I’d dug this old report up early in the day on October 27/21 from my google blog:
It was to be the follow up the piece;
Though in reality my google report long preceded the report of Sept 27/21. Which cited the wrong year for the notorious GoF research coming to light. It was 2011 and not 2012 as had been stated by Nature, since my report harkened back to 2011.
There has been a lot of noise lately about Covid-19 and “gain of function” potentiality. What I find interesting is how the narrative, which was at first discounted out of hand, has now morphed into a possibility that is being implanted in our created realities. Gropin’ Joe Biden is riding this train, as expected.
"President Joe Biden ordered U.S. intelligence officials to "redouble" their efforts to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, including any possibility the trail might lead to a Chinese laboratory. After months of minimizing that possibility as a fringe theory, the Biden administration is joining worldwide pressure for China to be more open about the outbreak, aiming to head off GOP complaints the president has not been tough enough, as well as to use the opportunity to press China on alleged obstruction."
The new narrative has a repetitive feature, in other words it’s been “previously enjoyed” so to speak? This tact is referred to here as “blame and frame”. Particularly important to influence public opinion.
“Blame and frame” is a highly effective tactic for perception management/mind control. One need only look at the Covidian Cult creation for proof that reality management through language and imagery works.
As has been expressed previously, implanting the idea of Covid-19 as originating in a lab in China, as something released due to extreme negligence or maliciousness has it’s basis in the planned by the US, confrontation of China. The blame and frame narrative necessitates that these already desired goals will have to spring into action. These plans will now be justified and prioritized. The goal posts have now been moved
*Further to the idea of Covid’s origins? – I’m privy to no information indicating this virus was lab created or occurred naturally. However, I’ll express an opinion at the end of this report based on information I’ve gathered.
Targeting China: Here
PennyMay 19, 2021 at 5:12 PM The linked report above is definitely a keep it under your hat kind of post- This speaks to me of Covid as political warfare against China (one aspect) It portends wider war- look at the war ship the US sent through India's waters.. The Belt and Road has always been a challenge to US hegemony which is why the US/Israel is working so very hard to create Greater Kurdistan So many agendas all rolled into one big deadly/tyrannical ball of warfare wax. Did I say warfare? Yes, I did. Because to my mind this is part of the reason US and Canada are moving manufacturing back to their respective nation states- On the surface not a bad thing, but...look a bit deeper at what is suggested by those moves. I was saying to hubby just a few short days ago.. looks like preparations for more war/bigger war........
Gain-of-function research is defined by the Department of Health and Human Services as research “that improves the ability of a pathogen to cause disease" in an effort to "enable assessment of the pandemic potential of emerging infectious agents." It warns that these studies “may entail biosafety and biosecurity risks.”
Gain-of-function research refers to the serial passaging of microorganisms to increase their transmissibility, virulence, immunogenicity, and host tropism by applying selective pressure to a culture.
Gain of Function can easily be used to weaponize viruses. That’s obvious enough!
Ferrets: Virus and Gain of Function Research
Back in 2011, (google blog) I’d posted some articles about ferrets, flu virus and Gain of Function research-
Flashback: US "requesting" to nix release of details of bird flu research At the time the initial news coverage emerged, it was heavily reported this "creation" had come out of Dutch laboratories. Even though that was clearly NOT the case.
When one dug just a little further it became clear this was a joint effort between US & Dutch researchers. But who was in charge? Who was the initiator? I would argue the initiator of the experimentation is the one trying to control the resulting data. "A government advisory panel, the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, overseen by the National Institutes of Health, has asked two journals, Science and Nature, to keep certain details out of reports that they intend to publish on the research. The panel said conclusions should be published, but not "experimental details and mutation data that would enable replication of the experiments" The journals, the panel, researchers and government officials have been grappling with the findings for several months. The Dutch researchers presented their work at a virology conference in September. September 2011. "This finding shows it's much easier to evolve this virus to an extremely dangerous state where it can be transmitted in aerosols than anybody had recognized, he said. Transmission by aerosols means the virus can be spread through the air via coughing or sneezing. Both studies of the virus - one at the Erasmus Medical Center in the Netherlands, and the other at the University of Wisconsin-Madison were paid for by the National Institutes of Health." December 14/2011: Deadly H5N1 created in Lab: 6.5 million Prepandemic H5N1 vaccines produced
"Working separately, they each hit on a combination of mutations (five, in Dr. Fouchier’s case) that makes H5N1 airborne (enabling it to spread readily between humans), without making it less deadly. In laboratory experiments, ferrets infected with this mutant strain passed it to other ferrets in nearby cages (ferrets are a common subject of flu studies because they react to flu viruses in a similar way to humans). A significant proportion of infected subjects died. Efforts to publish those findings have been fraught. Critics say that making the methodology or gene sequences widely available, amounts to giving would-be bioterrorists an easy recipe. They also worry that these manmade strains might escape from the lab.
