COVID 19: Created By CIA In North Carolina For Bio-Warfare
Gordon Duff, an accredited diplomat and generally accepted as one of the top global intelligence specialists, uncovers documents (below) which show that research to create COVID 19 began in the United States in 2006 and culminated in a successful bio-weapon in 2015.
As Trump said, over and over and over, the Chinese were involved.
COVID 19 was a US Army bio-weapons project to manufacture a pneumonia causing disease that would be nearly impossible to vaccinate for in patients over 40 years old.
The proof is here, simply scroll down. The study was run by the University of North Carolina and funded by USAID/CIA. It chose a Chinese bat virus and chose to include a medical facility in Wuhan as well.
Now we know why, a smokescreen of blame for a program China had little or nothing to do with, something satanically evil and purely American.
In November 2015, a study was published outlining the capability of producing the virus we are dealing with now. Among the many involved was a lab in Wuhan, China. It was listed from the beginning as one of dozens, mostly American, working on this project.
However, one key participant was left out, USAID. It is suspected, deeply so, that USAID is a front for American bio-warfare research such as that done in Tbilisi, Georgia and elsewhere, much documented. This is the citation which adds USAID to the research funding group.
Original 2015 Research Unedited And Complete
A SARS-Like Cluster Of Circulating Bat Coronaviruses Shows Potential For Human Emergence
- Published:
- https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985
Abstract
The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV underscores the threat of cross-species transmission events leading to outbreaks in humans. Here we examine the disease potential of a SARS-like virus, SHC014-CoV, which is currently circulating in Chinese horseshoe bat populations1. Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system2, we generated and characterized a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone. The results indicate that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV. Additionally, in vivo experiments demonstrate replication of the chimeric virus in mouse lung with notable pathogenesis. Evaluation of available SARS-based immune-therapeutic and prophylactic modalities revealed poor efficacy; both monoclonal antibody and vaccine approaches failed to neutralize and protect from infection with CoVs using the novel spike protein. On the basis of these findings, we synthetically re-derived an infectious full-length SHC014 recombinant virus and demonstrate robust viral replication both in vitro and in vivo. Our work suggests a potential risk of SARS-CoV re-emergence from viruses currently circulating in bat populations.
Main
The emergence of SARS-CoV heralded a new era in the cross-species transmission of severe respiratory illness with globalization leading to rapid spread around the world and massive economic impact3,4. Since then, several strains—including influenza A strains H5N1, H1N1 and H7N9 and MERS-CoV—have emerged from animal populations, causing considerable disease, mortality and economic hardship for the afflicted regions5. Although public health measures were able to stop the SARS-CoV outbreak4, recent metagenomics studies have identified sequences of closely related SARS-like viruses circulating in Chinese bat populations that may pose a future threat1,6. However, sequence data alone provides minimal insights to identify and prepare for future prepandemic viruses. Therefore, to examine the emergence potential (that is, the potential to infect humans) of circulating bat CoVs, we built a chimeric virus encoding a novel, zoonotic CoV spike protein—from the RsSHC014-CoV sequence that was isolated from Chinese horseshoe bats1—in the context of the SARS-CoV mouse-adapted backbone. The hybrid virus allowed us to evaluate the ability of the novel spike protein to cause disease independently of other necessary adaptive mutations in its natural backbone. Using this approach, we characterized CoV infection mediated by the SHC014 spike protein in primary human airway cells and in vivo, and tested the efficacy of available immune therapeutics against SHC014-CoV. Together, the strategy translates metagenomics data to help predict and prepare for future emergent viruses.
