIV, and Norwegian scientist Dr. Birger Sørensen, a virologist and head of a pharmaceutical conglomerate, have been studying Coronavirus. And they have said that they've come across "unique fingerprints," indicating that the virus did not come from nature.
Fox News reports that "it was during their COVID-19 vaccine research that the pair came across 'unique fingerprints' indicating the virus didn’t come from nature... The telltale clue: a rare finding in the COVID-carrying virus of a row of four amino acids, which give off a positive charge and bond to negative human cells."
"The laws of physics mean you cannot have four positively charged amino acids in a row," Dalgleish said. "The only way you can get this is if you artificially manufacture it." Now, I am not scientifically competent to evaluate this claim. But I don't think that a world-class scientist would make it if it were not true. Certainly, it needs to be checked out.
Now, these scientists also say, "A natural virus pandemic would be expected to mutate gradually and become more infectious but less pathogenic." And they say with COVID-19, this did not happen.
This needs to be unpacked a little bit. Because when we think of a virus becoming more infectious or more contagious, we think that it must also at the same time become more pathogenic (pathogenic just means causing disease), so a more infectious virus causes more disease. But no, that's not the fact. What the scientists are saying is that a disease can be very infectious. In other words, it can be easily caught. But at the same time, it may not be very pathogenic.
A really good example of this would be the Poliovirus. The Poliovirus is very easy to catch, but only about five percent of people who get the Poliovirus actually get the disease. So contagion is one thing, and getting the diseases is another. What stands in between contagion and getting the disease? Well, it's your body. Your body is going to fight off contagion. And so, getting infected, on the one hand, is not the same thing as showing, manifesting the different symptoms and features of the disease.
The Ebola virus is, in fact, terribly virulent. If you get the disease, basically, you're dead. But it's not that easy to get. So it's not that contagious. So once again, we're talking about a distinction between contagion, the ease of getting it, and disease, which is the manifestation of it.
Basically, what these scientists are saying is that for a natural virus, you expect that as the infectivity, as the likelihood of getting it increases, the disease also becomes less pathogenic. That is the earmark, you may say, of a naturally occurring virus. That is not the case with COVID-19. It is both very contagious. And it also manifests itself pathogenically or causes disease. So you've got two prominent researchers saying this virus was made in China; it was concocted in the lab. It was something that they did deliberately.
They're not saying China released it deliberately. That's a whole separate matter. But we have here, in contrast with the bogus arguments given for the meat market origin of the virus, two arguments that need to be further evaluated. But these scientists seem to have some scientific solidity suggesting that the major rival of the United States in the world, namely China, made this virus and then either deliberately or negligently unleashed it on the world.
