Covid-18, Omicron and Some Things That Need Explaining
Was SARS-CoV-2 made in a lab? Was it active prior to December of 2019? Is Omicron older than the Wuhan strain?
People want to understand some of the hypotheses about the origins of SARS-CoV-2. However, any discussion about Covid ultimately involves genetics, virology and many other scientific fields. So it can get complicated quickly.
My objective here is to provide a framework that allows for the average person to understand one of the key Covid hypotheses: that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab PRIOR to 2019.
I will try to stay high-level and provide links to much more detailed information. Towards the end I will try to synthesize a bit and even offer my own opinions based on my observations.
There are at least two camps of internet sleuths digging into the origins of SARS-CoV-2. One camp thinks the “leak” happened in the Fall of 2019. This camp is primarily made up of the #DRASTIC groups (they had a bit of a “breakup” last year so each tribe centers around either Yuri Deigin or Billy Bostickson). The second sleuthing group is less organized and puts the origins for SC2 into 2018 or earlier. The best analysis for this hypothesis comes from The Ethical Skeptic (TES).
Glossary of Terms
Phylogenetic Trees and the Trouble with Omicron
If Omicron was earlier why did it show up later?
India and Malawi
ACE2 Receptor - present in epithelial cells, it acts as a cellular doorway – a receptor – for a virus
BLAST - the US government repository for genomic and proteomic sequences
GoF - Gain-of-function (GOF) involves experimentation that aims to increase the transmissibility and/or virulence (deadliness) of pathogens
HIV - a virus that attacks cells that help the body fight infection, making a person more vulnerable to other infections and diseases
SEB - a toxin produced by the bacterium Staphylococcus aureus
Spike Protein - small hook on the SARS virus that binds to ACE2 receptors on the outer surface of human cells
To aid in the protection against viruses, scientists look to tinker with existing viruses to make them more deadly. By doing this you can test treatments, or, say, a new vaccine. In order to create or modify a virus you need a mechanism. Gain of Function (GoF) is that mechanism and it involves a series of methods and technologies that allow for scientists to make new pathogens in a lab. GoF has been going on for quite some time. And most of the recent coordination seems to come back to just one guy–Tony Fauci. But he has had an army of people and institutions at his fingertips, including Peter Daszak. And Daszak has not been quiet about his GoF efforts and the dangerous collaborations with the CCP:
There are lots of good reasons to believe that SARS-CoV-2 resulted from human tinkering known as GoF. But let me hit what I think are some of the highlights:
HIV-inserts. This virus possesses three proteins that were previously found in the virus that causes AIDS. These have been inserted into the spike protein. Now, this makes some sense as the work Daszak and Fauci were previously obsessed with was an HIV vaccine. And they got lots of help over the years working on various mechanisms to “use” parts of HIV.
The odds of getting all of these HIV elements into one virus through a naturally occurring combination of mutation and recombinations is too far fetched to be believed. “In theory nothing is impossible in science, medicine or genomics. A SARS virus emerging naturally with 3 HIV inserts at its binding sites and also containing a furin cleavage site that doesn’t exist in nature but does exist in a Moderna patent… that’s seriously crazy talk.”
#CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG. What the heck is that? That is a problem for Moderna and something known in the Twittersphere as #ModernaGate. That is a 19 nucleotide sequence found only in two places: the SARS-CoV-2 genome AND a Moderna patent from 2018. Don’t believe me? Just BLAST it. “In order for that sequence to have arisen in that virus, the virus which was manufactured with its HIV inserts, had to have been infected into patented cell lines supplied by Moderna that had that unique sequence not seen in any other virus.”
SEB toxin. The Wuhan strain of SARS-CoV-2, along with it’s vaccine sister mRNA spike, contains a very suspect feature–a toxin normally produced by bacteria that cause Staph infections. Somehow, this toxin magically evolved (if we are to believe the evildoers) within the spike of the virus, along with the 3 HIV components.
What a coincidence “The binding epitope on S harbors a sequence motif unique to SARS-CoV-2 (not present in other SARS-related coronaviruses), which is highly similar in both sequence and structure to the bacterial superantigen staphylococcal enterotoxin B” pnas.org/content/117/41…
Note: If you were to design a pathogen, it would make sense to include a lethal element (SEB) and an immunosuppressive element (HIV). It starts to get interesting doesn’t it?
Another note: it is a little curious that this SEB part of the spike protein seems to be attenuated or, even, “turned off” in the Omicron variant. More on that later.
