UNCOVERING COVID — Part 2 — The Origin of SARS CoV-2

A half truth is a whole lie.

A significant part of uncovering the truth about Covid-19 is determining its origin. Frankly, this is one of the most controversial and polarizing topics of debate among scientists and perhaps one of the most difficult tasks on this journey of discovery. After nearly two years, the genesis of this “novel” coronavirus is far from settled, although many theories abound.

The majority of “experts” trace the origin of SARS CoV-2 — the technical name for the virus that causes Covid-19 — to one of three possible scenarios.

  1. SARS CoV-2 is a natural mutation of the original SARS virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome) that was transmitted from an animal reservoir — such as a bat — to humans in the Wuhan province of China.
  2. SARS CoV-2 is a genetically engineered virus developed under gain-of-function (GOF) research before accidentally escaping the Wuhan Institute of Virology in late fall or winter of 2019.
  3. SARS CoV-2 is a genetically engineered virus developed under gain-of-function research and subsequently was released intentionally into the human population in Wuhan, China before spreading around the world.

Many well-respected, qualified scientists and doctors land on opposite sides of the aisle, creating mixed public perception about the origin of Covid-19. For sake of simplicity, I will assume that the timeframe and location of the first SARS CoV-2 case remains relatively settled — which is late fall or early winter of 2019 in Wuhan, China.

Everything else, however, is worth closer consideration.

Theory #1 — The Wuhan Wet Market Theory

China's 'wet markets' start selling bats, dogs again: Report
Bats being sold in an Asian wet market

The mainstream narrative circulated from health authorities and news outlets from the very beginning of the outbreak was that this novel coronavirus first emerged from a wet market in Wuhan, China, where bats are sold and consumed for food. Bats and other animals, such as pigs and cats, are known to be the primary carriers of coronaviruses. Hundreds, if not thousands, of coronaviruses exist in nature. Even the common cold is a classified in the coronavirus “family,” but at least three have “jumped” from animals to humans in the past few decades, causing more severe respiratory illness. These three are SARS (2002), MERS (2012) and SARS CoV-2 (2019).

The wet-market theory has not been proven and is based upon an assumption that SARS CoV-2 mutated naturally in an animal reservoir and then spread to its first human host in Wuhan, causing what we know as the Covid-19 pandemic. Even the Lancet Journal, which is one of the most respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, released an article in September of 2020 that insisted that SARS CoV-2 originated in bats without the possibility of being genetically engineered.

The Lancet article was weak on data, however, and strong on presumption and speculation. Instead of providing adequate scientific findings, the Lancet article sounded more like a political propaganda piece written solely to discredit the possibility that SARS CoV-2 was genetically altered and released from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Still, there is one theory that can be dismissed,” author Talha Burki said in the Lancet, referring specifically to the lab-leak theory. And yet the article provides little to back up this foregone conclusion. Interestingly, the article goes on to make self-contradictory statements, using phrases like “almost certainly” and “highly unlikely.”

Besides, if you were going to create a coronavirus that can be transmitted by humans, you would almost certainly start with the first SARS virus. SARS-CoV-2 is like nothing we have seen before. It really is highly unlikely that someone created it; it is not put together from pieces we know about.

The Origin of SARS-CoV-2 — Lancet Journal, September 2020

Just listen to the language used in the quote above. This virus is like nothing we have seen before and is not put together from pieces we know about. That doesn’t sound much like a “naturally occurring” virus to me but rather leaves the door wide open for not just the possibility but the probability that the SARVS-CoV-2 virus was genetically engineered to enhance human transmission.

That is precisely why many highly-qualified doctors and virologists have shared scientific evidence that leads them to believe that this virus is not naturally occurring but rather is the result of genetic engineering through gain-of-function research.

Theory #2 — Genetic Engineering through Gain-of-Function Research

'Gain of function' research - JournalsOfIndia

This is where things get interesting. I will do my best to provide this information in a consumable portion size, but it will be challenging. I also will provide as many reference links as possible for readers to go to the sources and do their own follow-up research.

The basic theory is that the SARS CoV-2 virus is the result of genetic manipulation through specific gain-of-function (GOF) research that has been funded at least in part by grants through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and specifically Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Furthermore, tax-payer dollars have been funneled through these government agencies and third-party non-profits, such as EcoHealth Alliance, directly to the Wuhan Instituted of Virology for GOF research in China, where SARVS CoV-2 was introduced to the human population.

This scenario, at best, poses major ethical concerns and reveals a blatant conflict of professional interest with Dr. Fauci — the self-appointed arbiter of truth who has become the sole voice of scientific and medical authority on all things Covid-19 since its inception. At worst, this could be the greatest scandal in American history resulting in treasonous crimes against humanity.

