“Worst-case thinking motivated by the belief that the danger we face is so overwhelmingly catastrophic that we must act immediately.WHO 2011 bulletin “Health is more than influenza“
The pandemic policy was never informed by evidence, but by fear of worst-case scenarios.”
COVID-19 uncensored; articles and interviews since April 2020
In science the solution to bad information is more information not less information – Dr Michael Greger
This site is not about anti-vaccination neither denying the existence of a virus!
Its primary purpose is to inform by collecting solid scientific information and or news articles that provide information mainly neglected by the “main stream media”.
This site is not build to provoke, abuse or deny. Critical definitely, but also open to receive criticism.
“The better the critic, the more holistic the sense of how own perspectives and tastes fit into the diverse pool of informed opinion of others.”
The contact form is available to anyone. If you think information is incorrect please provide documented conclusive material to proof this and we will remove the content.
Evidence that this Is No Naturally Evolved Virus
Prof. Dr. Roland Wiesendanger Coronavirus Origin Study Released
His findings conclude there are a number of quality sources indicating a laboratory accident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology as the cause of the current pandemic.
The study was conducted from January to December 2020, and is based on an interdisciplinary research approach and extensive research using a wide range of information sources.
In contrast to early coronavirus-based epidemics such as SARS and MERS, the scientific community has yet to identify the interim host that made the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from bats to humans possible. Thus, there is no sound basis for a zoonotic theory as a possible explanation for the pandemic.
The SARS-CoV-2 viruses are astonishingly effective at binding to human cell receptors and infecting human cells, thanks to its special cell receptor binding domains combined with a special (furin) cleavage site of the coronavirus spike protein. This is the first time a coronavirus has had both of these characteristics and indicates a nonnatural origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen.
There were no bats for sale at the wet market in the center of Wuhan, which is the suspected hub of the outbreak. The Wuhan Institute of Virology, however, houses one of the largest collections of bat pathogens in the world, taken from distant caves in southern Chinese provinces. It is extremely unlikely that bats naturally made their way to Wuhan, from almost 2,000 km away, to then start a worldwide pandemic in the immediate vicinity of the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
One research group at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been researching the genetic manipulation of coronaviruses for many years with the goal of making these more infectious, more dangerous, and more fatal. This has been demonstrated by numerous publications.
Safety measures were documented as being insufficient at the Wuhan Institute of Virology prior to the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic.
There are numerous direct indications that the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen is of laboratory origin and point to a young researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology as being the first person to be infected. In addition, there are indications that the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology into the city of Wuhan and beyond. There are also indications that the Chinese authorities conducted an examination of the institute in the first half of October 2019. Article https://www.uni-hamburg.de/en/newsroom/presse/2021/pm8.html
The study has been published at http://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.31754.80323
Prof. Luc Montagnier – Virus is Manipulated. A very Meticulous job.
The virus is manipulated by a molecular biologist who did a very meticulous job.
French virologist and joint recipient, with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Harald zur Hausen, of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). He has worked as a researcher at the Pasteur Institute in Paris and as a full-time professor at Shanghai Jiao Tong University in China.
Awards: 1986 Louis-Jeantet Prize for Medicine 1988 Japan Prize 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
Interview December 2020
Luc Montagnier chose FranceSoir to speak and take up “the challenge of truth”. Answering Richard Boutry’s questions, the Nobel Prize awarded French Professor looks back on the storm that has blew the scientific world last year (2nd video).
Dr Steven Quay concludes Sars-CoV-2 comes from a lab
Above francesoir webpage google translate version:
On January 29, 2021, in an article published by Dr Steven Quay, MD, PhD., CEO of Atossa
Therapeutics, concludes “ a Bayesian analysis concludes beyond a reasonable doubt that Sars-CoV-2 is not a natural zoonosis, but rather a laboratory derivative. “.
Reported by PrNewswire the article is 193 pages long (below as pdf or via links in the francesoir webpage above) and can be downloaded from Zenodo, a general open access repository managed by CERN and a short explanatory video is uploaded. The aim of the analysis was to determine the origin of SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19.
Starting with a 98.2% probability that it was a zoonotic leap from nature with only a 1.2% probability that it was a laboratory escape, twenty-six facts and evidence different and independent were examined systematically.
The final conclusion is that there is a 99.8% chance that Sars-CoV-2 comes from a lab and
only a 0.2% chance that it comes from nature.
“Like many others, I am concerned about what appear to be significant conflicts of interest between members of the WHO team and scientists and doctors in China and how this will preclude an impartial review of it. ‘origin of SARS-CoV-2 ,’ said Dr Quay.
