Believe it or not, “COVID-19 was manufactured!” This bold claim came from a group of Norwegian scientists and their claim is fully backed up by an ex-British intel head. The new study strongly points fingers at China that they are likely the possible origin of the virus. Their research supports the claims that Covid-19 is not of natural origins.
Virologist Birger Sorensen, who is part of the research team, discovered that the coronavirus’s spike protein contains sequences that appear to be artificially inserted.
This research has again beamed the searchlight on the hilly outskirts of Wuhan, the city at the heart of the coronavirus crisis, where the Chinese high-security biosafety laboratory is located and the cradle of the pandemic.
Chinese scientists made the world believe that COVID-19 likely jumped from an animal to humans in the Wuhan market. These Chinese doctors and scientists had encountered Covid-19 patients as early as November 2019 and did their job in promptly alerting the authorities. But Beijing clamped down on these scientists and their efforts to research the virus and notify the world. Beijing allowed a large number of its own people to move about, in and out of Wuhan, despite the government knowing of the dire risks; even after cordoning off Wuhan from the rest of China, it still permitted foreign travel which eventually led to the spread of the virus to the rest of the world.
Conspiracy theories of the virus originating from the Wuhan facility have now spread like Wild fire. But, at the heart of the conspiracies, begs the question whether it is possible to artificially alter the genetic makeup of a virus like the coronavirus?
A genetically modified virus is a virus that has been altered or generated using biotechnology methods, and remains capable of infection. Genetic modification involves the directed insertion, deletion, artificial synthesis or change of nucleotide bases in viral genomes. Genetically modified viruses are mostly generated by the insertion of foreign genes into viral genomes for the purposes of biomedical, agricultural, bio-control, or technological objectives. Yes, it is possible to artificially alter the genetic makeup of a virus.
According to Sorenson, “The inserted sequences should never have been published. Had it been today, it would never have happened. It was a big mistake the Chinese made. The inserted sequences have a functionality that we describe. We explain why they are essential. But the Chinese pointed to them first.”
The researchers found that the virus had been designed to bind to humans. They pointed out that COVID-19 has hardly mutated since it’s inception. This simply means that the virus was already fully adapted to humans.
Former MI6 head Richard Dearlove has supported the claim. He suggested that scientists may have been carrying out gene-splicing experiment, but rejected theories that this may have been for malevolent purposes. He insinuated that the release of the virus may have been an accident.
“It’s a risky business if you make a mistake. Look at the stories of the attempts by the leadership to lock down any debate about the origins of the pandemic and the way that people have been arrested or silenced”, he said.
The 300-million-yuan ($42 million) Wuhan lab was completed in 2015, and finally opened in 2018, with the founder of a French bioindustrial firm, Alain Merieux, acting as a consultant in its construction.
The institute also has a P3 laboratory that has been in operation since 2012.
The 3,000-square-meter (32,000-square-foot) P4 lab, located in a square building with a cylindrical annex, lies near a pond at the foot of a forested hill in Wuhan’s remote outskirts.
United States secretary of state Mike Pompeo later confirmed there is substantial evidence that the coronavirus originated in the Chinese state-backed Wuhan Institute of Virology.
The United States has now brought the allegations into the mainstream, with Pompeo saying U.S. officials are doing a “full investigation” into how the virus “got out into the world.”
Some scientists believe the virus originated in bats before being passed to humans through an intermediary species — possibly the endangered pangolin, whose scales are illegally trafficked in China for traditional medicine. Institute researcher Shi Zhengli, one of China’s leading experts on bat coronaviruses and the deputy director of the P4 lab, was part of the team that published the first study to suggest that SARS-CoV-2 came from bats.
But a study by a group of Chinese scientists published in The Lancet in January showed that the first COVID-19 patient had no connection to Wuhan’s infamous animal market, and neither did 13 of the first 41 confirmed cases.
In an interview with Scientific American, Shi said the SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence did not match any of the bat coronaviruses her laboratory had previously collected and studied.
Filippa Lentzos, biosecurity researcher at King’s College London, said while there is currently no proof for the lab accident theory, there is also “no real evidence” that the virus came from the wet market.
“For me, the pandemic origin is still an open question,” Lentzos said.
There are some indications “that could point to a potential lab accident from basic scientific research,” she said.
“But all of this needs considerable investigation for anyone to say anything with any certainty on the pandemic origins.”
David Heymann, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, also said there was no evidence about its origin but it is “closely related to a bat virus.”
“There are many theories of how humans could’ve been infected, and I don’t think any of them are able to be substantiated at present.”
The Trump administration has both praised China’s response to COVID-19 and persisted in blaming China for the pandemic, with the administration now wanting a UN Security Council resolution on COVID-19 to identify China as the source of the coronavirus.
President Xi has defended China’s actions saying that China as acted responsibly by releasing information such as the genome sequence of the virus “at the earliest possible time” and shared its experiences in attempting to control and treat the disease.
“All along, we have acted with openness, transparency and responsibility,” Xi said. “We have provided information to the WHO and the relevant countries in a most timely fashion.”
Professor John Yoo laid it bear saying, “The United States and other nations must hold China accountable not because of anger—though that sentiment is entirely justified—nor a desire for retribution. The world must make China pay in order to create incentives that will force it to improve its behavior. That may well demand measures that will force China to experience the full costs of its recklessness.’
Do you agree that China must pay the world for the COVID-19 pandemic? In what ways can China be made to pay if found guilty?
Kindly drop your thoughts with us.