Regarding the thing called SARS-CoV-2: I am not a "There was no novel virus" and "There was/is no virus" person.
My position is that there was no risk-additive coronavirus suddenly spreading from person to person in late 2019/early 2020.
Whatever was being "tested for" & coming back positive - and classified a SARSr-CoV, then named SARS-CoV-2 - may have been "new" to discovery but was not new to the animal kingdom, including humans.
The virologists on the ICTV-CSG which named the virus felt the same way, as their emails show and the initial draft of their paper also indicated.
Testing positive for a particular virus does NOT preclude the presence of other pathogens/causes, establish a link between a single pathogen and an illness, or prove human-to-human (or animal-to-human) transmission has occurred.
To the extent that SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus, I do not think it came from a lab, because I do not see evidence that scientists can “create” (or even adulterate well) coronaviruses, nor do I see evidence that coronaviruses transmit from animal to person or person to person. If something is from a lab and made it into humans, it would need to be through or as a result of injections, or via testing reagents, swabs, or something else “direct”.
I largely agree with and regarding GoF research and believe that co-opting of something already “out there” or in humans is far more likely than person to person transmission of something from a lab, market, or bat cave. wherearethenumbers.subs…
The real GoF research being done was with influenza (but “real” does not mean “successful”).
In general, I’m not a fan of the term bioweapon and explained why here: x.com/Wood_House76/stat…
You are correct that few Americans care about any research I’ve done. I expect as much from Covidians, but the reasons for non-engagement and relative indifference on the part of anti-mandate folks elude me. Vested interests (financial, personal, professional, social, psychological) and sunk cost fallacy are my current explanations.
Although I believe deployment of mRNA was a goal/purpose, unlike most people, I contend that there were real [government-created/exacerbated] health problems in need of solving that had become very hard to hide or minimize. Those problems included (but were not limited to) longstanding mortality and adverse effect issues with the flu shot & other vaccines, a contaminated illicit drug supply, and a couple other factors I’m not yet ready to elucidate.
Other purposes/goals were and are being served, i.e., distracting from problems with banking/finance, pharma needing fresh infusions of cash, ROI on pandemic/bioterrorism preparedness and prognostications, universal seasonal shot aspirations, surveillance, etc.
Regarding the COVID shots, we mostly agree: I don’t think large-scale depopulation was or is a main goal of it, but culling of the elderly is of-interest to evil govts for financial reasons, and seasonal shots are one of the best ways to accomplish that. Depopulation is better accomplished by preventing babies from being born. To the extent that the shots affect fertility, an argument for depopulation can be made, but I also think the birth rate has been/is being attacked in multiple and varied ways that have nothing to do with shots and everything to do with the intentional destruction of the traditional family unit.
I am unpersuaded that the COVID shot is a DRIVER of EXCESS deaths but have no doubt it has adverse effects and has killed people. I agree with everything Jonathan wrote here: peoplesvaccineinquiry.c… (video: peoplesvaccineinquiry.c…)
But, even if the shots were saline, there was moral injury and serious breaches of informed consent, ethical research principles etc. I also suspect there were both accidental and intentional differential batches. HOWEVER, I think there was similar experimentation with the flu shot for years, and I fail to see why more attention isn’t on that injection.
Hope that helps!
NOTE: post edited a few times to fix errors and to add content
