Connect with us

Coronavirus

US National Security STILL Believes Coronavirus LEAKED From Chinese Lab

Senior US official says lab escape is most ‘credible’ theory

Published

on

HECTOR RETAMAL/AFP via Getty Images

Top US National Security officials still believe that the most credible theory on the origin of COVID-19 is that it escaped from a Chinese laboratory.

The comments were made by National Security Adviser Matthew Pottinger, during a recent Zoom meeting with UK officials, according to reports.

Pottinger, a former China correspondent for Reuters and The Wall Street Journal, pointed to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and said that “China’s leaders openly admit their previous claims that the virus originated in a Wuhan market are false.”

“Even establishment figures in Beijing have openly dismissed the wet market story,” Pottinger noted, as he also blasted the World Health Organization’s ongoing investigation into the origin of the outbreak as a distraction.

“MPs around the world have a moral role to play in exposing the WHO investigation as a Potemkin exercise,” Pottinger said.

The reference is to fake villages that were created in 18th Century Crimea to convince the visiting Russian Empress Catherine the Great that the region was prospering.

Pottinger worked in military intelligence for over a decade, before moving to the US National Security Council in 2017. He also has a brother who is a top virologist at the University of Washington.

The report notes that former Conservative party leader Iain Duncan-Smith, who was on the Zoom call, said the lab leak theory has been provided extra credibility by a whistleblower from the Wuhan institute providing information to the US team.

“I was told the US have an ex-scientist from the laboratory in America at the moment,” Duncan-Smith said, adding “I was led to believe this is how they have been able to stiffen up their position on how this outbreak originated.”

The MP noted that China’s refusal to cooperate with investigators and journalists has only served to strengthen the lab leak position.

 “The truth is there are people who have been in those labs who maintain that this is the case,” he noted, adding “We don’t know what they have been doing in that laboratory. They may well have been fiddling with bat coronaviruses and looking at them and they made a mistake. I’ve spoken to various people who believe that to be the case.”

It previously emerged that the Wuhan lab had held a coronavirus sample that was 96.2 per cent the same as Covid-19 for almost a decade. This prompted the speculation about the origin of the virus.

Several prominent researchers and scientists have also noted that the lab must be investigated given this fact.

In addition, previous reports have suggested that the Institute took a shipment of some of the world’s deadliest pathogens just weeks before the outbreak of the coronavirus. It is also known that the lab was tampering with natural pathogens and mutating them to become more infectious.

Intelligence figures across the globe have also called for the Wuhan lab to be investigated.

Chinese virologists recently fled Hong Kong and effectively defected to the West, with evidence against the Chinese Communist Party concerning its role in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The WHO previously complained that it had ‘not been invited’ by China to investigate the outbreak, and has continually been criticised for propping up Communist Party talking points.

In August, the WHO announced that it would not be visiting the Wuhan Institute of Virology during its investigation into the origins of the coronavirus, despite the evidence outlined above.

The health body then did an about turn and said it would actually be visiting the lab after all, after a backlash ensued.

The investigation STILL has not gotten underway, close to a year after the outbreak began.

The Wuhan lab director has complained that scientists at the facility are being made scapegoats in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, and that the lab has been unfairly made the centre of dangerous ‘conspiracy theories’, following US intelligence suggestions that it could have been the origin for the viral spread.

Continue Reading
Comments

Coronavirus

Massive Peer-Reviewed Mask Study Shows ‘Little To No Difference’ In Preventing COVID, Flu Infection

Published

on

Zero Hedge

Getty Images / Compassionate Eye Foundation

A massive international research collaboration that analyzed several dozen rigorous studies focusing on “physical interventions” against COVID-19 and influenza found that they provide little to no protection against infection or illness rates.

The study, published in the peer-reviewed Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, is the strongest science to date refuting the basis for mask mandates worldwide.

And of course, the CDC still recommends masking in areas with “high” rates of transmission (fewer than 4% of US counties, as Just the News notes), along with indoor masking in areas with “medium” rates of transmission (27%).

Masks are still required in educational institutions in Democratic strongholds such as New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Washington and California, according to the Daily Mail. Boston Public Schools denied its “temporary masking protocol” in early January was a “mandate,” following a public letter against the policy by student Enrique Abud Evereteze.

South Korea is still requiring masks on public transport and in medical facilities after dropping COVID mandates in most indoor settings, including gyms, Monday, Reuters reported. -Just the News

According to the Cochrane study, which included the work of researchers at institutions in the  U.K., Canada, Australia, Italy and Saudi Arabia, a total of 78 studies were analyzed. Most recent additions to the meta-analysis were 11 new randomized controlled trials.

As unlisted study author Carl Heneghan – who directs the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford noted on Twitter: “Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks.”

The Danish study had trouble finding a major journal willing to publish its controversial findings that wearing surgical masks had no statistically significant effect on infection rates, even among those who claimed to wear them “exactly as instructed.” 

Mainstream media overlooked red flags in the Bangladeshi mask study, which found no effect for surgical masks under age 50 and a difference of only 20 infections between control and treatment groups among 342,000 adults. -JTN

Bottom line, mask wearing “probably makes little to no difference,” when it comes to influenza-like or COVID-like illnesses, regardless of type of mask used.

We’re sure the cult of Fauci will now start insisting peer-reviewed meta-analyses aren’t ‘the science.’

This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

Continue Reading

Coronavirus

Australian Health Authorities Call For More COVID Boosters… But The Public Says No

Published

on

Zero Hedge

Asanka Ratnayake/Getty Images

Australia and New Zealand suffered some of the worst pandemic mandate conditions of any country in the western world, crossing the line into totalitarianism on a number of occasions. 

Australian authorities restricted residents of larger cities to near house arrest, with people not being allowed to go more than 3 miles from their homes.  Citizens were given curfew hours between 9pm and 5am.   They were banned from public parks and beaches without a mask, even though it is nearly impossible to transmit a virus outdoors and UV light from the sun acts as a natural disinfectant. 

In the worst examples, Australian citizens received visits from police and government officials for posting critical opinions about the mandates on social media.  Some were even arrested for calling for protests against the lockdowns. In Australia and New Zealand, covid camps were built to detain people infected with covid.  Some facilities were meant for those who had recently traveled, others were meant for anyone who stepped out of line.

As the fears over covid wane and the populace realizes that the true Infection Fatality Rate of the virus is incredibly small, restrictions are being abandoned and things seems to be going back to normal.  It’s important, however, to never forget what happened and how many countries faced potentially permanent authoritarianism under the shadow of vaccine passports.  If the passports rules had been successfully enforced, we would be living in a very different world today in the west.

Luckily, the passports were never implemented widely.  Australian health authorities are once again calling for the public to take a fourth covid booster shot, but with very little response.  Only 40% of citizens took the third booster, and new polling data shows that 30% are taking the fourth booster. 

With an astonishing rise in excess deaths by heart failure in Australia coinciding exactly with the introduction of the covid mRNA vaccines, perhaps people are deciding to finally er on the side of caution.  Why take the risk of an experimental vaccine over a virus that 99.8% of the population will easily survive? 

This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

Continue Reading

Coronavirus

NIH Failed To Monitor EcoHealth Alliance: Federal Watchdog

Published

on

Zero Hedge

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

After an 18-month audit, a federal watchdog says that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) failed to adequately monitor and address problems involving EcoHealth Alliance, a New York City-based nonprofit that was used to offshore risky gain-of-function research to Wuhan, China after the Obama administration banned the practice in 2014.

According to the report from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the “NIH did not effectively monitor or take timely action to address” compliance issues with EcoHealth.

In April 2020, after then-President Donald Trump claimed the SARS-CoV-2 virus could have come from the WIV lab, NIH terminated the EcoHealth grant with little explanation. That step was widely condemned by scientists, and OIG’s report now says NIH improperly executed the termination because it did not provide a valid reason or provide EcoHealth with required information for appealing the decision.

A few months later, NIH reinstated the award but immediately suspended it, setting conditions for resumption that EcoHealth said it could not meet. NIH permanently terminated the WIV subaward as of August 2022 for compliance issues, including WIV’s failure to provide NIH with laboratory notebooks related to the funded experiments. –Science

The audit examined the above grant, as well as two others from 2014 to 2021 which totaled $8 million, but largely focused on $600,000 of it which went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The NIH faulted EcoHealth for failing to promptly report gain-of-function results in some experiments, however the company has blamed a computer glitch at NIH for the 2-year delay.

Digging into the report is US Right to Know’s Emily Kopp, who has broken down various aspects of the OIG report.

Meanwhile, the audit also found that the nonprofit billed NIH for $89,171 in disallowed costs, including expenses such as alcohol, and a staffer’s $3,285 trip to a conference that was miscoded, and should have instead been billed to a non-NIH grant. 

The OIG recommends that the WIV (but not EcoHealth) be banned from receiving future NIH funds.

Meanwhile, EcoHealth just scored a fresh $3 million grant from the Department of Defense.

This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

Continue Reading

Trending