The sequences of SHC014 and the related RsWIV1-CoV show that these CoVs are the closest relatives to the epidemic SARS-CoV strains (Fig. 1a,b); however, there are important differences in the 14 residues that bind human ACE2, the receptor for SARS-CoV, including the five that are critical for host range: Y442, L472, N479, T487 and Y491 (ref. 7). In WIV1, three of these residues vary from the epidemic SARS-CoV Urbani strain, but they were not expected to alter binding to ACE2 (Supplementary Fig. 1a,b and Supplementary Table 1). This fact is confirmed by both pseudotyping experiments that measured the ability of lentiviruses encoding WIV1 spike proteins to enter cells expressing human ACE2 (Supplementary Fig. 1) and by in vitro replication assays of WIV1-CoV (ref. 1). In contrast, 7 of 14 ACE2-interaction residues in SHC014 are different from those in SARS-CoV, including all five residues critical for host range (Supplementary Fig. 1c and Supplementary Table 1). These changes, coupled with the failure of pseudotyped lentiviruses expressing the SHC014 spike to enter cells (Supplementary Fig. 1d), suggested that the SHC014 spike is unable to bind human ACE2. However, similar changes in related SARS-CoV strains had been reported to allow ACE2 binding7,8, suggesting that additional functional testing was required for verification. Therefore, we synthesized the SHC014 spike in the context of the replication-competent, mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone (we hereafter refer to the chimeric CoV as SHC014-MA15) to maximize the opportunity for pathogenesis and vaccine studies in mice (Supplementary Fig. 2a). Despite predictions from both structure-based modeling and pseudotyping experiments, SHC014-MA15 was viable and replicated to high titers in Vero cells (Supplementary Fig. 2b). Similarly to SARS, SHC014-MA15 also required a functional ACE2 molecule for entry and could use human, civet and bat ACE2 orthologs (Supplementary Fig. 2c,d). To test the ability of the SHC014 spike to mediate infection of the human airway, we examined the sensitivity of the human epithelial airway cell line Calu-3 2B4 (ref. 9) to infection and found robust SHC014-MA15 replication, comparable to that of SARS-CoV Urbani (Fig. 1c). To extend these findings, primary human airway epithelial (HAE) cultures were infected and showed robust replication of both viruses (Fig. 1d). Together, the data confirm the ability of viruses with the SHC014 spike to infect human airway cells and underscore the potential threat of cross-species transmission of SHC014-CoV.
Trackback from your site.
George Affleck
| #
This study in no way suggests anything more than a warning against the possibility of a virus appearing. Note that the author says:
“Here we examine the disease potential of a SARS-like virus…”
“Our work suggests a potential risk of SARS-CoV re-emergence from viruses currently circulating in bat populations.”
I see nothing sinister here.
Am I reading it wrong?
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
Sars came out of China….want a sinister virus? China will produce it from the open market …live animal……disgusting unclean environment that produced the Wuhan CCP Xi virus. The CCP can close one of these dangerous markets by sending in police to beat and destroy and confiscate their stuff….but in weeks…or months….they’re back!….must be a cultural thing, eh?
Reply
George Affleck
| #
I don’t disagree with you but that’s not my point. The headline is completely misleading and irresponsible. Nothing about the study even hints at bio-warfare.
Not only that, why would anyone design a virus for warfare that kills the elderly? lol
Reply
lloyd
| #
Their parents never bought them that pony and they are still pissed.
Reply
Lloyd
| #
George, no you are not. The one weakness of this website is the conspiracy theory. especially about vaccines. etc. slide in from time to time, and then the Headlines spin the info towards the sensational. Some people here believe the U.S. is the senior member of The New World Order. While Global Economics has come to bite us in the butt with the U.S. having to depend on China and others for certain goods at a reduced price, I doubt the CIA is behind that problem.
Reply
George Affleck
| #
Thanks Lloyd. I appreciate the second pair of eyes. Thought I was going blind – lol.
Reply
Vladimir
| #
George, Lloyd I agree with both of you. Thanks.
The article is written by one person Gordon Duff appears as a compilation of few sources as in content as well as in style.
I traced original article by the link and found further source came from https://www.pravda.ru/world/1482450-COVID19/
Reply
Allen A. Bethea
| #
Looks like Ralph Baric is getting some attention for developing a Covid-19 treatment
https://alumni.unc.edu/news/unc-has-key-role-in-covid-19-drug-nearly-ready-for-human-trials/
Reply