A potentially more virulent virus is created in a lab and a vaccine for this virus, unmodified or otherwise, is produced nearly in tandem? From the same 2011 report: Original information accessible, amazingly, here
Novartis's new cell-culture based influenza vaccine factory in North Carolina has begun making a prepandemic H5N1 flu vaccine and is ready to start producing vaccines for a real pandemic when needed, the company and federal health officials announced yesterday. The facility in Holly Springs, N.C., billed as the first of its kind in the United States, was dedicated yesterday after a long testing process. As part of the testing, last week the plant produced two lots of "prepandemic" H5N1 flu vaccine for the Strategic National Stockpile, and another lot will be completed this week, for a total of 6.5 million doses, said Liz Power, a spokeswoman for Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Cambridge, Mass. Does that make anyone else go Hmmmm? Scientist create a deadly version of the H5N1 flu virus, September 2011 and Novartis is producing a pre-pandemic H5N1 vaccine in December. Oh, well I guess that is just another coincidence..........
Coincidence? I’m not a coincidence theorist- That’s for fools and idiots. I lean much more towards trial runs and preparations for accidental or intentional leaks? Whichever?
Let’s bring the idea of preparations for planned pandemics forward to the present time-
Flashback: We Had the Vaccine the Whole Time- A So Called Vaccine Awaiting a So Called Pandemic?
“Moderna’s mRNA-1273, which reported a 94.5 percent efficacy rate on November 16, had been designed by January 13. (2020) This was just two days after the genetic sequence had been made public...” In Massachusetts, the Moderna vaccine design took all of one weekend. It was completed before China had even acknowledged that the disease could be transmitted from human to human, more than a week before the first confirmed coronavirus case in the United States. By the time the first American death was announced a month later, the vaccine had already been manufactured and shipped to the National Institutes of Health for the beginning of its Phase I clinical trial.
Vaccine was manufactured by Moderna and shipped to the NIH prior to the US having a single confirmed case of this virus? Think about that? Then consider the information below:
Jan 21/20: CDC reports 1st US case of coronavirus; NIH working with Moderna on vaccine
January 13/20 Moderna had designed it’s vaccine. January 21/20 the CDC reports first US case of coronavirus- Moderna is a partner to the NIH.
-The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed the first U.S. case of a novel coronavirus - The U.S. patient reported that he did not visit the Wuhan markets implicated in the initial cases of the 2019-nCoV outbreak -A man in his 30s, who had traveled to Seattle from Wuhan, China (Wuhan is a huge city, population more then 11,000,000) — contacted his healthcare providers Jan. 19. - It was confirmed a day later through a new CDC diagnostic test that he had the 2019 novel coronavirus, or 2019-nCoV. -The U.S. patient is hospitalized in isolation at Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett, Wash., out of an abundance of caution and not because of severe illness - The man did not show any symptoms of 2019-nCoV when he first arrived in Seattle on Jan. 15, according to the officials. Vaccine development Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said his agency is partnering with Moderna Inc. to develop a vaccine against the 2019-nCoV. But Fauci noted that the NIH has had a long-standing relationship with Moderna on other vaccines using the company's messenger RNA platform technology. While Moderna is helping to cover some of the costs of the phase 1 trial, the NIH will be funding the bulk of the study, Fauci said. "Theoretically, we are always looking for developing universal vaccines for entire families of viruses," he said. "Getting a universal vaccine for an entire family of viruses is a difficult, not impossible, process."
