Category Archives: Uncategorized

Is COVID-19 the Result of a US Government- Funded Experiment in China?

Meryl Nass, MD, sheds light on inconvenient facts that should be considered when assessing the likely origin of the global COVID-19 pandemic. This is a contentious subject that government officials and proponents of “gain-of-function” experimentation have, as Dr. Nass writes, “circled the wagons” to insist that the pandemic emerged as a natural phenomenon.

However, their claim is disputed by an increasing number of independent analysts and investigative reporters who have examined the evidence. Critics also question the legitimacy of two US government contracts – each in the amount of $3.7 million – to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

 Meryl Nass, MD has extensive expertise in biological defense and biological warfare. She investigated the world’s largest anthrax epizootic, in Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) and due to biological warfare.

Dr. Nass was among the first who disputed the report published in the journal Nature Medicine on March 17th in which the authors declared: “We do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible… the definitive research supporting a natural virus origin.

She disputed that assertion, and identified several flawed assumptions made by the authors. She concluded that the coronavirus SARS-2 was probably created in a laboratory. * Dr. Nass is a member of the board of directors of the AHRP.

UPDATE (May 21, 2020)
GM [Genetic Modification] Watch cites numerous scientists who corroborate Dr. Nass’ Analysis:
Wuhan and US Scientists Used Undetectable Methods of Genetic Engineering on Bat Coronaviruses May 20, 2020

******

On March 26th. Dr Nass wrote the following:

There are many ways the novel coronavirus may have come about:

Nature Medicine ran a 3 page article that claimed to explain why the novel coronavirus is not a lab construct.  USA Today wrote a summary piece explaining it:

If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness,” the report said. “But the scientists found that the SARS-CoV-2 backbone differed substantially from those of already known coronaviruses and mostly resembled related viruses found in bats and pangolins.”

Yet it turns out to be a specious argument, relying on the fact that the novel coronavirus backbone sequence was not already known in the open virology literature.

  1. While starting from a known RNA sequence is one easy way to create a pathogen, it is certainly not necessary to do so.
  2. Nor is it likely that biodefense/biowarfare programs share knowledge of all their creations.  They never have before.
  3. a)  Finally, it is relatively easy to detect the human hand when a chimera of known virulence factors is strung together.
  4.     b)  But because plausible deniability is a critical component of a bioweapons attack, I doubt that a chimera using known sequences is the path that would have been followed by a modern biowarrior.

I will briefly mention some of the old techniques for creating bioweapons, none of which require that a known, published RNA backbone would be required to build a novel, virulent coronavirus:

  1.  China has unique bats.  So do other countries. Unique bats likely harbor unique viruses.  Bits of these viruses can be strung together, while no outside parties are aware that these particular RNA threads exist in nature.
  2.  You take an already virulent RNA virus, subject it to high rates of mutation via chemical or radiological exposure, and test the viruses that survive for the acquisition of new virulence characteristics.
  3.  You simply passage the virus through tens, hundreds or thousands of lab animals or cell cultures and test the results for acquisition of new virulence characteristics.
  4. You mix different viruses together with different virulence characteristics, allow them to grow together, and seek recombinants that have obtained the desired new mix of virulence factors.
  • All these possibilities result in viruses that are hard to pin on lab production.  I dare the Nature Medicine scientists to dismiss these scenarios.
  • Still, I doubt that any national program would deliberately release this coronavirus onto the people of the earth, because it is so hard to control.

Historically, bio-weaponeers have required their creations to be controlled at all costs. In one well-documented example of biowarfare, unleashing African swine fever on a Caribbean island was associated with no spread beyond the island. In another, anthrax spores were used because they stay put– their use did not cause anthrax cases beyond the borders of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).

So why do we have a coronavirus epidemic now?

An accidental biowarfare laboratory release is the best current hypothesis, in my opinion.  Such accidental releases have been documented for many decades, throughout the world.  But I could certainly be wrong.

On Thursday, April 2, 2020, Dr. Nass wrote:

Why are some of the US’ top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2?

