Coronavirus epidemic news

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The first video below is a 4 year old discussion by scientists about the pros and cons of "gain of function" experiments, including the use of ferrets as discussed by 'JC on a bike'. This includes the possibility, as we have discussed here, that black hats can easily utilize the work of the white hat researchers. One of the experimental aspects mentioned was changing the temperature range of the target virus that would allow an otherwise intestinal modality to become a respiratory modality.

11 minutes

This second video is an NIH sponsored conference on "gain of function" research on the H5N1 virus, where after the welcoming remarks, Dr. Fauci provides the introductory summary of the same pros and cons of "gain of function" research. This includes mentioning that resulting research papers should not include the means employed, so as to assist thwarting the black hats:

1 hour
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
This includes the possibility, as we have discussed here, that black hats can easily utilize the work of the white hat researchers.
I found it very remarkable how little rationalization they were able to come up with for this "white hat" research. The only rationale I heard, was that by creating the supervirus, they would then feel justified to believe that nature might do the same. But, there didn't seem to be much debate in contrary to the fellow who said that accidental release of pathogens is a predictable problem.

Who needs bad guys, if these are the good guys?

On another topic: my local friend Gary Rondeau posted a comparison of two relatively rural states, South Dakota vs. Oregon at his blog, Squash Practice.

South Dakota reported its first cases and first death on March 10. Oregon, a neighbor to the original hot-spot in the nation, Washington state, identified its first case on February 28, and recorded its first COVID-19 death on March 14. The Governors of these two states have taken very different paths. Oregon’s Gov. Kate Brown issued a series of recommendations culminating in a stay-at-home order on March 23. In contrast, Gov. Kristi Noem has yet to enact any mandatory restrictions on social distancing or congregating in South Dakota, declaring, “I’m just a big believer that the best person to make decisions for them and their family is the individual.”
In spite of having 1/4th the population, South Dakota has now virtually tied Oregon for number of positive tested cases. About half of the cases in South Dakota stem from a single meat packing plant which was belatedly closed on April 14. For some reason, after April 15, the exponential increase of cases in South Dakota dropped off, and the "curve" started to flatten somewhat there, but the rate of increase is still much faster than Oregon.

But, the jury is still out as to whether South Dakota's laissez faire approach is really superior to Oregon's mandatory lockdown. As of today, we have 91 fatalities, they have only 11. We've had 546 hospitalized, they've had only 121.

A possible explanation is that the governor and the health care system of South Dakota have been promoting early hydroxycholorquine + AZT treatment, while it's illegal for outpatient use in Oregon.

I pointed this out to Gary, and he replied that fatality is a lagging indicator, so it might simply be a matter of waiting for South Dakota to catch up on deaths. But, the data says that Oregon crossed 100 cases on 3/20 and had 3 deaths at that point, while SD crossed 100 cases on 3/30 and had 1 death. Ten days behind. Oregon had 1000 cases on 4/5 and 27 deaths, while SD passed 1000 cases on 4/15 and had 6 deaths. Tracking ten days behind. Oregon, 1500 cases on 4/12 and 52 deaths; SD, 1500 cases on 4/18 and 7 deaths. SD catching up, six days behind.

So, adjusting for South Dakota's late start, it seems that Oregon still has a substantially higher fatality rate.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
The comparison between South Dakota vs. Oregon isn't a controlled scientific experiment. So it's very likely that other factors are involved in determining the outcome. All I can say is, that these results are compatible with the hypothesis that the preferred treatment protocol in South Dakota is reducing the death toll, at a similar proportion to the results of earlier studies.

So far (as opponents of the protocol are always pointing out) we don't have the results of any large scale, truly randomized, double blind study of HCT, AZT and/or zinc as treatments for covid-19. Several studies are under way, although Raoult argues that his preliminary studies were more than sufficient to demonstrate that it's simply unethical not to use the protocol.

Most of the results have come in now, from the serum antibody testing in Telluride (San Miguel County, Colorado). The goal was to make testing available for everyone in the county, which has a population of about 8,000. By March 1, they had completed 4,285 samples. Another 1167 samples were collected about April 2.

