Today’s Science Magazine describes how the NIH is seeking information on the specific SARS-Coronaviruses held at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) prior to the Covid-19 pandemic. NIH had funded the Wuhan lab using the ‘non-profit’ EcoHealth Alliance (EHA,whose CEO Peter Daszac earned $400,000 yearly). The complete role of EcoHealth Alliance has yet to be fully explained, and NIH terminated its grant several months ago. Now NIH says EHA can have the money back, but only if it provides information on the provenance of coronaviruses in the Wuhan lab:
“Last month, NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research Michael Lauer sent the EcoHealth Alliance a letter stating the agency was reinstating the grant, but also instantly suspending it again pending the completion of certain actions. (ScienceInsider has now independently reviewed a copy of the 8 July letter.) Among the conditions included:
· The group must arrange for an outside inspection of WIV and its records “with specific attention to addressing the question of whether WIV staff had SARS-CoV-2 in their possession prior to December 2019,” Lauer wrote. · The nonprofit must explain purported restrictions at WIV including “diminished cell-phone traffic in October 2019, and the evidence that there may have been roadblocks surrounding the facility from October 14-19, 2019.” Clearly the US National Institutes of Health suspects SARS-Cov-2 may have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Yesterday the documentary Plandemic 2 was released, in which I said I believed SARS-CoV-2 came from a lab. Today I have been attacked by the so-called “fact-checkers” for being misleading and spreading false information and conspiracy theories. Yet besides the NIH, Newsweek, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and various journals, magazines, and web pages have discussed the likely lab origin of SARS-CoV-2. I would suggest that the real conspirators are trying to cover up a lab origin, so they can continue their gain-of-function (a metaphor to obfuscate what used to be known as biological warfare) research, endangering the planet.
Paradoxically, the argument being used against me by each fact-checking site I have investigated is one I debunked back in March and April. The argument has been widely criticized as nonsensical, and furnishes evidence of a conspiracy to impose the “natural origin” story. Read those 2 old posts of mine.
Even back in March, Nature magazine wrote, “scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus.”
Bottom line: there is no direct evidence that the virus came from a lab, but there are many aspects of its genome that are not explained by natural selection. I have discussed this at length in my blog. There is also no direct evidence it did not come from a lab. It is an open question. But I am not allowed to tell an audience I “believe” the virus came from a lab. Where is the conspiracy?