The suggestion in America that Covid-19 came from a Chinese lab just won’t go away. The thought that a state could act malevolently in this way has taken hold for a reason: the US has its own chequered past in biological research.

On Wednesday evening, after new claims surfaced in the Wall Street Journal, President Joe Biden issued an executive order requiring US intelligence to investigate Covid’s origins – and the specific consideration that it was a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology – giving it 90 days to do so.

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/524958-covid-lab-leak-theory-usa/

 

Meanwhile some cynics/comedians (we love cynics and comedians) have expose that this is a continuation of the grand deceit about Covid...:

 

The media – both alternative and mainstream – are all talking about the possibility that the virus which allegedly causes Covid19 was leaked from a virology lab in Wuhan, and may have been developed as a bio-weapon.

We published, just last week, a fact-check article looking at the evidence for and against it. 

Suffice to say, there’s very little evidence to support the idea the virus known as Sars-Cov-2 was developed in a lab. And, given its low death rate, no reason at all to fear it even if it were.

Nevertheless, the story doesn’t seem to be going away, especially with the release of the Fauci emails. To us, the FOIA-released emails seem nothing but a distraction. 

The fact this story is being spread by Buzzfeed, CNN and Washington Post, some of the most controlled media in the age of controlled media, doesn’t seem to be putting off people who should probably know better.

Just yesterday the Wall Street Journal published an article headlined:

 

The Science Suggests a Wuhan Lab Leak

 

It’s pretty clear that the entire Covid19 “pandemic” narrative is undergoing a shift, a change in focus that will both reinforce the idea the virus is definitely real/frightening, and re-frame China to play the heel.

The problems with this narrative were perfectly summed up by our friends over at the Consent Factory, home of satirist-in-residence CJ Hopkins and a Twitter must-follow. We’ve transcribed their brilliant Twitter thread below.

 

* * *

 

The lab-leak story is:

1. an out for those who haven’t wanted to face the fallout of covering the actual Covid story (i.e., manipulation of definitions and statistics to generate the illusion of an apocalyptic plague)
2. reification of that illusion.

 

If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget about Sweden, Florida, Texas, etc.

 

If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you will forget how they redefined a medical “case” to include perfectly healthy people, and then reported an explosion of “cases.”

 

If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll totally forget how they defined a “Covid hospitalization” as anyone in hospital, for any reason, who tested positive with a PCR test jacked up to 40 or 50.

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2021/06/07/the-wuhan-lab-leak-story-is-just-more-fear-porn/

 

Free Julian Assange Now ¶§∞§••••ªª¢£™!!!!

 

Ian Birrell has an excellent piece up at UnHerd that chronicles how the scientific establishment effectively covered up and bungled the lab-leak theory. Only now is it becoming acceptable to even suggest that a Wuhan research facility was the source of the novel coronavirus. Yet as Birrell notes, some scientists have been trying to say as much since the pandemic began:

 

Just over a year ago, I stumbled across an intriguing scientific paper. It suggested the pandemic that was ripping around the world was “uniquely adapted to infect humans”; it was “not typical of a normal zoonotic infection” since it first appeared with “exceptional” ability to enter human cells. The author of the paper, Nikolai Petrovsky, was frank about the disease when we spoke back then, saying its adaptability was either “a remarkable coincidence or a sign of human intervention”. He even broke the scientific omertà by daring to admit that “no one can say a laboratory leak is not a possibility”.

But even though Petrovsky has excellent credentials — professor of medicine at a prominent Australian university, author of more than 200 papers in scientific journals and founder of a company funded by the US government to develop new vaccine technologies — I was still anxious when my story went global. His original document had been posted on a pre-print site, so had not been peer reviewed, unlike if it had been published in a medical or scientific journal. These sorts of sites allow researchers to get findings out quickly. Petrovsky told me his first attempt to place these seismic findings was on BioRxiv, run by prominent New York laboratory. But it was rejected; eventually he succeeded on ArXiv, a rival server run by Cornell University. Last week, however, he told me this important origins modelling paper had finally been accepted by Nature Scientific Reports after “a harrowing 12 months of repeated reviews, rejections, appeals, re-reviews and finally now acceptance”.

