Wuhan Scientists Planned to Release ‘Chimeria COVID Spike Proteins’ Into Bat Populations Using ‘Skin-Penetrating Nanoparticles’

September 24, 2021

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/wuhan-scientists-planned-release-chimeric-covid-spike-proteins-bat-populations-using-skin

Wuhan Scientists Planned To Release ‘Chimeric Covid Spike Proteins’ Into Bat Populations Using ‘Skin-Penetrating Nanoparticles’

by Tyler Durden
Thursday, Sep 23, 2021

18 months before the pandemic, scientists in Wuhan, China submitted a proposal to release enhanced airborne coronaviruses into the wild in an effort to inoculate them against diseases that could have otherwise jumped to humans, according to The Telegraph, citing leaked grant proposals from 2018.

New documents show that just 18 months before the first Covid-19 cases appeared, researchers had submitted plans to release skin-penetrating nanoparticles containing “novel chimeric spike proteins” of bat coronaviruses into cave bats in Yunnan, China.

They also planned to create chimeric viruses, genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily, and requested $14million from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) to fund the work.

The bid was submitted by zoologist Peter Daszak of US-based EcoHealth Alliance, who was hoping to use genetic engineering to cobble “human-specific cleavage sites” onto bat Covid ‘which would make it easier for the virus to enter human cells’ – a method which would coincidentally answer a longstanding question among the scientific community as to how SARS-CoV-2 evolved to become so infectious to humans.

Daszak’s proposal also included plans to commingle high-risk natural coronaviruses strains with more infectious, yet less deadly versions. His ‘bat team’ of researchers included Dr. Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as well as US researchers from the University of North Carolina and the US Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Center.  (See link for article)

__________________

**Comment**

Important quote:

“This is clearly a gain of function, engineering the cleavage site and polishing the new viruses to enhance human cell infectibility in more than one cell line,” Angus Dalgleish, professor of Oncology at St. Georges, University of London  – Telegraph

An anonymous scientist at WHO states that Daszak’s grant proposal proposed plans to enhance the more deadly MERS virus which has a fatality rate over 30% – and is more deadly than COVID.

“If one of their receptor replacements made Mers spread similarly, while maintaining its lethality, this pandemic would be nearly apocalyptic.”  Anonymous WHO scientist

For those just tuning in, Danszak conspired with other scientists and authored a paper in the Lancet to shut down any scientific debate into the origins of COVID. Daszak thanked Fauci in private emails for downplaying the lab leak theory in front of the world stage. Fauci lied to U.S. Congress denying his role in approving and funding coronavirus gain-of-function research projects that exploit human immune systems.

In this video, Dr. Martin addresses the history of the development of the SARS bioweapon, which was originally funded for AIDS/HIV research in 1999, and he dropped this bombshell on the audience:

Anthony Fauci has spent, listen to this number, 191 BILLION dollars, not 3.7 million, not 30 million, 191 BILLION dollars of audited funds for the bioweaponization of viruses against humanity.

And it is YOUR money that has been spent.

Dr. Martin also explains how the COVID-19 “vaccine” does not meet the legal definition of a “vaccine,” but it meets the legal definition of a “bioweapon.” Source

Why are Fauci and Danszak not behind bars already?

For more:

Category:

Activism, Viruses

Comments Off on Wuhan Scientists Planned to Release ‘Chimeria COVID Spike Proteins’ Into Bat Populations Using ‘Skin-Penetrating Nanoparticles’

FLCCC’s Guide to Overcoming the Pharmacy Barrier for Getting Ivermectin

The FLCCC’s Guide to Overcoming the Pharmacy Barrier

Based on many reports from patients, there appears to be a growing number of pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for ivermectin—one of the safest drugs on the market today. To combat this violation of both the law and the oath taken by medical professionals, the FLCCC has created a guide for consumers to use in countering pharmacists and their refusal to allow patients access to an effective treatment for COVID-19.

