Should we discount the laboratory origin of COVID-19?

New Paper contributed by several DRASTIC members.

“Should we discount the laboratory origin of COVID-19?” No, definitely we should not.

2 thoughts on “Should we discount the laboratory origin of COVID-19?

  1. Have you looked at the technical papers and patents surrounding the gain of function experiments? For example: “Reverse genetics with a full-length infectious cDNA of severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus. (2003) https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/100/22/12995.full.pdf

    or for example several patents like this: US-7776521-B1 filed 2007-05-14 by Centers of Disease Control and Prevention CDC, Current Assignee: Centers of Disease Control and Prevention CDC. “Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections therewith. Immune stimulatory compositions are also provided, along with methods of their use.”

    Or: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a8/c0/6a/0584dd67435ef2/US7279327.pdf “This invention was made possible with government support under grant numbers AI23946 and GM63228 from the National Institutes of Health. The United States government has certain rights to this invention.”

    A natural virus is not patentable since there has been invention/novelty. .

    Then there is this law suit: https://medicalveritas.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Plaintiff-Motion-for-Judicial-Notice-5-27-21.pdf “As early as 2008, the National Institute of Health’s grant AI23946-08 was issued to Pfizer “partner” in “anti-infective efforts,”3 Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (officially classified as affiliated with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID by 2003). These interlocking agents and agencies in the public/private enterprise began work on synthetically-altering coronaviruses for the express purpose of general research, pathogenic enhancement, detection, mutation, and potential therapeutic interventions. As early as May 21, 2000, Dr. Baric and UNC sought to patent critical sections of the coronavirus family for commercial gain.”

    Or this ARPA funded project: https://investors.modernatx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/darpa-awards-moderna-therapeutics-grant-25-million-develop

    Like

  2. Have you looked at the technical papers and patents surrounding the gain of function experiments? For example: “Reverse genetics with a full-length infectious cDNA of severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus. (2003) https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/100/22/12995.full.pdf

    or for example several patents like this: US-7776521-B1 filed 2007-05-14 by Centers of Disease Control and Prevention CDC, Current Assignee: Centers of Disease Control and Prevention CDC. “Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections therewith. Immune stimulatory compositions are also provided, along with methods of their use.”

    Or: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/a8/c0/6a/0584dd67435ef2/US7279327.pdf “This invention was made possible with government support under grant numbers AI23946 and GM63228 from the National Institutes of Health. The United States government has certain rights to this invention.”

    Of course, a natural virus is not patentable since there has been no invention.

    Then there is this law suit: https://medicalveritas.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Plaintiff-Motion-for-Judicial-Notice-5-27-21.pdf “As early as 2008, the National Institute of Health’s grant AI23946-08 was issued to Pfizer “partner” in “anti-infective efforts,”3 Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (officially classified as affiliated with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID by 2003). These interlocking agents and agencies in the public/private enterprise began work on synthetically-altering coronaviruses for the express purpose of general research, pathogenic enhancement, detection, mutation, and potential therapeutic interventions. As early as May 21, 2000, Dr. Baric and UNC sought to patent critical sections of the coronavirus family for commercial gain.”

    Or this ARPA funded project: https://investors.modernatx.com/news-releases/news-release-details/darpa-awards-moderna-therapeutics-grant-25-million-develop

    Like

Leave a Reply to budbromley Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

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

%d bloggers like this: