Renewed efforts are being made to conceal the origin of the Wuhan virus.
Bengaluru: As a Democratic Party defeat in the U.S. midterm elections this year seems a certainty, and the possibility of Republicans taking control of the U.S. House of Representatives increases, the prospects for a Congressional hearing/inquiry into the origin of the Wuhan virus, also known as Covid-19, is a given. To avoid a possible Congressional investigation, the cast of American figures involved in the research and development of this genetically modified virus which has killed millions of people around the world, is back to mask the source of the virus – the Institute Wuhan Chinese Virology Institute (WIV) – calling it a natural virus in an effort to whitewash their own culpability and that of Xi Jinping’s regime. This is apparent from the publication of two articles on July 26, 2022, in the journal Science. Both of these articles have multiple authors under the direction of Dr. Kristian G. Andersen in the United States. Andersen is known to have sadly gone from suspecting that Covid-19 was genetically modified, to trying to prove that it naturally jumped from wild bats to humans. These last two studies further prove that Covid-19 originated in Wuhan, but do not prove the zoonotic (passing from animal to human) origin of the virus which the authors strive to prove, based on on many assumptions. The co-conspirators in the diversion of major US research funds to the WIV in China ensured the suppression of facts and orchestrated the publication of misleading scientific correspondence in the early days of the pandemic in 2020 to prove that the virus had an origin natural in Wuhan wet market. This concerted disinformation campaign has been reignited by some virologists who fear a possible ban on research on high-risk viruses, exposure of their role in research like genetic engineering and gain-of-function, and are more concerned about their own financing than by the safety and well-being of mankind.
A MISLEADING STUDY: One of these two articles, an 18-page essay by 18 authors, is titled: “The Hunan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan was the first epicenter of the Covid-19 pandemic “. This is based on the premise that understanding how the Covid-19 virus emerged in 2019 is key to preventing zoonotic outbreaks. Therefore, the article predetermines that the virus was of natural origin. The article provides the geographical distribution of the first suspected cases of Covid-19 around the wet market of Wuhan, based on an erroneous and biased sample. Their spatial distribution maps highlight the location of the wet market and ignore the Wuhan CDC (the agency that initially monitored the outbreak) just 280 meters away, let alone the WIV 12 kilometers away. The Wuhan CDC had housed experimental wild animals, including bats collected from Hubei and Zhejiang provinces. The authors of the article found many old cases that had no direct link to the market. They found “susceptible” mammals such as raccoon dogs for sale, but were unable to identify an intermediate host. They conceded that “there is insufficient evidence to define the events upstream, and the exact circumstances remain unclear.” They still concluded that “our analyzes indicate that the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 occurred via the live wildlife trade in China, and show that the Huanan market was the epicenter of the pandemic. of COVID-19”. It should be noted that the epicenter of an outbreak would be a crowded place near the source of the virus, and not necessarily the source itself.
THE OTHER MISLEADING STUDY: The other paper, a 15-page study by 29 authors from the same institutions, and titled “Molecular Epidemiology of Multiple Zoonotic Origins of SARS-CoV2” examines strains of the virus found in the early stages of the outbreak in Wuhan. They mention two viral lineages A and B and propose several interspecies transmissions – from the B lineage virus to humans around November 18, 2019 and later from the A lineage within weeks. It makes sense that a transmission between species that has not occurred in the centuries of existence of wet markets in China is highly unlikely to occur multiple times in quick succession. Their claims center on the well-known fact that “gain-of-function” research produces multiple strains. Who should know better than these virologists? They speculate that raccoon dogs and other mammals are the intermediate hosts, but their many errors suggest that the animals and their samples may have been contaminated by infected humans. Their conclusion also ignores the fact that the only bats in Wuhan existed in Wuhan labs and not in the wet market.
PROFESSIONAL MEDIA AND THE PUBLIC ARE DECEIVED: Journalists and the ombudsman of newspapers and networks have always struggled to understand technical jargon and make sense of scientific claims. It’s worse when leading experts publish scientific papers with dubious claims. Ideally, the results of a scientific study should be explained in a rational way and lead to a logical conclusion. It should not be reverse-engineered to reach a predetermined conclusion. Sometimes, as with these two studies, the elaborated data and statistical analysis seem authentic, but the authors jump to a conclusion that is not justified. A July 27, 2020 article by Laura Ungar in the Associated Press based on these two studies in Science and titled “New studies bolster nature-emerging coronavirus theory” quotes Dr. Kristian G. Andersen saying, “Have we disproved the laboratory leak theory? No, we haven’t, but I think what’s really important here is that there are possible scenarios and plausible scenarios and it’s really important to understand that possible doesn’t mean equally likely. This article was prominently republished by many major Indian newspapers with the headline eventually evolving to an emphatic “Covid was born in Wuhan market, say 2 studies”. Tragically, this will now be accepted as gospel truth by many academic, intelligence, political and administrative circles.
SUMMARY OF EVENTS LEADING TO THE ORIGIN OF COVID-19: After leaks from even the most secure Western virology labs and outcry over the creation of deadly chimeric viruses by virologists hoping to profit from vaccines against new human viruses ; this risky virus research with technology, equipment and facilities has been outsourced to China. Chinese researchers were trained in gain-of-function and genetic engineering techniques, funded and held by experienced, well-connected American virologists. Western collaboration has allowed Chinese researchers to clandestinely or otherwise collect deadly viruses that exist in nature in various parts of the world and steal samples from Western labs.
THE ORIGINAL COVERAGE: My June 6, 2021 article, in The Sunday Guardian, titled “International Scientists Covered Up Covid-19 Lab Origin” details the original cover-up. Here is a brief recap of the original cover-up of this article: On February 1, 2021, hours after IIT New Delhi researchers submitted their findings online at bioRxiv, alarm bells were ringing around the world. Dr. Kristian G. Andersen of the Scripps Research Institute emailed Dr. Fauci: “Some of the features appear designed, inconsistent with the expectations of the theory of evolution.” Following this, a concerted suppression of the findings, including of the New Delhi group, was carried out by special interests. On February 19, 2020, a group of 27 senior virologists from the United States, Australia, Germany, Spain, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Italy, Malaysia and Hong Kong, including Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance, which funded WIV, published in the Lancet a “Statement of Support for Chinese Scientists, Public Health Professionals and Healthcare Professionals Fighting COVID-19”. In a correspondence published March 17, 2020 in Nature titled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” Kristian G. Andersen, who on February 1 had emailed Dr. Fauci, now became upsetting and with four other researchers argued that “Our analyzes clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a deliberately manipulated virus.” On March 26, 2020, Dr. Francis Collins supported Dr. Andersen’s analysis on the NIV Director’s Blog: “The next time you come across something about COVID-19 online that bothers or intrigues you, I suggest you go to FEMA’s new coronavirus rumors. This will help distinguish rumors from facts.
The motto of these compromised researchers is: If you can’t convince them, confuse them.
Dr. PS Venkatesh Rao is a Consultant Endocrine, Breast and Laparoscopic Surgeon in Bengaluru.