Posted on the FLCCC homepage, flccc.net, the guide provides:

  • Information on the rights of the patient to have access to the medication prescribed by their doctor without interference from a pharmacist. 
  • A walk through of the misinformation that a pharmacist might use to not fill the prescription.
  • Actions the patient can take to counter the misinformation and alert the corporate leadership of the pharmacy if necessary. 

“The relationship we have with our patients is sacred and should not be compromised by pharmacists acting on their own. We are encouraged to see some of the large pharmacy chains taking action and ensuring our patients have their prescriptions filled.” said Pierre Kory, M.P.A., MD, president and chief medical officer of the FLCCC. “We want to make sure that the public knows their rights and has access to this important treatment.”

The guide can be found here: https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Overcoming-Pharmacy-Barriers.pdf

The FLCCC Weekly Update—September 22, 2021
Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Paul Marik join host Betsy Ashton to provide several important updates.

  • 15:51—Physician/scholars called “fringe doctors”
  • 18:00—MATH+ Hospital Protocol update
  • 20:21—Dr. Paul Marik’s new landmark paper: “The Pathophysiology of COVID.” The mechanisms of COVID. Why it causes such sickness and death.
  • 23:25—The success of Uttar Pradesh against COVID
  • 34:30—How to counter pharmacists’ refusals to fill prescriptions for ivermectin.

For more information on the FLCCC, the science and our protocols, please visit www.flccc.net

**Comment**

I have heard that a Wisconsin doctor is now under scrutiny for prescribing Ivermectin for COVID. Evidently Walgreens turned this doctor in. And in France, Dr. Jean-Paul Theron was just arrested and drug out into the street like a criminal.

 Dr. Jean-Paul Theron arrested for prescribing ivermectin for COVID

In case you missed it, the AMA, AphA, and ASHP as well as the ABEM and FSMB are threatening doctors who prescribe ivermectin for COVID and for spreading “misinformation.” Sadly, a hit-piece in my local paper is following the accepted narrative. The title was, “Experts: Don’t Use Drug For Animals – Ivermectin Ineffective, Potentially Dangerous.”

It’s one of the worst pieces of journalism I’ve seen in a long time. First, stating Ivermectin is an “animal” medicine is like saying penicillin is an “animal” medicine since it too is used in animals as well as humans. Ivermectin is on the WHO list of essential medicines and has been used safely for decades for river blindness, scabies, and other human illnesses (as well as for animals). Shame on our corrupt public health ‘authorities’ and a complicit media for spreading these lies. And they are LIES of the biggest sort costing 500,000 lives according to one doctor. To learn why they are censoring this important, effective treatment watch the video in the first link below.

For more on Ivermectin:

Also see FLCCC’s website for COVID protocols for every stage of the illness:  https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/

To find a doctor willing to prescribe effective COVID medication:  https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/treatments/how-do-i-get-covid-19-medication/

Are you being pressured to get the dangerous COVID jab?  Read this:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2021/08/30/covid-vaccine-mandates-if-i-dont-want-the-jab-what-are-my-options/

For more:

Hospitals have become “killing fields,” where patients are “medically kidnapped” and denied life-saving treatment.
Due to this, a new physician alliance called the Pandemic Health Alliance has formed.

Go here for a Sept. 13 interview with Steve Bannon, host of War Room: Pandemic, for an interview with Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Heather Gessling, and Dr. Cole.  Many are trapped in hospitals, left to die, with no one to advocate for them.  And now pharmacies are blocking essential prescriptions such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloriquin.

“We are in a situation where the government has seized control of the medical profession and this is causing death,” Malone said.