“Taking only publicly available scientific evidence on SARS-CoV-2 and using very conservative estimates in my analysis, I nevertheless conclude that there is no reasonable doubt that SARSCoV-2 escaped from a laboratory.
Additional evidence for what appears to be adenovirus vaccine genetic sequences in samples from five patients from December 2019 and sequenced by the Wuhan Institute of Virology needs explanation. You would see that kind of data in a vaccine challenge trial, for example. I hope the WHO team can get these questions answered. “
Dr Steven Quay has published over 360 contributions to medicine and has been cited over 10,000 times, placing him in the top 1% of scientists worldwide. He holds 87 U.S. patents and invented seven FDA-approved pharmaceuticals that have helped over 80 million people. He is the author of the bestselling pandemic survival book, Stay Healthy: A Doctor’s Guide to Surviving the Coronavirus.
To help find the truth and get feedback on the methodologies used and the conclusions drawn in this article, a prepublication copy of this document has been sent to twenty-six scientists around the world, including currently WHO researchers. in Wuhan, Wuhan Institute of Virology scientists, as well as other leading virologists.
Recall that in May 2020 Professor Luc Montagnier , Nobel Prize in Medicine, made an identical statement (video above) before being lynched by the media.
Professor Tritto published a book “The chimera that changed the world” at the beginning of August 2020 confirming this thesis. In July, Prof. Montagnier and mathematician Jean-Claude Perez had a publication on this subject accepted in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. In addition, Luc Montagnier had confided in the microphone of Richard Boutry in the program “the challenge of the truth” (video above), confirming his statements of May 2020.
Birger Sørensen -The Evidence which Suggests that This Is No Naturally Evolved Virus
ORIGINAL PDF ONLINE
PDF Local backup:
“I firmly believe that it was spread by accident. When US authorities conducted an inspection in Wuhan in 2018, it was described as a risk lab,” Sørensen told Fria Tider.Birger Sørensen
Dr. Li-Meng Yan – Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification
Yan, Li-Meng; Kang, Shu; Guan, Jie; Hu, Shanchang
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has led to over 910,000 deaths worldwide and unprecedented decimation of the global economy.
Despite its tremendous impact, the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has remained mysterious and controversial. The natural origin theory, although widely accepted, lacks substantial support.
The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals
Dr. Li-Meng Yan: Twitter suspends virologist
Twitter has suspended the account of the Chinese virologist and whistleblower Dr. Li-Meng Yan after she published a paper claiming that COVID-19 was created in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Lab-Made? SARS-CoV-2 Genealogy Through the Lens of Gain-of-Function Research
If you hear anyone claim “we know the virus didn’t come from a lab”, don’t buy it — it may well have.
Labs around the globe have been creating synthetic viruses like CoV2 for years.
And no, its genome would not necessarily contain hallmarks of human manipulation: modern genetic engineering tools permit cutting and pasting genomic fragments without leaving a trace. It can be done quickly, too: it took a Swiss team less than a month to create a synthetic clone of CoV2.
When the CoV2 genome was just sequenced and made publicly available on January 10, 2020, it was a riddle, as no closely related strains were known. But quite quickly, on January 23, Shi Zhengli released a paper indicating that CoV2 is 96% identical to RaTG13, a strain which her laboratory had previously isolated from Yunnan bats in 2013. However, outside of her lab, no one knew about that strain until January 2020.
More reason to think Beijing’s to blame for the pandemic
By Post Editorial Board – March 16, 2021
Here’s an item that made a lot fewer headlines than it should have: David Asher, the former lead investigator on the State Department task force investigating the origin of the coronavirus, believes it was the result of military research gone bad at that infamous Wuhan Institute.
“The Wuhan Institute of Virology is not the National Institute of Health,” Asher, now a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, told Fox News. “It was operating a secret, classified program. In my view, and I’m just one person, my view is it was a biological-weapons program.”
It’s a far more believable narrative than those the Chinese Communist Party has tried to peddle, such as suggestions that it’s the result of US military research, with the bug somehow brought to China by US soldiers or . . . frozen-food imports.
Asher spent his career working on some highly classified investigations for the State and Treasury departments. Speaking at a panel on the pandemic’s origins, he said he believes it resulted from a “weapons vector gone awry, not deliberately released, but in development and then somehow leaked.”