 

That delay had little to do with scientific rigor. As Birrell makes clear, the major medical and scientific journals look to have suppressed papers supporting the lab-leak theory in favor of ones that backed zoonosis. Specifically, as one expert put it, “Nature and The Lancet played important roles in enabling, encouraging, and enforcing the false narrative that science evidence indicates Sars-CoV-2 had a natural-spillover origin points and the false narrative that this was the scientific consensus.”

 

This will come as no surprise to readers of TAC contributor Lew Andrews, who has been documenting for years the more general corruption of peer-reviewed research. Andrews quotes Lancet editor Richard Horton as saying that perhaps half of all scientific literature “may be simply untrue.” Yet the question remains as to why it may have been untrue in this case. Groupthink? Politics? Birrell sees a more portentous motive:

 

Allegations swirl that it was not down to editorial misjudgement, but something more sinister: a desire to appease China for commercial reasons. The Financial Timesrevealed four years ago that debt-laden Springer Nature, the German group that publishes Nature, was blocking access in China to hundreds of academic articles mentioning subjects deemed sensitive by Beijing such as Hong Kong, Taiwan or Tibet. China is also spending lavishly around the world to win supremacy in science — which includes becoming the biggest national sponsor of open access journals published by both Springer Nature and Elsevier, owner ofThe Lancet.

 

Give his entire piece a read. And then click over to a Pew Research Center survey from last year, which found that, even as faith in institutions has cratered across the West, trust in the scientific community has remained broad and consistent. How much longer will that last? And why did it take a year and a half for the dam to finally break?

 

Read more:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/state-of-the-union/when-trust-the-science-collides-with-i/

 

Read from top.

 

Note:

 

Nikolai Petrovsky is director of endocrinology at flinders medical centre with a conjoint position as professor of medicine at flinders university. Nikolai Petrovsky is also vice-president and secretary-general of the international immunomics society. active in diabetes, endocrinology and vaccine research, he is the founder of vaxine, a company funded by the us national institutes of health to develop novel vaccine technologies. in 2009 vaxine won the amp innovation award at the telstra business awards and australia's coolest company award from australian anthill magazine. Nikolai Petrovsky has developed vaccines against influenza, hepatitis b, sting allergy, malaria, japanese encephalitis, rabies and hiv, has authored over 90 papers and chapters and is a regular invited speaker at international vaccine conferences.

 

Qualifications

• Bachelor of Medical Science (University of Tasmania), 1979 
• Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS), University of Tasmania, 1982 
• Fellowship, Australian Institute of Company Directors (FAICD) 1990
• Fellowship, Royal Australasian College of Physicians (FRACP) 1994
• PhD, University of Melbourne, 1998
• Graduate Certificate in Education Studies, University of Sydney, 2002 

Honours, awards and grants

• NH&MRC Postgraduate Medical Research Scholarship, 1994
• Cleveland Young Investigator Award, Royal Melbourne Hospital, 1995
• Edith Moffat Award, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, 1996
• Distinguished Speaker Award, International Immunomics Society, 2005
• Flinders University Public Affairs and Alumni Media Award 2005 & 2007
• AMP  Innovation Award, 2009 Telstra Business Award
• AusIndustry Innovation Award, Australian Anthill Company Awards 

Key responsibilities Director of the Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology at Flinders Medical Centre. Actively involved in medical research, supervision of postgraduate research students and teaching of medical curriculum at Flinders University

 

 

See also: https://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/38483

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW JJJJ∆∆∆∆∆∆∆˙˙©∆∆∆∆∆∆!!!

 

 

It has been 48 cartoons from here that we have not mentioned the Covid-Saga... But here is an update:

 

Sydney appears set to head into the weekend without a COVID-19 lockdown, with health authorities confident they're tracing almost all cases associated with the most recent virus outbreak.