The test uses the ELISA method, which is said to have very high sensitivity & selectivity, and ability to distinguish between various coronavirus strains and give positive results only for SARS-cov2. The test was developed using serum samples from known positive covid-19 patients as positive examples, and blood samples collected before 2019 as negative examples. Since the test uses lab equipment which is unfortunately located in New York, the testing results were delayed. But they've now finished evaluating the results on 4,757 samples, leaving only 695 to go.

The samples from San Miguel County revealed a third category which gave some positive signal, but not as much as any of the highly symptomatic covid-19 patients. They consider this category "borderline" and we can't really say whether these patients had covid-19 or not, but it seems plausible that they had some exposure to the virus and thus developed some level of antibody, more so than the pre-2019 training samples.

So... they found 26 positive samples and 70 "borderline" out of 4757. Extrapolating to the entire community of 8,000, we predict 44 positive and 118 "borderline". At that same time, there were seven PCR-tested positive cases in the county. So the actual number of infections was somewhere between 6 and 23 times the known rate, depending on the interpretation applied to "borderline" results. At the lower end of the range, this would be consistent with results from Gangelt, or New York. At the higher end of the range, it would be consistent with the (discredited) results from the Santa Clara study.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The following videos are discussion by pulmonologists about the new focus on oxidative damage to the endothelial cells of blood vessels perhaps being the main damage to lungs, as well as the other affected organs. This oxidative damage leading to micro-blood clots throughout the body.

One can buy SOD and L-Glutathione as supplements, as well as zinc, copper, and manganese which are all part of the basic energy cycle of our cells.



The last video here is a weeks-old technical medical discussion, for other doctors, discussing evolving criteria for ventilation and other related treatment, of which I found the discussion of "proning" interesting. It answered my earlier question of whether changing positions from side to side is also helpful, in this case, to patients who have not been put on ventilation already. So, this would be useful for Covid-19 patients at home. That is, to alter their position at least every hour at least 90 degrees. That would mean that, optimally, another person or an alarm should be used to prompt a shift, I suppose, which might be more important than sleeping through?

As far as ventilation is concerned, it seems that the evolving consensus is to attempt alternative strategies to delay ventilation until a patient is no longer able to adequately clear their CO2 adequately. And that ventilation modalities appropriate for ARDS patients is damaging to those patients who are otherwise demonstrating a paradoxiacal state with Covid-19 called "happy hypoxia".

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
In the first video (2 hours) former HIV researcher Dr. Judy Mikovits discusses Dr. Fauci's beyond sinister role in Covid-19 , in the context of his historical roles with both HIV/AIDS and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Strangely(?), Fauci has just promoted Gilead's Remdesivir as a treatment for Covid-19 on very, very weak data.

It has also just come out that Dr. Fauci approved the funding for the Chinese "gain of function" research at the Wuhan lab.

Dr. Anthony Fauci is an adviser to President Donald Trump and something of an American folk hero for his steady, calm leadership during the pandemic crisis. At least one poll shows that Americans trust Fauci more than Trump on the coronavirus pandemic—and few scientists are portrayed on TV by Brad Pitt.
But just last year, the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the organization led by Dr. Fauci, funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.
In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million.
Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release. ...

See more at the bottom of this post regarding the Newsweek article.


In the second video (1.5 hours) Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai discusses Dr. Fauci's role similarly, and provides the greater globalist context:


Ayyadurai also discusses why Peter Duesberg was correct that HIV does not cause AIDS, but rather that rampant drug use weakened the immune systems of gays and IV drug addicts of the day.