  1.  I know about biological warfare/biodefense.  I am the first person in the world (according to publicly available literature) to have analyzed an epidemic and demonstrated that the epidemic was due to biological warfare. See: 1992 study of the 1978-1980 Rhodesian anthrax outbreak, published in Medicine and Global Survivalhttps://www.ippnw.org/pdf/mgs/psr-2-4-nass.pdf
  2.  Prior to genetic engineering techniques being developed (1973) and widely used (since late 1970s), more ‘primitive’ means of causing mutations, with the intention of developing biological weapons, were employed.  Such methods were used by the Japanese beginning in the 1930s, by the US beginning in the 1940s, and by a number of other countries. They resulted in biological weapons that were tested, well-described, and in some cases, used. Such methods were also used subsequent to the 1970s.
  3.  These methods can result in biowarfare agents that lack the identifiable signature of a microbial agent constructed in a lab from known RNA or DNA sequences.  In fact, it would be desirable to produce such agents, since it would be difficult to prove they were deliberately constructed in a lab. Here are just a few possibilities for how one might create new, virulent mutants:
  4. a)  exposing microorganisms to chemical or radiological agents that cause high mutation rates and selecting for desired characteristics
  5. b)  passaging virus through a number of lab animals or tissue cultures
  6. c)  mixing viruses together and seeking recombinants with a new mix of virulence factors
  7.  Top scientists circled their wagons to protest against (what they called) “conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.”In a statement published in the LancetMarch 7 (earlier online), they claimed their aim was to “stand with” public health professionals and scientists in China. Many who signed the statement have worked in biodefense: Rita Colwell is the former director of the National Science Foundation, and James Hughes, is the former director of CDC’s National Center for Infectious Diseases, and former assistant Surgeon General.
    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext

Science magazine published an article in support of these scientists:

“The authors of The Lancet statement note that scientists from several countries who have studied SARS-CoV-2 “overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife,” just like many other viruses that have recently emerged in humans. “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” the statement says.

Five additional scientists soon claimed to provide the “scientific evidence” to back up the natural origin claim. All 5 of these scientists have worked in biodefense, have been affiliated with those who signed the Lancet statement, and their article was published in Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020.  https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

All of these scientists set up a straw man to knock down:  they claimed that had the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) been created in a lab – “if genetic manipulation had been performed” – then a known coronavirus backbone would have been used.  But because no known backbone forms part of SARS-CoV-2, “the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus.”

USA Today summarized their argument as follows:

“If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness,” the report said. “But the scientists found that the SARS-CoV-2 backbone differed substantially from those of already known coronaviruses and mostly resembled related viruses found in bats and pangolins.”

Their specious claims were then supported by Dr. Francis Collins, the current director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on his blog.  Dr. Collins stated,

“Some folks are even making outrageous claims that the new coronavirus causing the pandemic was engineered in a lab and deliberately released to make people sick. A new study debunks such claims by providing scientific evidence that this novel coronavirus arose naturally…

this study leaves little room to refute a natural origin for COVID-19… 

Finally, next time you come across something about COVID-19 online that disturbs or puzzles you, I suggest going to FEMA’s new Coronavirus Rumor Control web site…”

I am quite certain that the groups of scientists who wrote these pieces in the Lancet and Nature Medicine, as well as NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins, know that you don’t need genetic engineering methods to create a bioweapon.  Like me, they are old, their frame of reference is a world before genetic engineering; they know the history of biowarfare, and they know the score.

  • Why then are they participating in this charade?

Update April 29:  Newsweek has been delving into “gain of function” (which means increasing the virulence of a pathogen) coronavirus research in Wuhan, China which might have contributed to the formation of SARS-CoV-2… and the interesting fact that the US government provided financial support for this research (which I posted about here).  Newsweek’s pieces were posted April 27, and 29.  My other pieces questioning the origin of SARS-CoV-2 are here and here.

Many Americans look to the National Institutes of Health and other federal public health agencies for leadership on investigating matters of urgent public health concern. Unfortunately, NIH Director Francis Collins once again appears to be circling the wagons to protect powerful interests rather than the American public….

https://ahrp.org/is-covid-19-the-result-of-a-us-government-funded-experiment/

Guns and Butter: Coronavirus: The Crisis – Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky discusses his new series of research articles on the “pandemic”, including, “COVID-19 Coronavirus ‘Fake’ Pandemic: Timeline and Analysis” and “Coronavirus COVID-19: ‘Made in China’ or ‘Made in America’?, among others.

On January 30th, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) in relation to China’s novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) categorized as a viral pneumonia. The virus outbreak was centred in Wuhan, a city in Eastern China with a population in excess of 11 million.

In the week prior to the January 30th decision, the WHO Emergency Committee expressed divergent views. There were visible divisions within the Committee. On January 30th, a far-reaching decision was taken without the support of expert opinion at a time when the coronavirus outbreak was limited to Mainland China.

There were 150 confirmed cases outside China when the decision was taken: 6 in the United States, 3 in Canada, 2 in the UK, etc. 150 confirmed cases over a population of 6.4 billion (world population of 7.8 billion minus Chinas 1-4 billion).

What was the risk of being infected?  Virtually zero.

http://gunsandbutter.org/blog/2020/03/19/covid-19-coronavirus-the-crisis

Guns and Butter: From Franklin to Epstein: The Cover-Up Continues: Nick Bryant

Nick Bryant discusses his book, “The Franklin Scandal: A Story of Powerbrokers, Child Abuse and Betrayal” and “Confessions of a D.C. Madam: The Politics of Sex, Lies and Blackmail” that he co-wrote with Henry W. Vinson, which parallels the child trafficking networks partially exposed in the current Jeffrey Epstein scandal; the Finders; the Nebraska Franklin Federal Credit Union scandal; pedophile Lawrence E. King; foster parents Jarrett and Barbara Webb; child abuse victims charged with perjury; grand jury cover-ups; the Franklin Committee of the Nebraska legislature; private investigator Gary Caradori assassinated; FBI intimidation and cover-up; Henry Vinson’s D.C. Gay Escort Service; Craig Spence and the White House Call Boys Network; Spence and Epstein’s mansions wired for audio/visual; William Barr Attorney General under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Donald Trump; Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book; Epstein’s house manager circles names in the black book; U.S. attorney told to lay off of Epstein in 2006; rampant sexual blackmail to achieve political control; pedophile networks protected at highest levels of power.

http://gunsandbutter.org/blog/2020/03/08/from-franklin-to-epstein-the-cover-up-continues

Whitney Webb: Bio-Terror Careerist Robert Kadlec & The Darkest Winter

Robbie Martin speaks to investigative journalist and writer Whitney Webb about her incredible in-depth new series about a group of sketchy individuals who weave a thread of anthrax, bio-terror fear mongering and ‘pandemic preparedness’ through the Bush Sr, Clinton, George W Bush administration and now the Trump administration. They discuss how these individuals like Robert Kadlec not only profit off of the threat of bio-terror but that they also have bizarre and inexplicable connections to the attacks themselves and following coverup of the attacks.

 

https://soundcloud.com/media-roots/bio-terror-careerist-robert-kadlec-the-darkest-winter-wwhitney-webb

Wuhan and US scientists used undetectable methods of genetic engineering on bat coronaviruses

Evidence has emerged that researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China, working in collaboration with scientists in the USA, have been genetically engineering bat viruses for the past several years to investigate infectivity – using undetectable methods. The WIV is just a few miles from the Chinese city where the COVID-19 pandemic is thought to have originated and is the chief suspect in the possible scenario that the virus emerged from a lab.

The evidence rebuts claims by journalists and some scientists that the SARS-CoV-2 virus responsible for the current COVID-19 pandemic could not have been genetically engineered because it lacks the “signs” or “signatures” that supposedly would be left behind by genetic engineering techniques.

Those making these claims cite as evidence a letter published in Nature Medicine in March by American microbiologist Kristian Andersen and colleagues. The article stated that there was no evidence that the virus had been genetically manipulated and concluded that it emerged through natural mutation and selection in animal and human hosts.[1]

Typical of the media response to the Nature Medicine letter was an article published in The Scientist, which stated, “there are no signs of genetic manipulation in the SARS-CoV-2 genome”. The BBC also reported that “the study of the coronavirus genome … found no signs it had been engineered”.

Other experts, however, have pointed out that there are well known ways of manipulating the genetic material of a virus without leaving any such signs.

Now Dr Richard Ebright, an infectious disease expert at Rutgers University (USA), has alerted the public to evidence that WIV and US-based researchers were genetically engineering bat viruses to investigate their ability to infect humans, using commonly used methods that leave no sign or signature of human manipulation.

Ebright flagged up a scientific paper published in 2017 by WIV scientists, including Shi Zhengli, the virologist leading the research into bat coronaviruses, working in collaboration with Peter Daszak of the US-based EcoHealth Alliance. Funding was shared between Chinese and US institutions, the latter including the US National Institutes of Health and USAID. The researchers report having conducted virus infectivity experiments where genetic material is combined from different varieties of SARS-related coronaviruses to form novel “chimeric” versions. This formed part of their research into what mutations were needed to allow certain bat coronaviruses to bind to the human ACE2 receptor – a key step in the human infectivity of SARS-CoV-2.

Continue reading Wuhan and US scientists used undetectable methods of genetic engineering on bat coronaviruses

COVID-19 Supplements: Melatonin Helps Lessen Severity Risk In COVID-19 Patients By Preventing Cytokine Storms

In drug repurposing studies for COVID-19 studies, many suitable cheaper drugs and supplements have emerged from various studies as suitable candidates either as antivirals or to treat the cytokines storms associated with the disease or even other symptoms such as clotting issues. However many of these suitable candidates are often left on the shelves as the patents have expired or there are no patents on them hence  the pharmaceutical giants are not motivated to have these further explored as they are unable to profit from them.

In the case of preventing cytokine storms in COVID19 patients, there have been many cheaper drugs options as suitable candidates for further study such as colchicine, melatonin and many more. In this article which is  part of a series of articles that Thailand Medical News will be presenting to readers, we will be focusing on Melatonin as a suitable drug candidate to prevent Cytokine Storms in those infected with COVID-19.The big pharmaceuticals  prefer to push expensive drugs like Tocilizumab that currently costs around 950 euros (US$1030) per injection and a patient might be needing like 2 to 3 injections whereas a bottle of decent 600mg of melatonin tablets might only cost about US$20. (We really hope that readers will truly appreciate our efforts and generously donate to sustain this  website as the big pharma companies  not only refuse to support our website but also want it shut!)

There has been a few studies to date that demonstrates the ability of melatonin to prevent inflammation and cytokine storms in COVID-19 patients.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024320520303313 and
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08830185.2020.1756284 and
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/rmv.2109 ….

https://www.thailandmedical.news/news/breaking-covid-19-supplements-melatonin-helps-lessen-severity-risk-in-covid-19-patients-by-preventing-cytokine-storms

COVID-19, Pneumonia & Inflammasomes – The Melatonin Connection

Study Finds Coronavirus Behaves Like HIV To Evade Immune Response

COVID-19 Research: According to a new breakthrough study by Chinese researchers, the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus emulates the HIV strategy to remove marker molecules on surface of an infected cell that are used to identify invaders, in a manner to evade attack from the human immune system. This new discovery also has vast potential implications that Sars-CoV-2 may be around for some time according to the research team.

