A scientist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle claims to have located genetic sequences from early coronavirus cases in China and says that they show the virus was circulating in Wuhan before any cases were linked to the infamous wet market.
Virologist Jesse Bloom has over 30 samples that are genetically more similar to bat coronaviruses than any other previously known sequences. The samples were originally submitted as part of a Wuhan University project.
Bloom says he recovered the data that was deleted from a US National Institutes of Health database by searching on Google Cloud. The NIH allowed the deletion of data from its databases in June 2020 by a Chinese scientist who originally submitted it, according to reports.
The data then also disappeared from there China National GeneBank where it had previously resided.
It “seems likely that the sequences were deleted to obscure their existence,” Bloom notes in the paper.
Bloom also notes that the finding indicates that samples being used by the WHO and other bodies to investigate the origins of the pandemic could be incomplete or inaccurate.
The study “shows that there are additional sequences from relatively early in the outbreak that are still unknown, and in some cases have mutations that suggest they are probably evolutionarily older than the viruses from the Huanan Seafood Market,” Bloom said in an email to CNN.
“They’re three steps more similar to the bat coronaviruses than the viruses from the Huanan fish market,” Bloom outlined.
Bloom’s paper has not been peer reviewed, but already seems to be annoying other scientists cited in the CNN report, with microbial pathogenesis professor Andrew Preston stating that Bloom “appears to be pointing towards a deliberate cover up by Chinese authorities of early sequence data from Wuhan.”
Yet that directly correlates with reports that initial genetic sequences of COVID-19 were deleted, destroyed or hidden from WHO investigators.
Bloom noted this within his tweet thread:
The WHO dismissed the lab leak hypothesis within a few hours of visiting the Wuhan lab back in February, yet it did not have early case data, early virus sequences or patient samples.
Bloom also noted that he is confident that more information will come to light even if further investigations are stymied, and that ‘trust based systems in science’ need to be examined to determine if they were used to hide data on the pandemic origins:
Bloom’s findings add to the increasing stockpile of evidence indicating that not only did the virus originate outside of the wet market, but that a cover up was instigated to obscure the fact.
As we reported earlier this month, there are now multiple studies that confirm “COVID-19 has a genetic footprint that has never been observed in a natural coronavirus.”
The genome sequencing of the virus ‘CGG-CGG’ does not occur in nature, yet it is the exact combination commonly used in ‘gain of function’ research, which is known to have been used with coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/
ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.
We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.
Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————
Massive Peer-Reviewed Mask Study Shows ‘Little To No Difference’ In Preventing COVID, Flu Infection
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
Australian Health Authorities Call For More COVID Boosters… But The Public Says No
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
NIH Failed To Monitor EcoHealth Alliance: Federal Watchdog
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
clownworld4 days ago
London Police Recruiting Illiterate Officers Who Can Barely Write English to Meet Diversity Quotas
LGBT4 days ago
Video: Mother Reads Shocking Gay Porn Material Found In Minnesota School Direct To Board Members
censorship2 days ago
News Outlets Announce They’re Abandoning “Objectivity” Because It’s Racist
World at War7 days ago
Croatian President Calls Germany’s ‘We Are at War With Russia’ Comment “Madness”
LGBT14 hours ago
Leftists Triggered By Old Mister Rogers ‘Boys Are Boys, Girls Are Girls’ Clips
Bizarre2 days ago
Video: Kamala Harris Lambasted For Weird Cringe Kindergarten Description Of Astronauts’ Historic Mission
Politics7 days ago
Biden Jokes About People Thinking He’s “Stupid” Then Makes Another Stupid Verbal Gaffe
LGBT3 days ago
Cosmetics Brand Accused Of “Erasing Women” With Bearded Lipstick Ads