The Kristian Andersen Email. Look at the date. Look at the recipient. Generally speaking, “inconsistent with evolution” means man-made.
Math. Add all these things up and it is just not mathematically possible that all these genetic anomalies happen together naturally. The Ethical Skeptic puts it at 4 Unvigintillion to one.
Phylogenetic Trees and the Trouble with Omicron
Note: From this point forward, I am going to be referring to the Wuhan strain (B.1 to Alpha to Delta) and Omicron as if they are distinct from each other.
Omicron is a problem. It appears to be older than Delta and maybe even the Wuhan strain altogether. And if it is older, then that is even more evidence of some kind of human intervention, including GoF.
People much smarter than me are trying to map backwards from all that we know about the virus and its many mutations as a way to figure out the date(s) of origin. Concurrently, sleuths look at circumstantial evidence to corroborate any date hypothesis. For example, the #DRASTIC team has done a good job of looking at Wuhan hospital data around the time of a suspected autumn 2019 leak. The Ethical Skeptic has looked at abnormal CO2 emissions rates in China.
But there is also just genetic science. And most say that Omicron seems genetically “older” than the Delta strain of SARS-CoV-2.
So there are two main camps: those that see Omicron as a derivative of the Wuhan strain and those that believe it is either the parent of Wuhan or the sister of (which would mean that Omicron and Wuhan (B.1) would have a “common ancestor”). Like I mentioned earlier, unique to Omicron is that the SEB component is weaker when compared to Wuhan—it appears to have attenuated. As viruses evolve they often become weaker. This led many to just assume originally that Omicron was a post-Delta derivative. But that seems less and less likely at this point.
There are two solid pieces that cover, in depth, early-Omicron hypotheses. The first is a very readable substack by The 21st Century Salonnière. The second is the manifesto by The Ethical Skeptic. They have some similarities and some differences. Here is a summary:
Both look at the proportion of the Silent/unimportant (S) Mutations versus the Functional/useful (N) Mutations. In short, the genes of organism mutate over time and Omicron shows a certain amount of “useful” N mutations but not nearly enough silent (S) mutations. For scientists, this is a tell that this virus has been tampered with. It’s older than Delta.
Both attempt to work backwards to a date, based on the phylogenetic tree.
The Salonnière along with most of the #DRASTIC crew work Omicron backwards to around June of 2020.
IMO: omicron was collected&frozen ~06/2020, thawed ~04/2021, then passaged with various convalescent/vaccinated sera in vitro or rebuild as a synthetic polymutant. Made to investigate antibody resistance or as a 2nd generation vaccine. Then likely tested in hACE2 transgenic mice.
The Ethical Skeptic, on the other hand, puts Omicron (or it’s ancestor) back to early 2018.
The Salonnière article, Kevin McKernan, and most of the #DRASTIC crew have leaned toward mouse theories for the weird delay in Omicron’s evolution. These suggest that a mouse host was used at some point in the development of Omicron and then it either: went into a freezer (literally), went into a single immunocompromised person where it “froze” evolutionarily, or was used by Big Pharma in the development of monoclonal antibodies or Molnupiravir (ivermectin competitor). Many of these hypotheses can be found in The Salonnière substack.
TES doesn’t spend much time on the mouse hypotheses. He not only maps the phylogenetic tree back to early 2018, but he also leverages lots of other circumstantial evidence to peg a “common ancestor,” sometimes referred to as proto-Omicron, as the cause of lots of flu-like illness and increased all-cause mortality throughout China’s geographical neighbors and its African trade partners.
If Omicron was earlier, why did it show up later?
This question has plagued the Omicron debate since people started realizing that Omicron could not have descended from Delta. We have briefly touched on three of the dominant hypotheses already: the freezer hypothesis, the immunocompromised host hypothesis, and the Big Pharma research (Molnupiravir) hypothesis.
But there are other hypotheses. For example, what was up with “Vape Lung” in 2019? Could that have been SARS-CoV-2? Possibly even Omicron?
TES and @ewoodhouse7 have lots of charts demonstrating that we could have had Covid much earlier and we would not have known–because it would have been categorized as influenza or an influenza-like illness (ILI). In other words, maybe SARS-CoV-2 or, specifically Omicron, was circulating prior to 2020, but we simply weren’t looking for it.
A sleeper theory is that Omicron was present, especially in Africa, Asia and Australia/New Zealand, but was driven away through Viral Interference (VI) once the more lethal Wuhan strain showed up. Obviously, the VI theory of Influenza (where’s flu?) has been going around for quite some time. So if the Wuhan strain can cause VI on Influenza why not also Omicron?