To summarize: Random man with no symptoms returns to the US from a huge city of more then 11 million, having NOT attended the market place in China, decides to contact his health care provider and is coincidentally tested with the CDC newly created diagnostic test for a alleged novel virus that coincidentally already has a vaccine in the can.
Was Gain of Function research a factor in above seemingly serendipitous turn of events?
Flashback: March 24/21- Interview with Richard Ebright PHD: How Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins “systematically thwarted” the US Gain-of-Function Research Pause
Regarding the inspection personnel, at least one member of the WHO mission team, Ecohealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak, seems to have conflicts of interest that should have disqualified him from being part of an investigation of the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. RE: Yes. Daszak was the contractor who funded the laboratory at WIV that potentially was the source of the virus (with subcontracts from $200 million from the US Department of State and $7 million from the US National Institutes of Health), and he was a collaborator and co-author on research projects at the laboratory. What went wrong for the Cambridge Working Group thesis during the 2014-2016 USA official moratorium and deliberative process on Gain-of-Function Research of Concern (GoFRoC)? RE: The Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have systematically thwarted efforts by the White House, the Congress, scientists, and science policy specialists to regulate GoF research of concern and even to require risk-benefit review for projects involving GoF research of concern. In 2014, the Obama White House implemented a “Pause” in federal funding for GoF research of concern. However, the document announcing the Pause stated in a footnote that: “An exception from pause may be obtained if head of funding agency determines research is urgently necessary to protect public health or national security”. Unfortunately, the NIAID Director and the NIH Director exploited this loophole to issue exemptions to projects subject to the Pause –preposterously asserting the exempted research was “urgently necessary to protect public health or national security”– thereby nullifying the Pause. The Director of the NIAID is... Anthony S Fauci, M.D
Dr. Fauci was appointed director of NIAID in 1984. He oversees an extensive portfolio of basic and applied research to prevent, diagnose, and treat established infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, respiratory infections, diarrheal diseases, tuberculosis and malaria as well as emerging diseases such as Ebola and Zika Dr. Fauci has advised seven presidents on HIV/AIDS and many other domestic and global health issues. December 19, 2017 NIH Lifts Funding Pause on Gain-of-Function Research
Today, the National Institutes of Health announced that it is lifting a funding pause dating back to October 2014 on gain-of-function (GOF) experiments involving influenza, SARS, and MERS viruses. GOF research is important in helping us identify, understand, and develop strategies and effective countermeasures against rapidly evolving pathogens that pose a threat to public health. The funding pause was lifted in response to today’s release of the Department of Health and Human Services Framework for Guiding Funding Decisions about Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens (HHS P3CO Framework). The HHS P3CO Framework describes a multi-disciplinary review process, involving the funding agency and a Department-level review group, that considers the scientific merits and potential benefits of the research, as well as the potential to create, transfer, or use an enhanced potential pandemic pathogen. This framework formalizes robust oversight for federally funded research with enhanced pathogens of pandemic potential. It is the product of an extensive deliberative process undertaken by experts throughout the public and private sectors, and is aligned with the Recommended Policy Guidance for Departmental Development of Review Mechanisms for Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight (P3CO).
Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D.
Ironically the image that accompanies the 2017 announcement is the very flu virus A H5N1 that was weaponized in the US and Holland in 2011. As was covered then and is referred to now as an example of prior gain of function experimentation.
Q – Am I of the opinion Gain of Function research played a role in the emergence of the Covid-2019 virus?
A – Yes, it seems entirely possible.
Q – Do I think China was responsible for this?
A – No, I do not. I’m looking at the US (leadership and business class) as the instigating forces. For many reasons, of course. Crony capitalism. Reshaping society. Reshaping the globe Enabling the targeting China. A long desired plan/goal now has a justification.
Who benefits? Whose gain?
One last thought… I’m now letting the idea roll around in my head that China’s heavy handed response might have had something to do with the possibility they considered this a biological attack. Speculative, yes. But entirely plausible.