Key points:

• NSW Health is monitoring the latest coronavirus outbreak closely
• The state's most senior health official does not believe a snap lockdown will work
• There are dozens of cases associated with NSW's latest COVID-19 outbreak

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian did not mince her words yesterday when she described the past week as the "most serious moment for the state" since the pandemic began.

There have so far been 49 locally acquired COVID-19 cases in the state since a limousine driver tested positive last Wednesday, and more infections are expected to be announced at 11:00am today.

"We're dealing with a virus that is extremely contagious," Ms Berejiklian said.

"And we are also dealing with a situation where many people may be forced into isolation in the days ahead and where many people will be asked to follow the health advice in a more vigilant way that they have ever been asked during the course of the pandemic.

 

Read more:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-25/nsw-covid-cases-not-enough-to-spark-snap-sydney-lockdown/100242430

 

 

MEANWHILE:

 

Early in the pandemic, suggestions COVID-19 had escaped from a top-level Wuhan biolab were dismissed as conspiracy theories, but as the virus killed thousands in the US, it gained new currency as politicians sought to shift blame from their failed policies and onto China.

Excerpts from a forthcoming book on the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US reveal that top scientists resisted an order from former US President Donald Trump to slash program funding that partly went to coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology at a time when Trump first began blaming the pandemic on an unproven theory the virus had escaped from the lab.

The revelation comes from an excerpt from “Nightmare Scenario: Inside the Trump Administration's Response to the Pandemic That Changed History,” a book by Washington Post journalists Yasmeen Abutaleb and Damian Paletta expected to hit shelves next week, given to Fox News.

‘A Direct Order From the President’

The excerpt takes place in mid-April 2020: about a month after the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak to be a global pandemic, all attempts at containing it had failed and as many as 2,700 Americans were dying every day, most of them in New York, the epicenter of the first wave. On top of that, 22 million Americans were out of work and the US economy had taken its deepest-ever plunge into a recession due to pandemic-related lockdowns.

In the excerpt, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and a key figure in Trump’s coronavirus task force, and NIH Director Francis Collins weigh the possibility of resigning in protest after being ordered to immediately cut funding for a peer-reviewed grant that was helping back research at the top-level biolab in the Chinese city of Wuhan.

On April 15, 2020, Trump indicated his administration was looking into whether or not COVID-19 escaped from the Wuhan biolab, and then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged that China “needs to come clean” on the origins of COVID-19. Two days later, on April 17, Trump told reporters he would look into whether or not US taxpayer money had funded research at the lab and would cancel it.

 

According to the excerpt, the NIH looked into this and found a $3.7 million grant to EcoHealth Alliance, which had worked with Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers in the past, but wasn’t presently involved in work there. On April 24, Collins and Fauci suddenly received notice that Trump wanted them to announce the grant had been terminated.

“Collins and Fauci told the White House and [the Department of Health and Human Services] that they were not sure the NIH actually had the authority to terminate a peer-reviewed grant in the middle of a budget cycle. The HHS general counsel told them to do it anyway and made clear it was a direct order from the president, implying that their jobs were on the line if they didn’t comply. Fauci and Collins reluctantly agreed to cancel the grant,” the authors wrote.

The book also includes a conversation between Fauci and Peter Staley, an HIV/AIDS activist who in the 1980s and 90s led militant protests that pressured the NIH into speeding up research on AIDS treatments. Staley briefly suggested Fauci and Collins resign in protest over the directive in order to demonstrate their contempt at the politicization of scientific research - and he wasn’t the only one to suggest it. In the end, they didn’t resign and they paused the spending of the final $369,819 balance on the grant.

A few months later, during a House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing in June 2020, Fauci told lawmakers he didn’t know why the grant had been canceled.

 

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/us/202106241083235410-fauci-fought-trump-on-april-2020-cut-for-program-that-had-funded-wuhan-biolab-research-book-reveals/

 

Obviously we're sailing in the dark without a paddle and the experts know the way to the iceberg... Read from top.

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJoi4hGpqa8

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6Dvb_L34bY

 

READ FROM TOP

 

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW