Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Lab-leak teorien.

Recommended Posts

Leaked Grant Proposal Details High-Risk Coronavirus Research (theintercept.com)


Among the scientific tasks the group described in its proposal, which was rejected by DARPA, was the creation of full-length infectious clones of bat SARS-related coronaviruses and the insertion of a tiny part of the virus known as a “proteolytic cleavage site” into bat coronaviruses. Of particular interest was a type of cleavage site able to interact with furin, an enzyme expressed in human cells.

DEFUSE proposal - DocumentCloud

Er det noen som har sett dette? Det er interessant....


“Let’s look at the big picture: A novel SARS coronavirus emerges in Wuhan with a novel cleavage site in it. We now have evidence that, in early 2018, they had pitched inserting novel cleavage sites into novel SARS-related viruses in their lab,” said Chan. “This definitely tips the scales for me. And I think it should do that for many other scientists too.”

Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University who has espoused the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated in a lab, agreed. “The relevance of this is that SARS Cov-2, the pandemic virus, is the only virus in its entire genus of SARS-related coronaviruses that contains a fully functional cleavage site at the S1, S2 junction,” said Ebright, referring to the place where two subunits of the spike protein meet. “And here is a proposal from the beginning of 2018, proposing explicitly to engineer that sequence at that position in chimeric lab-generated coronaviruses.”

Det er vanskelig å oppsummere alt, men kort fortalt ville USA eksperimentere med nye SARS coronavirus og de ville gjøre det i labben i Wuhan....

Jeg bruker igjen eksterne kilder, siden det er for mye å prøve å oppsummere på egen hånd, pluss at jeg ikke vil at eventuell debatt skal handle om mine tolkninger...

The Lab-Leak Debate Just Got Even Messier - The Atlantic


The document seems almost tailor-made to buttress one specific theory of a laboratory origin: that SARS-CoV-2 wasn’t simply brought into a lab by scientists and then released by accident, but rather pieced together in a deliberate fashion. In fact, the work described in the proposal fits so well into that narrative of a “gain-of-function experiment gone wrong” that some wondered if it might be too good to be true. Central figures in the coronavirus-origins debate were involved: Among Daszak’s listed partners on the grant were Ralph Baric of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, an American virologist known for doing coronavirus gain-of-function studies in his lab, and Shi Zhengli, the renowned virus hunter from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. (Shi Zhengli has not responded to a request for comment. A UNC spokesperson responded on behalf of Baric, noting that “the grant applicant and DARPA are best positioned to explain the proposal.”)


For meg ser det i alle fall ganske overbevisende ut nå. De beskriver jo mer eller mindre SARS-CoV-2 i forslagene til det de skal gjøre i 2018....

Og angående Fauci, så er dette helt klart "gain of function".

Share this post

Link to post

Vil vi noensinne få besvarelse for om Wuhan-strain ble lekket? Jeg tviler litt på det. Men, hva med Omikron, som ser ut å kanskje være enten lekket fra mus i lab. eller i fra mus i heimen til folk? Jmf. en av John Campbell sine videoer. Samt også fra denne fyren. Kan dette være Lab-leak #2 (evt. leak #1, dersom Wuhan ikke er lekkasje)?

Edited by G

Share this post

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...