Dr. Fauci said the research money went to respected Chinese scientists.
Dr. Anthony Fauci — Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infection Diseases

First I need to define gain-of-function research, which has been implemented by both private and government research agencies for decades. The following description comes from PubMed and the National Library of Medicine.

Gain-of-function (GOF) research involves experimentation that aims or is expected to (and/or, perhaps, actually does) increase the transmissibility and/or virulence of pathogens. Such research, when conducted by responsible scientists, usually aims to improve understanding of disease causing agents, their interaction with human hosts, and/or their potential to cause pandemics. The ultimate objective of such research is to better inform public health and preparedness efforts and/or development of medical countermeasures. Despite these important potential benefits, GOF research (GOFR) can pose risks regarding biosecurity and biosafety.

[PubMed — Gain of Function Research — August 2016]

So gain-of-function (GOF) research is predicated upon manipulating the genetic codes of viruses in order to create new — aka “novel” — viruses that both are more transmissible and detrimental to humans.

Just let that sink in for a minute.

Nothing could possibly go wrong here.

Gain-of-function research was deemed so risky, in fact, that the Obama administration placed a moratorium on GOF back in 2014, yet certain coronavirus projects were given exemptions under Fauci’s direction, who argued back in 2012 that the benefits of gain-of-function research outweigh the increased risk of a potential pandemic-causing lab accident.

Even President Biden himself said back in May that U.S. Intelligence officials are still investigating the possibility that Covid-19 originated from a leak at the Wuhan lab.

Follow the Money

It is no secret that Dr. Fauci and the NIAID have been in favor of GOF research for years, stating that his personal interest in GOF research was prompted by the initial SARS outbreak in 2002-03. The Pentagon alone has funneled money through EcoHealth Alliance at the tune of over $40 million since 2008 to fund threat assessment projects outside of the U.S. Judicial Watch has obtained verification from Fauci emails that “EcoHealth was allocated approximately $7.5 million over 11 years from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) to carry out its study ‘Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.’”

However, when high-ranking U.S. Congressman and medical doctor Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) began to press Fauci on his level of involvement in GOF research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Fauci vehemently denied all accusations and said that the NIAID or NIH had never awarded any grants to the Wuhan bio lab.

The documented evidence, however, was too overwhelming to deny, finally forcing Fauci to testify under oath to a House Appropriations subcommittee that a mere $600,000 in U.S. money was funneled to the Chinese lab through the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance to fund “a modest collaboration with very respectable Chinese scientists who were world experts on coronavirus” [New York Post — May, 25, 2021].

Fauci had been caught in a blatant lie, and one lie usually leads to another. After being less than honest about the amount of funding granted for research in Wuhan, Fauci doubled-down and insisted that none of these grants were used specifically for GOF research. Senator Paul, however, having gained access to Fauci’s private emails and other declassified information, provided substantial evidence that Fauci not only was lying about using taxpayer dollars to fund research at the Wuhan lab but also that he was lying about those funds being used directly for GOF research in China.

Paul, writing an op-ed in the National Review, accused Fauci of lying to Congress and the American people about his knowledge of GOF research at the Wuhan Institute.

Fact: Dr. Anthony Fauci, without a doubt, knew the National Institutes of Health (NIH) granted funds for gain-of-function research to the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab. It’s no secret that gain-of-function research has been deemed a controversial practice since its beginning. However, that hasn’t stopped the NIH from approving funding for it abroad and in the United States under Dr. Fauci’s watch.

[U.S. Senator Rand Paul — National Review, August 4, 2021]

For a more concise report on Fauci’s involvement in GOF research, you can watch Sean Hannity’s Fox News report here.

In conclusion, there is a growing consensus based on legitimate scientific evidence that the SARS CoV-2 virus was first genetically altered through GOF research using American taxpayer dollars at the direction of Dr. Fauci the National Institute of Health. Those facts alone should lead to an all-out criminal investigation of Dr. Fauci and his network of researchers. In the meantime, Dr. Fauci should immediately be thrown out of his ivory tower, removed from his pedestal, and stripped of his “authority” in providing medical advice and making policy decisions for the U.S. government.

In my next post, I will introduce you to many of the highly-qualified scientists, virologists, doctors, and experts who all concur that the genome sequence of SARS CoV-2 could not have originated by natural processes but rather was genetically engineered for efficiency.

Until then, feel free to read the following articles that support the lab-leak scenario.

The Blaze

MIT Technology Review

Wall Street Journal

2 thoughts on “UNCOVERING COVID — Part 2 — The Origin of SARS CoV-2

  1. M September 10, 2021 / 7:48 pm

    without a doubt, pants on Fire Fauci should definitely be extinguished

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s