Yet, he added, it “has turned out to be the greatest weapon in history,” having “taken out 15 to 20 percent of global GDP. You’ve killed millions of people.” Meanwhile, China’s “population has been barely affected. Their economies roared back to being No. 1 in the entire G20.”
All of which fits with Beijing’s all-out efforts to prevent any independent investigations in Wuhan, including muscling the World Health Organization into repeatedly trying to “debunk” the world’s suspicions without doing any actual investigating. The truth may never come out, but the CCP’s behavior sure makes it look guilty.
Searching for “COVID-19 virus” isolation records
A colleague in New Zealand and I (CM) have been submitting Freedom of Information requests to various institutions around the world seeking records that describe the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus from any unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient. Other
Our requests have not been limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, or limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to any records describing “COVID-19 virus” isolation performed by anyone, ever, anywhere on the planet.
EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH UK MHRA – Exposing the genomic sequence of SARSCov2
The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine was approved by UK MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) & I initiated a polite exchange of emails with them.
Without a purified sample virus UK MHRA confesses that the Pfizer Vaccine mRNA element is a computer generated genomic sequence amplified from a RNA fragment found in one experimental study from Wuhan (Feb 2020). No similar virus has been isolated anywhere in the world since.
… and last but not least a little bit of history.
1919 – Dr Milton Rosenau, attempts to prove the infectious nature of this disease
But most revealing of all were the various heroic attempts to prove the infectious nature of this disease, using volunteers. All these attempts, made in November and December 1918 and in February and March 1919, failed. One medical team in Boston, working for the United States Public Health Service, tried to infect one hundred healthy volunteers between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five.
Their efforts were impressive and make entertaining reading:
“We collected the material and mucous secretions of the mouth and nose and throat and bronchi from cases of the disease and transferred this to our volunteers. We always obtained this material in the same way. The patient with fever, in bed, had a large, shallow, tray-like arrangement before him or her, and we washed out one nostril with some sterile salt solutions, using perhaps 5 c.c., which is allowed to run into the tray; and that nostril is blown vigorously into the tray. This is repeated with the other nostril. The patient then gargles with some of the solution. Next we obtain some bronchial mucus through coughing, and then we swab the mucous surface of each nares and also the mucous surface of the throat… Each one of the volunteers… received 6 c.c. of the mixed stuff that I have described. They received it into each nostril; received it in the throat, and on the eye; and when you think that 6 c.c. in all was used, you will understand that some of it was swallowed. None of them took sick.
”In a further experiment with new volunteers and donors, the salt solution was eliminated, and with cotton swabs, the material was transferred directly from nose to nose and from throat to throat, using donors in the first, second, or third day of the disease. “None of these volunteers who received the material thus directly transferred from cases took sick in any way… All of the volunteers received at least two, and some of them three ‘shots’ as they expressed it.”
In a further experiment 20 c.c. of blood from each of five sick donors were mixed and injected into each volunteer. “None of them took sick in any way.”
“Then we collected a lot of mucous material from the upper respiratory tract, and filtered it through Mandler filters. This filtrate was injected into ten volunteers, each one receiving 3.5 c.c. subcutaneously, and none of these took sick in any way.”
Then a further attempt was made to transfer the disease “in the natural way,” using fresh volunteers and donors: “The volunteer was led up to the bedside of the patient; he was introduced. He sat down alongside the bed of the patients. They shook hands, and by instructions, he got as close as he conveniently could, and they talked for five minutes. At the end of the five minutes, the patient breathed out as hard as he could, while the volunteer, muzzle to muzzle (in accordance with his instructions, about 2 inches between the two), received this
expired breath, and at the same time was breathing in as the patient breathed out… After they had done this for five times, the patient coughed directly into the face of the volunteer, face to face, five different times… [Then] he moved to the next patient whom we had selected, and repeated this, and so on, until this volunteer had had that sort of contact with ten different cases of influenza, in different stages of the disease, mostly fresh cases, none of them more than three days old… None of them took sick in any way.”
“We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease, and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person. Perhaps,” concluded Dr. Milton Rosenau, “if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.”
the above text is from the book The INVISIBLE RAINBOW by Arthur Firstenberg
ISBN 978-1-64502-009-7 (paperback) | 978-1-64502-010-3 (ebook)
Dishonest efforts will not bring real success.
Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason. The saying is recorded from the early 19th century, but a related idea with an ironic twist is found in John Harington’s Epigrams of the early 17th century
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” – Joseph Goebbels Master propagandist of the Nazi regime and dictator.
“Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.” Hermann Wilhelm Göring
Nuremberg Diary Paperback – August 22, 1995