patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,249,612 comments by 14,902 users - Al_Sharpton_for_President, desertguy, RWSGFY online now
Conspiracy theories morphing into conspiracy FACTS
invite response
2022 Sep 6, 10:29am 5,296 views 62 comments
« First « Previous Comments 58 - 62 of 62 Search these comments
59
Patrick
2024 Oct 5, 7:59pm
Patrick
2024 Oct 5, 7:59pm
https://okaythennews.substack.com/p/covid-vaccine-science-catching-up
COVID vaccine science catching up with 'conspiracy theorists'
Two new peer-reviewed medical journal articles indicate that the science is starting to catch up with the ‘conspiracy theorists’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’ such as myself, also known as people that rationally asked questions of novel products that were rushed out the door, to help stem a pandemic that was far less deadly than all other causes, including cardiovascular disease, cancer, and even tobacco use (and note that COVID-19 deaths tend to be inflated). Publishing in the Polish Annals of Medicine, Thoene conducts a limited literature review on the reporting of COVID-19 vaccine severe adverse events in scientific journals, finding:
“From 2020 to 2024, the literature has gone from claiming there are absolutely no SAEs (Serious Adverse Events) from mRNA based vaccines (2020/2021) to an acknowledgment of a significant number of various SAEs (2023/2024); including but not limited to neurological complications, myocarditis, pericarditis and thrombosis. … The early scientific literature was biased, so as not to report SAEs, due to social and political concerns and overwhelming corporate greed. Only in the last year have scientists been able to publish articles that acknowledge a high number of SAEs linked to mRNA based vaccines. This should act as a warning that science should be completely objective when evaluating health risks, but can often be influenced by social and economic considerations.”
« First « Previous Comments 58 - 62 of 62 Search these comments
https://nitter.cz/R_H_Ebright/status/1566826229931524096#m
COVID: summary of lab-origin hypothesis:
1) Pandemic caused by a bat SARS-like coronavirus emerged in Wuhan--a city 1,000 miles from nearest wild bats with SARS-like coronaviruses, but that contains labs conducting world's largest research program on bat SARS-like coronaviruses.
2) In 2015-2017, scientists and science-policy specialists expressed concern that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) was conducting and contemplating research that posed an unacceptable risk of lab accident and pandemic
3) In 2017-2018, WIV constructed a novel chimeric SARS-like coronavirus that was able to infect and replicate in human airway cells and that had 10,000x enhanced viral growth and 4x enhanced lethality in mice engineered to display human receptors on cells.
4) In 2018, in an NIH grant proposal, WIV and collaborators proposed to construct more novel chimeric SARS-like coronaviruses, targeting chimeras that replace natural spike gene with novel spike genes encoding spikes that have higher binding affinities to human cells.
5) Also in 2018, in a DARPA grant proposal, WIV and collaborators proposed to construct novel "consensus" bat SARS-like coronaviruses, and to insert furin cleavage site (FCS) sequences at the spike gene S1-S2 border of bat SARS-like coronaviruses,
6) In 2017-2019, WIV constructed and characterized novel SARS-like coronaviruses at biosafety level 2, a biosafety level patently inadequate for work with enhanced potential pandemic pathogens and patently inadequate to contain a virus having transmission properties of SARS-CoV-2
7) In 2019 a novel SARS-like coronavirus having a spike with high binding affinity for human cells, and having an FCS at the spike S1-S2 border--a virus having the properties set forth in the 2018 WIV NIH and DARPA grant proposals--emerges on the doorstep of WIV.
8) SARS-CoV-2 is the only one of more than 100 known SARS-like coronaviruses that contains an FCS. This is a feature that does not rule out a natural origin, but that is more easily explained by a lab origin. Especially since insertion of FCS had been explicitly proposed in 2018.
9) The FCS of SARS-CoV-2 has codon usage unusual for bat SARS-related coronaviruses and has an 8-of-8 amino-acid-sequence identity to the FCS of human ENaCa. These are features that do not rule out a natural origin, but that are more--much more--easily explained by a lab origin.
10) In 2020-present, WIV and its funders/collaborators at EcoHealth Alliance have withheld information, misrepresented facts, and obstructed investigation...even though, if not connected to origin, they most easily could clear their name though cooperation with investigation.
Richard Ebright = Board of Governors Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology. This is a highly prestigious CHAIRED position, and he is specialist in Transcription--synthesis of an RNA so he is not some random asshole on twatter.
https://www.waksman.rutgers.edu/ebright