Category:

Activism, Treatment

Comments Off on FLCCC’s Guide to Overcoming the Pharmacy Barrier for Getting Ivermectin

Small Fiber Neuropathy in Lyme Disease & COVID

https://danielcameronmd.com/neuropathy-in-lyme-disease-covid-19/

Small fiber neuropathy in Lyme disease and COVID-19

person with neuropathy due to lyme disease rubbing their foot

Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is a disorder that affects the small sensory cutaneous nerves, resulting in unusual sensations such as tingling, pins-and-needles and numbness. Some patients may experience burning pain or coldness and electric shock-like brief painful sensations. In most patients, these symptoms start in the feet and progress upwards.¹

By

Small fiber neuropathy with autonomic and sensory dysfunction has been described in Lyme disease patients. In fact, a small study suggests that SFN may be a viable biomarker of post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome, particularly for patients whose main symptoms involve sensory issues.²

In their article, “Resolution of Pain in the Absence of Nerve Regeneration in Small Fiber Neuropathy Following Treatment of Lyme Disease,” the authors describe the case of an 83-year-old woman with a 4-year history of diffuse burning pain in her face, arms, and legs, and muscle spasms in the legs.³

Lyme disease causes small fiber neuropathy in an elderly woman. Complete resolution of symptoms after antibiotic treatment.

Lyme disease testing was positive. “She was then treated with a 40-day course of oral antibiotics for Lyme disease with complete resolution of her neuropathic symptoms.”

“Painful small fiber neuropathy may be a manifestation of Lyme disease,” the authors suggest. “Antibiotic treatment of Lyme disease can result in resolution of the neuropathic pain symptoms.”

Small fiber neuropathy and COVID-19

Now, small fiber neuropathy is being recognized in patients with COVID-19.

Investigators describe the clinical presentation of SFN associated with COVID-19 in two patients.4

Patient 1

A 52-year-old man, who contracted SARS-CoV-2, developed moderate respiratory problems (shortness of breath and productive cough).

“About 3 weeks later, he began to experience burning pain in the feet that spread up to the knees that was associated with imbalance and falls,” the authors explain.

“The pain would wake him at night, impacted his functional capacity, and was associated with allodynia.” (Note: Allodynia is the experience of pain from stimuli that typically is not painful, for example, light touch.)

He was diagnosed with small fiber neuropathy based on symptoms and test results.

The patient’s symptoms were “most compatible with a small fiber-predominant sensory neuropathy unmasked by COVID-19 infection.”

His neuropathic symptoms improved with gabapentin, and a topical lidocaine cream improved his neuropathic symptoms.

Patient 2

A 67-year-old woman with a 10-year history of mild acral tingling and burning pain had been diagnosed with small fiber neuropathy associated with psoriatic arthritis, based upon biopsy results.

Her symptoms had been stable for 10 years until she contracted SARS-CoV-2 and developed severe burning pain in her hands and feet.

“She presented 6 months later with persistent symptoms and occasional orthostasis.”

Her examination and test results supported a diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy.

“This is an example of a chronic pre-morbid sensory and small fiber-predominant autonomic neuropathy exacerbated by COVID-19 infection,” the authors write.

This study was observational and “cannot draw reliable conclusions regarding causative relationships or underlying mechanisms.”

Related Articles:

Autonomic dysfunction, small fiber neuropathy and Lyme disease

Femoral neuropathy and Lyme disease

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy resolved with antibiotics

References:
  1. Johns Hopkins Medicine. Neurology and Neurosurgery. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/neurology_neurosurgery/
  2. Novak P, Felsenstein D, Mao C, Octavien NR, Zubcevik N. Association of small fiber neuropathy and post treatment Lyme disease syndrome. PLoS One. 2019;14(2):e0212222. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0212222
  3. Resolution of Pain in the Absence of Nerve Regeneration in Small Fiber Neuropathy Following Treatment of Lyme Disease (P06.228) Naomi Feuer, Armin Alaedini Neurology Feb 2013, 80 (7 Supplement) P06.228;
  4. Shouman K, Vanichkachorn G, Cheshire WP, et al. Autonomic dysfunction following COVID-19 infection: an early experience. Clin Auton Res. Apr 16 2021;doi:10.1007/s10286-021-00803-8

_________________

**Comment**

For pain we have also found gabapentin to be extremely helpful as well as LDN, CBD, and MSM.  I’ve also used lidocaine patches with good success as well as a pain cream you can make yourself either with or without DMSO, which is a very powerful pain killer but please read and learn about it before using. You can also purchase ready-made DMSO creams but realize they are often stored in plastic and have other ingredients that are potentially harmful. The plastic issue is important because DMSO is a carrier/penetrating agent which will absorb/penetrate anything in or around it.

For more on small fiber neuropathy and Lyme/MSIDS:

Category:

Lyme, Pain Management, research, Treatment, Viruses

Comments Off on Small Fiber Neuropathy in Lyme Disease & COVID

Fauci Torched by 16 Scientists on COVID Origin & He Finally Admits Natural Immunity Gives a “Considerable Degree of Immunity”

September 23, 2021

https://www.lifezette.com/2021/09/sixteen-top-scientists-torch-fauci-in-scathing-medical-journal-article

Sixteen Top Scientists Torch Fauci In Scathing Medical Journal Article

Fauci is running out of allies

By

Excerpts:

Now, a group of scientists that includes Jacques van Helden of Aix-Marseille University in France, Richard Ebright of Rutgers University, and 14 others have published a new article in The Lancet calling out Fauci and his apologists’ unscientific Fake News “which claimed overwhelming support for the hypothesis that the novel coronavirus causing the COVID-19 pandemic originated in wildlife.”

“The authors associated any alternative view with conspiracy theories by stating: ‘We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.’” these scientists wrote. “The statement has imparted a silencing effect on the wider scientific debate, including among science journalists.”

(See link for article)

https://www.lifezette.com/2021/09/fauci-admits-natural-immunity-after-recovery-from-covid-gives-a-considerable-degree-of-immunity

Fauci Admits Natural Immunity After Recovery From COVID Gives a “Considerable Degree of Immunity”

The real question is, why such a forceful push for the jab if natural immunity works so well?

By

Head vaccine pusher Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Jake Tapper on Sunday and did something shocking, he actually admitted people who get infected with COVID and recover have a “considerable degree of immunity.”

In a rare moment of journalism for Tapper, he asked Fauci why Biden’s vaxx mandate, “has to apply to people that have had COVID? Given that they have some protection already?” (See link for article)

___________________

**Comment**

True to form, Fauci then casts doubt on natural immunity by implying it may not be durable, and that’s why everyone, regardless of health status or previous infection needs a jab in the arm with a product he has a vested interest in.

It is a lie that these injections, which aren’t even vaccines, are “safe and effective“.  Similarly with Lyme/MSIDS, corrupt public health ‘authorities’, and Big Pharma have been busy manipulating data to derive their predetermined outcome that bolsters their accepted narrative that our only salvation is in the jab.

Fauci lies further by stating that those who have recovered from COVID increase their protection by getting the jab. In fact, reality paints a far starker picture.

Those who get the jab after infection often end up with severe COVID requiring hospitalization, and some even die.

We were warned about ADE a long time ago and it is coming to pass.

The need for a “needle in every arm” mantra has drowned out the truth of natural immunity and the fact there are effective, safe, cheap treatments for COVID.

The article points out that a recent study out of Israel showed:

  • recovered patients are 13 times less likely to be infected than those who have Pfizer jabs
  • those who were double jabbed were 5.96 times more likely to be infected and 7.13 times more likely to experience symptoms than those with natural immunity after recovery
The data is in and it is clear: natural immunity is best, the jabs are unnecessary, ineffective, dangerous, poisonous and has caused a 46-fold increase in vaccine-related deaths.

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

Comments Off on Fauci Torched by 16 Scientists on COVID Origin & He Finally Admits Natural Immunity Gives a “Considerable Degree of Immunity”

An Appeal For An Objective, Open, And Transparent Scientific Debate About the Origin of SARS-CoV-2

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02019-5/fulltext

An appeal for an objective, open, and transparent scientific debate about the origin of SARS-CoV-2