...
A second phase of the project, beginning that year, included additional surveillance work but also gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit research group, under the direction of President Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. NIH canceled the project just this past Friday, April 24th, Politico reported. Daszak did not immediately respond to Newsweek requests for comment. [Nor did Fauci - rs]
The project proposal states: "We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential."
In layman's terms, "spillover potential" refers to the ability of a virus to jump from animals to humans, which requires that the virus be able to attach to receptors in the cells of humans. SARS-CoV-2, for instance, is adept at binding to the ACE2 receptor in human lungs and other organs.
According to Richard Ebright, an infectious disease expert at Rutgers University, the project description refers to experiments that would enhance the ability of bat coronavirus to infect human cells and laboratory animals using techniques of genetic engineering. In the wake of the pandemic, that is a noteworthy detail.
Ebright, along with many other scientists, has been a vocal opponent of gain-of-function research because of the risk it presents of creating a pandemic through accidental release from a lab. ...
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Martenson discusses a lot of good reports about HCQ and then ponders who might be behind trashing it. We see some rather damning circumstantial evidence regarding Gilead's representation on an NIH review board (which is run by Fauci).


Here is some interesting discussion of the great positive impact of Vitamin D, however it neglects to mention the prison studies on the 'viral' benefit of supplementation (versus the other means mentioned).

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
It seems that the pandemic has created figurative clots in the flow of dirty money between SoCal, Mexico and China.

...
But the pandemic has slowed the cycle significantly, he said. Most narcotics precursors from China are made in Wuhan, the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, and factories there are shuttered or operating at a reduced capacity.
“When chemicals aren’t flowing from China, there’s no churn in the money laundering system,” Bodner said. Further, with global markets in upheaval, many of the Chinese nationals who were moving money through the system are now hesitant to stash funds overseas, he said.
Slowdowns in Los Angeles’ money laundering systems come as drug prices rise in the city. With supply chains in disarray, Bodner said, the wholesale price of methamphetamine has soared to about $1,800 a pound, compared with about $900 a pound five months ago.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
With Fauci looking pretty bad (from above posts about "gain of function" and more), this is all playing into the contrived (IMO) Trump - Deep State dialectic, and Trump is continuing to press on this front, as he has with HCQ. I don't believe he would do so unless he thinks he holds a trump card, or rather that we and/or his base are intended to believe such.

 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
I don't believe he would do so unless he thinks he holds a trump card, or rather that we and/or his base are intended to believe such.
He can be as suspicious as he wants about the virus origins, and so can we all. But nobody is ever going to prove anything, because the gain of function methodology mimics and accelerates natural evolution.

ABC news (Australia) headline: "Chinese state media releases animated propaganda video mocking US coronavirus response." Maybe it is "propaganda": almost too heavy-handed to be funny. But it's a very accurate depiction of US complaints about China's role in the crisis. And, I laughed at 1:13, where the Chinese are saying: "Gosh!! Just listen to yourself."

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
He can be as suspicious as he wants about the virus origins, and so can we all. But nobody is ever going to prove anything, because the gain of function methodology mimics and accelerates natural evolution.
But we all gnow.

As Trump blocks Fauci from having to face questions from Congress, who would ask such rude questions?

Martenson discusses the Newsweek article:

 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Martenson discusses the Newsweek article:
Yes, Martenson is just livid about this. Conclusion:

This isn't biomedical research. This is tinkering with a virus. This is tinkering with something that, if it gets away from you, the downside of that is a collapsed world economy and a pandemic. The upside is, oh, we learned a few things that were kind of fun and interesting. You know, all my lab mates and colleagues across my profession were kind of impressed with me. That upside is minuscule compared to the downside.

But, he also points out that hundreds of those same lab mates and colleagues have been arguing vociferously against this research ever since it first got started. I can't believe that very many professionals would be impressed that their peers are learning fun and interesting things this way. Fauci might be impressed, but then again, he has very deep connections to Bill Gates foundation.

But we all gnow.
It's also important to remember what we don't even gnow. Was this really an accidental release, or was it a planned and expected "accidental" release? Did it really come from the Wuhan biolab, or is that just a cover story? Was China behind this, or the US, or an alliance of elites from both? (Yes, Rick, I know you gnow, but nobody else does -- even though they're saying that they do.)

And, who is Bill Gates? Looking forward to watching this just out from James Corbett:

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
America's Best Christian? I thought I was America's Best Christian.


