RE: 666 - The Beast Unleashed as Pestilence
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
"Unfortunately, Dr. Campbell repeats the disproved theory that the Wuhan wet market was the vector for the initial introduction of the virus. The Lancet disproved this weeks ago." I just read through the Lancet article and I couldn't find a smoking gun, other than that patient zero had no connection with the market that they could find. This doesn't disprove the zoonotic origin theory, it just means that the market may not be the origin, or that they don't know his connection with it. The market does seem to be the place where the initial outbreak began though. With an R0 of 5 or 6 it may be impossible to pin down exactly where this guy got it from, especially considering how little was understood about the danger at that time. People weren't exactly being cautious at that point. He and others were probably spreading it for at least a week while asymptomatic. While writing this, I went and checked James Lions-Weiler's (the guy who was quoted as proving the engineered-virus hypothesis) Twitter feed and he refutes the engineered-virus hypothesis in this recent video here. I've been skeptical of this notion since day 1 because of something that Martin Armstrong pointed out early on in the outbreak, which is that the fatality rates are much too small to be engineered bioweapons. He figures that 30+% fatality rate would be necessary as an effective bioweapon. This is not to say that it disproves government mishandling of viruses in labs, but we don't exactly have reliable information to that effect.
Of particular concern to me in all of this isn't the origin though, it's the combination of that large R0 number and the apparent fatality rate when you look at the data found here that you were so kind as to share with us. One further thing that adds some more weight to the fear factor about the above data is that in that video above by Dr. John Campbell, he shows from the cited research paper that the time between hospital admission and discharge vs. hospital admission and death is roughly the same at 11.5 and 11.2 days respectively. What this means is that the real-time data that we're seeing should be a pretty accurate reflection of the fatality rate when taking the number of deaths and dividing by the number of recovered. Last I checked that number was just a bit over 9%. The silver lining here is that now that strategies have been developed and time has progressed, the fatality rate seems to have shrunk considerably since I first brought this up on your blog when it seemed to be closer to 26%. The converse to that is that 9+% is a near-literal decimation of any populations that are infected with the virus.
My hope here is that I'm missing some critical piece of information and that the rate really is only around 2%. As usual, the biggest problem in all of this is how close to the chest they're keeping all of their information. As a result I'm at a loss as to where they're coming up with their fatality rates given the data that they themselves are presenting.
Regarding the Lancet article, they unambiguously state patient zero had no connection to the Wuhan wet market. That is a smoking gun regarding the Wuhan wet market origin story. He didn't get it there, and he is supposedly patient zero. Therefore it came from somewhere else, even if it did later infect folks at that market and thereafter spread from there.
Further, I have previously cited MRCA work published on Jan. 25, 2020 by Kristian Anderson on Virological.org that pointed to strong evidence that the virus entered the population once, and was transmitted from human to human since then. This does not support a Zoonotic source, because Zoonotic sources tend to infect people continuously during an outbreak. This virus didn't do that.
This does support the lab origin theory. Dr. James Lyons-Weiler did initially suspect - not claim with certainty - that the specific form of the virus indicated lab origins. He later discovered a zoonotic source for the specific motif he found suspect, and now says SARS-2-CoV must therefore be of natural origins. However, that is not logically sound, because that motif he finds diagnostic could well have been part of the gain of function research in the potential lab source.
Furthermore, numerous researchers linked with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, China's BSL-4 lab, were doing gain of function work at other labs with viruses extremely similar to SARS-2-CoV. Labs in Canada, infamous for samples being smuggled by Chinese researchers to WIV, North Carolina, and Australia were all hosting researchers attached to WIV who were working on related gain of function. It is difficult to avoid the suspicion that those researchers continued that research at WIV. Further yet, the Institute of Military Medicine, Nanjin Command, The Chinese Center for Disease Control (less than 300 meters from the Wuhan wet market) and all other Chinese labs are under the centralized control of the CCP.
Once research by any of them was attained, it would have been shared with all of them, since they were all under the one umbrella, and were working together to attain the goals of the CCP.
The Chinese author of the paper that specifically found a lab origin likely, since the Wuhan wet market could not have been the source, Botao Xiao, worked for the Chinese government himself, at the South China University of Technology. If you're aware of what happened to Dr. Li Wenliang, the other seven doctors that initially joined him in sounding the alarm, or Fang Bin, whose video revealed the bodies stacking up in the hospitals, who was later seized by force and taken to quarantine in unknown parts, never to be seen again, you will have some idea of what Botao Xiao must have expected for publishing his paper.