Published:September 17, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02019-5
On July 5, 2021, a Correspondence was published in The Lancet called “Science, not speculation, is essential to determine how SARS-CoV-2 reached humans”.
The letter recapitulates the arguments of an earlier letter (published in February, 2020) by the same authors,which claimed overwhelming support for the hypothesis that the novel coronavirus causing the COVID-19 pandemic originated in wildlife. The authors associated any alternative view with conspiracy theories by stating: “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin”. The statement has imparted a silencing effect on the wider scientific debate, including among science journalists.
The 2021 letter did not repeat the proposition that scientists open to alternative hypotheses were conspiracy theorists, but did state: “We believe the strongest clue from new, credible, and peer-reviewed evidence in the scientific literature is that the virus evolved in nature, while suggestions of a laboratory leak source of the pandemic remain without scientifically validated evidence that directly supports it in peer-reviewed scientific journals”. In fact, this argument could literally be reversed. As will be shown below, there is no direct support for the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2, and a laboratory-related accident is plausible.
There is so far no scientifically validated evidence that directly supports a natural origin. Among the references cited in the two letters by Calisher and colleagues,, all but one simply show that SARS-CoV-2 is phylogenetically related to other betacoronaviruses. The fact that the causative agent of COVID-19 descends from a natural virus is widely accepted, but this does not explain how it came to infect humans. The question of the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2—ie, the final virus and host before passage to humans—was expressly addressed in only one highly cited opinion piece, which supports the natural origin hypothesis, but suffers from a logical fallacy:it opposes two hypotheses—laboratory engineering versus zoonosis—wrongly implying that there are no other possible scenarios. The article then provides arguments against the laboratory engineering hypothesis, which are not conclusive for the following reasons. First, it assumes that the optimisation of the receptor binding domain for human ACE2 requires prior knowledge of the adaptive mutations, whereas selection in cell culture or animal models would lead to the same effect. Second, the absence of traces of reverse-engineering systems does not preclude genome editing, which is performed with so-called seamless techniques.,
Finally, the absence of a previously known backbone is not a proof, since researchers can work for several years on viruses before publishing their full genome (this was the case for RaTG13, the closest known virus, which was collected in 2013 and published in 2020).
Based on these indirect and questionable arguments, the authors conclude in favour of a natural proximal origin. In the last part of the article, they briefly evoke selection during passage (ie, experiments aiming to test the capacity of a virus to infect cell cultures or model animals) and acknowledge the documented cases of laboratory escapes of SARS-CoV, but they dismiss this scenario, based on the argument that the strong similarity between receptor binding domains of SARS-CoV-2 and pangolins provides a more parsimonious explanation of the specific mutations. However, the pangolin hypothesis has since been abandoned,, , , so the whole reasoning should be re-evaluated.
Although considerable evidence supports the natural origins of other outbreaks (eg, Nipah, MERS, and the 2002–04 SARS outbreak) direct evidence for a natural origin for SARS-CoV-2 is missing. After 19 months of investigations, the proximal progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 is still lacking. Neither the host pathway from bats to humans, nor the geographical route from Yunnan (where the viruses most closely related to SARS-CoV-2 have been sampled) to Wuhan (where the pandemic emerged) have been identified. More than 80,000 samples collected from Chinese wildlife sites and animal farms all proved negative.
In addition, the international research community has no access to the sites, samples, or raw data. Although the Joint WHO-China Study concluded that the laboratory origin was “extremely unlikely”,WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared that all hypotheses remained on the table including that of a laboratory leak.
A research-related origin is plausible. Two questions need to be addressed: virus evolution and introduction into the human population. Since July, 2020, several peer-reviewed scientific papers have discussed the likelihood of a research-related origin of the virus. Some unusual features of the SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence suggest that they may have resulted from genetic engineering,, an approach widely used in some virology labs.
Alternatively, adaptation to humans might result from undirected laboratory selection during serial passage in cell cultures or laboratory animals,, , including humanised mice.Mice genetically modified to display the human receptor for entry of SARS-CoV-2 (ACE2) were used in research projects funded before the pandemic, to test the infectivity of different virus strains.