This is funny, but unfortunately, as we've seen here, Fauci Science, at least, has not exactly been saintly, as with Faux News.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Well, if you didn't like the previous smoking gun, how about this one?


Here is the article that Martenson references: https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748

If one reads through the comments, one can see criticism that it is still possible that the sequence could have been generated naturally, but I think the discussion that Martenson focuses on about the difference between a 'mutation' and a sequence 'insertion' tips the scales considerably. And this in the context of the knowledge of scientific manipulation of the furin cleavage aspect. All leaving natural mutability as a great means of plausible deniability obfuscation.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
The paper by Yuri Deigin at Medium explains the same facts that Chris does, mostly towards the beginning of the paper, in a section entitled "A Killer Intro". About the PRRA insert, Deignin says:

"So the virologists are puzzled. Where did this 12 nucleotide insert come from? Could it be lab-made? Well, virologists have studied furin sites in coronaviruses for decades, and have introduced many artificial ones in a lab."
Isn't that the smoking gun right there? Why isn't the paper over already? Instead, Deignin goes on to discuss many other topics. A significant moment passes with no fanfare at all. Deignin quotes a discussion of "temperature sensitivity" as "a trait that limits virus replication in pulmonary tissues." The conclusion to this section:

It seems that the creation of temperature-sensitive viral mutants to develop potentially attenuated vaccines was widespread at the end of the twentieth century. If you remember, in 1990, Ralph Baric himself also experimented with the creation of temperature-sensitive coronavirus strains.
Could something like this have caused the Covid-19 pandemic? Several options are possible — from a leak during development of a potential vaccine to fundamental research on laboratory recombination of the bat and pangolin viruses. Some particularly ambitious researcher could even decide to combine the two “fashionable research themes” — adding a furin site and transplanting RBM from a strain of one species (pangolin) to another (bats), so that later, confirming the increased virulence of the new chimeric virus, they can wax poetic about the dangers of the same recombination happening in Yunnan caves or wet markets. And if such a researcher could even pre-emptively develop a vaccine against this and other potential chimeras, all sorts of accolades could await.
Am I then saying this is what happened? Of course not, I do not claim to know what happened. Today, there is no evidence of this.
And then the next section:

Let us now turn our attention back to the virus itself. Does it have any obvious signs of lab manipulation? First, a few words about what “obvious” means. Any mutation can arise naturally, and even if the amino acid insert that had created the furin site in CoV2 was not “PRRA” but “MADEINWVHANPRRA”, there would still be a non-zero chance that it arose by accident. But for us, and for any court, I think this would be enough to prove lab origin beyond a reasonable doubt.

Then Deignin resumes more analysis about "restriction enzymes" and "codon usage bias", and goes into some speculation about whether perhaps the RaTG13 virus is some sort of fake virus that's part of the cover-up.

The conclusion takes this bizarre twist:

If you made it here by reading rather than scrolling, mad props to you. Hey, even if you scrolled, that’s cool too, and I apologize for the verbosity. I just didn’t anticipate that the rabbit hole would turn out to be a whole underground cave system. I hope that you found this deep dive into the world of virology interesting and enjoyed the exploration of the lab-made CoV2 hypothesis. In my opinion, the data I have presented, taken together, do not allow us to reject this possibility.
Let me be clear: this does NOT prove that CoV2 was synthesized in the laboratory. Yes, as we have seen above, from a technical standpoint, it would not be difficult for a modern virologist to create such a strain. But there is no direct evidence that anyone did this, and strange coincidences cannot pass for circumstantial evidence. On balance, the current chances against this are still higher than for the natural origins of CoV2.
Is Deignin shooting himself in the foot here, or what? And why? And then some inscrutable joke about the virus originating in a "lab" (meaning, the dog breed) and a homily about Deignin's desire that his post would not be "used to assign blame or propagate one-sided theories", while lamenting that "if there is even a 0.1% chance GOF research caused the whole thing, that chance is too high."

In terms of meandering around a conclusion, this is the strangest, most elusive paper I can remember.