Researchgate censored it quickly, but someone archived it first, which is why we know it was published. That he would publish that paper given what would certainly happen to him for doing so indicates to me that he had the strongest confidence in the lab origin of SARS-2-CoV, and that it was worth his life to warn researchers globally so that they could better study the pathogen, maybe finding solutions more quickly, and saving perhaps millions of lives. No lesser motivation could have impelled him to sacrifice his career, and probably his life to publish that paper, IMHO.
I find the above compelling evidence of the likelihood of lab origins, and the nature of the censorship, propaganda, arrest and disappearance of dissenters from the propaganda, ubiquitous from official sources, and advocated by the WHO, is actually corroborating evidence. The fact that they're lying means they're hiding something, and their targets are folks claiming SARS-2-CoV is likely lab engineered. It is impossible to not conclude that's what they're hiding.
I have never claimed SARS-2-CoV was a bioweapon. I have said it was likely to be engineered, just like vaccines are lab engineered. Dr. Lyons-Weiler's initial suspicion was exactly that, not that it was a bioweapon.
Given the impending quarantine of all of Europe, the USA, the Middle East, Africa, and the rest of Asia, global government will be instantly a fact across all societies. What is the purpose of a bioweapon? To win a war for political power. Claiming that a bioweapon must have a certain Case Fatality Rate to be effective is clearly overlooking more relevant effects that a bioweapon can have.
I have said I believe this pandemic is the proximate cause the globalists will seize on to fully implement Agenda 2030's population goals, whether the virus kills billions or not. Once people are locked up, without freedom of action, weapons, information, or any power at all, the victors of this final World War will do what they want to achieve with their victory.
This explains to me why the WHO has continually advocated for policies that keep introducing SARS-2-CoV to new populations, has published impossibly low R0 and CFR rates, and refuses to even use the word pandemic now, as all these lies lull people into a false sense of security and keep them from undertaking rational action to preserve their lives and freedom.
SARS-2-CoV appears to be the most effective bioweapon that could possibly be devised to take over the world.
Your assessment may differ. We'll find out soon enough. I hope to God I'm wrong.
Edit: I wanted to add a response to your comment about the official data. It's wrong. It cannot possibly be true, because China did not have personnel, facilities, or supplies to collect that data, and also because China has provably and continuously been censoring it's people, like Li Wenliang, Fang Bin, and now Botao Xiao. It clearly has no intention at all of releasing factual data, and it couldn't if it wanted to. All of the calculations based on false data are false.
As best I have found The Lancet estimated the R0 to be ~4.08, and the CFR to be about 15%. That fatality rate seems supported by what Iran has reported. The Lancet has also calculated that ~50% of folks that require intensive care survive it, and that about 20% of victims require intensive care. That's 10% CFR right there, even if no one else ever died. We know many, many people are dying without being treated at all in hospital, so the CFR is necessarily higher than that.
The lack of connection between Patient 0 and the wet market may be a smoking gun for the wet market theory, but not the zoonotic one. My mention of the wet market being a source of outbreak was to point out how easily human error and misunderstanding could easily be the explanation for their error. We need nothing more than this mistake for the authorities to want to cover it up. They don't want to be made to look incompetent, at pretty much all cost.
I'm still of the mind that the continued missteps by Chinese, global and US authorities in the containment of this virus boils down to incompetence borne of bureaucracy, hierarchy and perceived duty. Having spent most of my early life in institutions (K-12 schools and the university system) and part of my professional life in academic research, I don't have a lot of respect for these types of institutions and how people tend to behave within them. They tend to be rigidly and stupidly hierarchical, and cross-pollinating this with the Southeast Asian cultural propensity to rigid hierarchy, it's a recipe for disaster. This is why Asian countries have much higher rates of plane crashes. The copilots will literally die along with all of his passengers before contradicting a captain who is acting in error. While some individuals within these institutions may by themselves be the most intelligent and competent people around, the collective fruits of institutional labor are often in opposition to those individual talents and counterproductive. I'm constantly reminded of the tunnel catastrophe scene in Atlas Shrugged as I'm watching this outbreak unfold. Furthermore, I find that if more than one person knows a secret, it's all but guaranteed to become widely known at some point, meaning that I have a hard time believing that a carefully planned secret mission to release and spread the disease is unfolding here without some self-interested whistle blower not having come forward. The most likely explanation continues to be incompetence IMO.