Laboratory research also includes more targeted approaches such as gain-of-function experiments relying on chimeric viruses to test their potential to cross species barriers.,
A research-related contamination could result from contact with a natural virus during field collection, transportation from the field to a laboratory,characterisation of bats and bat viruses in a laboratory, or from a non-natural virus modified in a laboratory. There are well-documented cases of pathogen escapes from laboratories., , ,
Field collection, field survey, and in-laboratory research on potential pandemic pathogens require high-safety protections and a strong and transparent safety culture. However, experiments on SARS-related coronaviruses are routinely performed at biosafety level 2,, which complies with the recommendations for viruses infecting non-human animals, but is inappropriate for experiments that might produce human-adapted viruses by effects of selection or oriented mutations.
Overwhelming evidence for either a zoonotic or research-related origin is lacking: the jury is still out. On the basis of the current scientific literature, complemented by our own analyses of coronavirus genomes and proteins,, , , , , we hold that there is currently no compelling evidence to choose between a natural origin (ie, a virus that has evolved and been transmitted to humans solely via contact with wild or farmed animals) and a research-related origin (which might have occurred at sampling sites, during transportation or within the laboratory, and might have involved natural, selected, or engineered viruses).
An evidence-based, independent, and prejudice-free evaluation will require an international consultation of high-level experts with no conflicts of interest, from various disciplines and countries; the mandate will be to establish the different scenarios, and the associated hypotheses, and then to propose protocols, methods, and required data in order to elucidate the question of SARS-CoV-2’s origin. Beyond this issue, it is important to continue debating about the risk–benefit balance of current practices of field and laboratory research, including gain-of-function experiments, as well as the human activities contributing to zoonotic events.
Scientific journals should open their columns to in-depth analyses of all hypotheses. As scientists, we need to evaluate all hypotheses on a rational basis, and to weigh their likelihood based on facts and evidence, devoid of speculation concerning possible political impacts. Contrary to the first letter published in The Lancet by Calisher and colleagues,we do not think that scientists should promote “unity” (“We support the call from the Director-General of WHO to promote scientific evidence and unity over misinformation and conjecture”).
As shown above, research-related hypotheses are not misinformation and conjecture. More importantly, science embraces alternative hypotheses, contradictory arguments, verification, refutability, and controversy. Departing from this principle risks establishing dogmas, abandoning the essence of science, and, even worse, paving the way for conspiracy theories. Instead, the scientific community should bring this debate to a place where it belongs: the columns of scientific journals.,
JvH, CDB, ED, and JH contributed equally. They wrote the first version of the manuscript, integrated the other authors’ modifications, and managed the interactions with the editors. All the other authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript and acknowledged the latest version. We declare no competing interests.
__________________
**Comment**
All I can say is “AMEN.”
These rational voices are desperately needed as mob mentality is growing – particularly in medicine and science with more & more articles shaming and attacking doctors who depart from the accepted narrative. There are also calls for these doctors to be sanctioned by medical boards. There is a push for “consensus” based medicine which will effectively stop all progressive thought and progress, and will punish those who think for themselves or have an original thought. 
We are living through perilous times where freedom of thought and speech is being threatened daily.
For more:

Nobel Prize Winner Dr Luc Montagnier states:

  • SARS-CoV-2 appears to be a benign bat coronavirus modified to integrate spike proteins that allows the virus to enter human cells by attaching to ACE-2 receptors
  • The virus also appears to have been modified to integrate an envelope protein from HIV called GP141, which tends to impair the immune system. A third modification appears to involve nanotechnology, which allows the virus to remain airborne longer

Cellular and molecular microbiologist, Dr. Judy Mikoviz also believes COVID-19 is a product of human manipulation:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/05/04/retroviral-lyme-msids-role-in-covid-19-facemasks-are-immunosuppressive/

She states:

  • COVID-19 — the disease — is not caused by SARS-CoV-2 alone, but rather that it’s the result of a combination of SARS-CoV-2 and XMRVs (human gammaretroviruses)

  • SARS-CoV-2 also appears to have been manipulated to include components of HIV that destroys immune function along with XMRVs

Category:

research, Viruses

Comments Off on An Appeal For An Objective, Open, And Transparent Scientific Debate About the Origin of SARS-CoV-2