The breakthrough research findings which are yet to have been peer-reviewed were posted a few days ago on the preprint server bioRxiv.org and have caused alarm among many medical researchers. The research paper is currently being reviewed by numerous research groups and journals and if the findings are confirmed, the implications could be vast and also could damper a lot of existing research and progress so far. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.24.111823v1.full.pdf+html

Leading Chinese virologist Dr Zhang Hui and a team from Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou also said their research discovery added weight to clinical observations that the SARS0CoV-2 coronavirus was showing “some characteristics of viruses causing chronic infection”.

https://www.thailandmedical.news/news/breaking-news-covid-19-research-study-finds-that-sars-cov-2-coronavirus-behaves-like-hiv-to-evade-immune-response

The CDC Slashed the COVID-19 Fatality Rate to a Fraction of Earlier Estimate Used to Justify Lockdowns

Governments throughout the world and across the US justified extreme, draconian, undemocratic, and unconstitutional (in most US states) “lockdown” and stay-at-home orders on the grounds that the COVID-19 virus was exceptionally fatal.

In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) was claiming that the fatality rate was a very high 3.4 percent.

Yet as time went on, it became increasingly clear that such high estimates were essentially meaningless because researchers had no idea how many people were actually infected with the disease. Tests were largely being conducted on those with symptoms serious enough to end up in emergency rooms or doctor’s offices.

[RELATED: “The Experts Have No Idea How Many COVID-19 Cases There Are” by Ryan McMaken]

By late April, many researchers were publishing new studies showing that the number of people with the disease was actually much higher than was previously thought. Thus, it became clear that the percentage of people with the disease who died from it suddenly became much smaller.

Now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released new estimates suggesting that the real fatality rate is around 0.26 percent.

Specifically, the report concludes that the “symptomatic case fatality ratio” is 0.4 percent. But that’s just symptomatic cases. In the same report, the CDC also claims that 35 percent of all cases are asymptomatic.

Or, as the Washington Post reported this week:

The agency offered a “current best estimate” of 0.4 percent. The agency also gave a best estimate that 35 percent of people infected never develop symptoms. Those numbers when put together would produce an infection fatality rate of 0.26, which is lower than many of the estimates produced by scientists and modelers to date.”

Of course, not all scientists have been wrong on this. Back in March, Stanford scientist John Ioannidis was much, much closer to the CDC’s estimate than the WHO. The Wall Street Journal noted in April:

In a March article for Stat News, Dr. Ioannidis argued that Covid-19 is far less deadly than modelers were assuming. He considered the experience of the Diamond Princess cruise ship, which was quarantined Feb. 4 in Japan. Nine of 700 infected passengers and crew died. Based on the demographics of the ship’s population, Dr. Ioannidis estimated that the U.S. fatality rate could be as low as 0.025% to 0.625% and put the upper bound at 0.05% to 1%—comparable to that of seasonal flu.

Not that this will settle the matter. Proponents of destroying human rights and the rule of law in order to carry out lockdowns will continue to insist that “we didn’t know” what the fatality rate was back in March. The lack of evidence, however, didn’t stop proponents of lockdowns from implementing policies that destroyed the ability of families to earn a living, and which also created social conditions that caused child abuse and suicides to spike.

But for more sane people, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Those who have claimed that lockdowns are “the only option” had virtually no evidence at all to support their position. Indeed, such extreme over-the-top measures such as the general lockdowns required an extreme level of high-quality, nearly irrefutable evidence that lockdowns would work and were necessary in the face of a disease with an extremely high fatality rate. But the only “data” the prolockdown people could offer was speculation and hyperbolic predictions of bodies piling up in the streets.  But that became politically unimportant. The people who wanted lockdowns had gained the obeisance  of powerful people in government institutions and in the media. So actual data, science, or respect for human rights suddenly became meaningless. All that mattered was getting those lockdowns. So the lockdown crowd destroyed the lives of millions in the developed world—and more than a hundred million in the developing world—to satisfy the hunches of a tiny handful of politicians and technocrats.

https://mises.org/power-market/cdc-slashed-covid-19-fatality-rate-fraction-earlier-estimate-used-justify-lockdowns

This is of course the meaning of technocracy.   Blind algorithmic obedience to whoever has the biggest megaphone.   As usual, the media is the problem.