Forgive my ignorance on this point, but you say that zoonotic sources tend to infect people continuously during an outbreak, as opposed to what we're seeing with COVID-19. Could you elaborate on that? I can't shake from my mind the zoonotic source as being a strong possibility given what I'm seeing here so far. Why couldn't patient zero have eaten or otherwise come into contact with a wild animal and then subsequently started spreading the disease?
The authorities that have been releasing this misinformation likely view themselves as the good guys, and they likely view the rest of us as masses of mentally incapable cattle that need to be herded for our own good. Their misinformation campaign then would be to prevent a metaphorical stampede that would exacerbate the problem. Obviously I disagree with their viewpoint, but I understand it because I've spent a lot of time compulsorily listening to people who think this way. In their narcissism, they would never be able to see themselves as unqualified to succeed at their task, and as a result they would never afford the masses of people in the world with the dignity of truth.
Regarding whether the political class will seize upon this opportunity, well I see that they already are. Every single one of them is trying to spin it in such a way that it will support whatever narrative they happen to be pushing. I just can't bring myself to believe any of these clowns have originated such a conspiracy requiring the work of so many and continue to keep it secret. The powers that be are more like opportunistic buzzards eating off the carcass of road kill than lions making the kill here. I also know that not one of them wants to be seen as not doing enough to stop it now that the general public seems to be starting to take this pandemic seriously, so maybe (hopefully) some competence will begin to materialize.
I think you and I are 100% in agreement on one thing though, and it's the danger that COVID-19 represents. This is one scary mf'ing bug and I'm getting a bit spooked about it now that they unleashed it upon the California public with their "rescue" of the passengers on the quarantined cruise liner. I'm worried it's too late to stop it from spreading uncontrolled in the lower 48 now.
We agree on many things, and I am not confident I know the source of infection. I use language carefully, and say that 'it is likely' rather than 'it is certain.'
While a dead animal used as bushmeat can be a single point of introduction, it is uncommon that harvesting of species for food isn't more often repeated than a singular event. If the species is a reservoir of disease, the repeated harvest and consumption of that species repeatedly infects people. Mosquitoes are vectors for Malaria, Yellow Fever, Dengue, and many other diseases, and each infection is a new introduction from the zoonotic source. Lyme Disease is only transmitted to people by ticks. Each time someone gets Lyme disease, it is a new introduction from a tick.
Some diseases with zoonotic sources aren't even transmissible person to person, but only from the animal vector, like Lyme disease. Obviously diseases that can't be spread from person to person require continued re-introduction from the animal source every time someone falls ill.
Since the source of the initial infection with SARS-2-CoV was not the Wuhan wet market - it could not have been, because patient zero did not go there - it must have been something else. As Botao Xiao points out the most likely source geographically in the city of Wuhan are the labs. There just aren't many sources of bat viruses besides those labs in the city, where patient zero was infected.
Dogs or cats roaming the city weren't the source. There are no bat colonies in Wuhan. Additionally, no bat species has been shown to carry SARS-2-CoV. It's novel. Only people are known to have it presently. Speculation that it came from a zoonotic source is based on some unique mutation event that coincided with patient zero being infected. How likely is that compared to accidental release from the lab(s) that made it?
The labs were thick with bat CoV. This reality makes the labs the most likely source of SARS-2-CoV, which is largely derived from bat viruses, although different parts of the virus are derived from different bat species from different geographical locations, and one part seems to be derived from a Malaysian pangolin species, which don't often have opportunity to interact with Big City Bats in Wuhan. The labs provably were working with these different bat viruses, and doing gain of function work on them, there and at other labs globally where researchers from WIV also worked, like Canada, Australia, and North Carolina in the US.
Here's a pic of submissions to the NCBI by labs of sequences relevant to this issue. The branching structure indicates how closely related the sequences are. As you can see, WIV was working hard with the sources of sequences found in SARS-2-CoV.
IMG source - JamesLyonsWeiler.com
It is notable that during and immediately after the SARS outbreak in 2003, SARS was repeatedly accidentally released from lab(s) working on it in China. There are claims that people working at the labs (not necessarily the researchers themselves, but support staff) sometimes took research animals and sold them at the wet market to augment their pay, instead of incinerating them safely. All in all, these various factors make the labs, one, the other, or both of them, the most likely source of SARS-2-CoV.