But that isn't what perplexes me most about this hypothesis.

If SARS-CoV2 is a man-made supervirus, and it's so horrendously dangerous and infective because of its ingenious spike protein and furin cleavage: then why is there so much evidence surfacing that the fatality rate is only 0.3% or so? Why so many asymptomatic carriers?

Is this a "temperature sensitive virus" that was designed as part of vaccine research?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Is the following below the sending of a message? JC on a Bike is from Pittsburg. Allegedly, three medical workers in Russia were launched out of windows, allegedly one had an active infection. On the other hand, an ER doc in NYC (allegedly) committed suicide. Chinese doctors were silenced variously.

A medical researcher said to be on the “verge of making very significant” coronavirus findings was found shot to death over the weekend in Pennsylvania, officials said.
Bing Liu, 37, a researcher for the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, was found dead Saturday inside a home in Ross Township, north of Pittsburgh, the Allegheny County Medical Examiner said. ...
This report alleges that Liu was killed as part of a love triangle murder-suicide, regarding competition for the third party: https://news.yahoo.com/professor-researching-covid-19-killed-153600250.html

The killer cannot confirm the allegation.
 
Last edited:

Claude Badley

Registered Guest
Fascist
The evidence for the PRRA insert in the Martenson video is certainly compelling since it is not a minor-mutation duplication of adjacent sequences - implying artificial interference or an improbable natural one. The presence of arginine (R) in the insert is very significant, as arginine is highly basic (i.e. anti-acidic as it full of NH2 groups), so leads to an alteration in shape, function and antibody-binding properties for that part of the protein. As for the killing of Bing Liu, we just have to wait for what the evidence shows - and if there is a coverup.

And yes, Jerry, the PRRA insert could also have been produced as a by-product of other research e.g. into a temperature-sensitive virus, perhaps too with vaccines in mind. Still, I have come to agree with Joe and I think yourself, Jerry, that modern vaccine research is ideologically driven by population control - especially as Bill Gates stated this explicitly, that vaccines have a significant role to play in population reduction, even when we were and are always taught (at medical school too) that vaccines were there to preserve and enhance human life by minimizing illness!

I suspect that vaccines are being designed so as to contain additives to impair human reproduction, since especially in Australia, research has long been conducted into controlling the fertility of pest species, particularly through immunological means, by making animals produce antibodies to their own reproductive organ proteins. Human sperm counts had already been falling for decades before 1975 when us medical students learnt about it, and this just might correlate with the increasing incidence of autoimmune diseases such as Lupus Erythematosis. However, the development of anti-fertility vaccines for animals postdates the finding of sperm count decline and the increase in autoimmune diseases.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Below is a more recent and succinct interview with Judy Mikovits, discussing vaccines and her theory of XMRV viruses as relates to this pandemic.

[edited 5/12 to provide a new link, replacing censored YouTube version]

https://lbry.tv/@humankind:b/judy-mikovits-christina-aguayo-20200504:5

I'm starting to more clearly see Trump et al and Fauci et al as Good Bad Cops and Bad Good Cops in all this. Depending on one's prior biases, you can choose which label applies to whom. No matter.

Moving on, I'm a little bit confused here below about why Martenson is excitedly announcing a more virulent mutation as news. We've known about this for some time. In any case, the papers and graphs discussed are interesting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Guns and Roses' version of Live and Let Die blares as Trump goes maskless, again, this time in a Honeywell mask factory in Arizona. Who is trolling whom?

 

Claude Badley

Registered Guest
Fascist
Re Martinson in #358, he does not include the fact that modern medicine's increased human longevity is merely being pruned by COVID-2, i.e. most of those dying are the elderly, hence the lockdown will prove counterproductive e.g. by trapping people unemployed and at home, leading to more divorces and breakups. Yet another triumph for the Frankfurt School in cultural debasement, irrespective of the G mutation.

As for the Spanish death studies, sounds like the Spanish Civil War deaths were exaggerated!

Yours faithfully
Claude
 
Last edited:
Top