But this leads to a different question: If the Wuhan strain was causing VI on Influenza and Omicron, why wasn’t Australia suffering from the Wuhan strain? This is a tough one. The best I can come up with is that Omicron provides super-immunity. But I digress. Let’s keep going, shall we?
In early 2018, Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance applied for a $14M grant from the DoD’s very own DARPA for Gain of Function work. They were very clear in what they intended: bat sampling, virus characterization, high-risk experiments, captive trials on bats, and large scale inoculation of bats in Yunnan to “DEFUSE” a potential SARSr-CoV spillover.
This is very suspicious. Add it to the list of data points leading to a pet project by evildoers.
FYI, they did not win the grant. But it would not be uncommon to ask for grant money after projects are well under way.
India and Malawi
By May of 2020, India already had 10M people who had antibodies for SARS-CoV-2. "From the first serosurvey in May and June 2020, when one in 140 adults had antibodies for the virus…” (India has nearly 1.4 Billion people) Even if you don’t extrapolate this to the children, you still have millions of people who already had Covid prior to the world-wide outbreak. Keep in mind, Covid-19 was not a thing in India until later that summer.
How did India have millions of recovered from Covid if they had not had Covid yet?
Meanwhile, before the summer of 2021, according to recent research, 80% of the population of Malawi had recovered from Covid. Malawi has a population of over 21 million people. However, they have had fewer than 85K documented cases of Covid, most of those recorded AFTER that study. How did 80% of the population of Malawi recover from Covid before Malawi had Covid? As of early February 2022, according to the CDC, the US is still only at 34%!
Dr. David Martin was kinda destroyed by Kevin McKernan’s debunk. However, we don’t need the viral engineering to go back into the 1990s. Tony Fauci has been at this for a long time. Fauci and Francis Collins were promoting their GoF work publicly as far back as 2011 and Obama shut the funding down in 2014. (But did it shut down? NGO’s have their purpose don’t cha know)
I see no reason why much of this could not have started in 2016/17. Around that time, Moderna was a therapeutics company reluctantly transitioning to a vaccine company because “...mRNA is a tricky technology. Several major pharmaceutical companies have tried and abandoned the idea, struggling to get mRNA into cells without triggering nasty side effects.” Moderna mRNA therapies just weren’t working well. “In order to protect mRNA molecules from the body’s natural defenses, drug developers must wrap them in a protective casing. For Moderna, that meant putting its Crigler-Najjar therapy in nanoparticles made of lipids. And for its chemists, those nanoparticles created a daunting challenge: Dose too little, and you don’t get enough enzyme to affect the disease; dose too much, and the drug is too toxic for patients.”
So Moderna needed a “Hail Mary.” They decided to pivot their mRNA technology away from therapeutics and toward vaccines with the knowledge that “vaccines are not nearly as lucrative as the rare disease space that Moderna hoped to dominate.”
Just one year later Moderna patented their 19 nucleotide sequence CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG which later became a key component of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its miracle “vaccine.”
My hunch is that Moderna created a virus for a vaccine. That they had versions of the virus by 2018 at the latest. That they were testing mRNA on small populations around the world (probably Africa). That the common ancestor of Omicron has been traveling through parts of Africa and Asia for at least 3 years now (and even was starting to hit North America by 2019). I think it is very possible that Omicron and proto-Omicron provide super-immunity to the Wuhan strain. In this way, Africa, Asia and AUS/NZ would have had the milder version of SARS-CoV-2 many Hope-Simpson season curves before 2020. Their non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) would have made them look brilliant during the first years of Wuhan. However, no one was looking under the hood and testing for antibodies. Omicron could have been endemic in those regions by that point. The Wuhan strain would have found few hosts.
But this leaves many questions unanswered. In what way was Moderna connected to the CCP? How did the other pharma companies get involved? Why the dramatic videos from the CCP in January 2020? Was the Wuhan Virology Institute really the source of the “leaks” or were more Chinese labs involved? Was the virus leaked or released? Why a coordinated lockdown strategy across the West? Why embrace the talisman science of masking in direct conflict with past evidence? Why can’t any of the four vax companies make an “update” to their technology in the same amount of time as their first “vaccines”? And why were therapeutics neglected? Why were Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine torpedoed? Why have no medical schools developed a Covid treatment approach?
Ultimately, Moderna has some explaining to do. As do Fauci, Daszak, Collins, Barric and many others. At a minimum they have concealed information about their research and vaccine trials. At worst, they have committed the crime of the millennium.