re: Fauci Diary -- Most felt GOF in WIV CV19 allowed adaptation of the spike protein

Where are the SlowJerkOffPro fricks?

Low Tbag etc?

Waiting on their talking points to arrive. Gotta get everybody on the same page.

The outbreak began in a city where there was a virology institute that specialized in bat coronaviruses. The wet market was literally hundreds of yards away from where this institute was located. We were called crazy for thinking that the virus accidentally (or purposefully) leaked from the lab. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct one.

quote:

---

I remember your behaviour during the covid scan.

---

Sigh.
What is it you think you remember?

E.g., Here is one of my first posts on CV19 (My guess of an eventual ~500,000 deaths worldwide turned out to miss the total by 10-12-fold.)

quote:

---

Posted on 1/31/20 at 2:07 pm to LSURussian

quote:

---

Am I the only one who thinks the market's reaction to the coronavirus outbreak is way overdone?

---

It may be. You're far more expert on "black swans" or appropriate market response, than I.

But I can address the medical end. This corona virus saga is medically unique.
(1) It is a new strain.
(2) China has been unusually dishonest and secretive about the episode.
(3) Given 1 & 2, both epidemiology and virulence are very poorly understood.

In fact, I've not seen the CDC/NIH this poorly informed or confused about a CAI in a long time. We're finally catching up. Based on our understanding now, I don't expect the thing to be contained to China. Odds are significant it gets widespread. In the end, I'd guess virulence and spread to approximate Flu. . . . i.e., ~500,000 deaths worldwide.

How would that translate in market response terms?
LINK

---

Here are some other posts:
Myocarditis 1/23,
Anti-science CV19 consensus 3/25,
Peds EUA was malpractice,
Vax Mandates are BS,
CV19 vax should never have been mandatory,
CV19 evolution -More transmissible, less virulent,
Institutional responsibilities

FWIW, The original CV19 strains were virulent. CFR was significantly higher. The Vaccine's rapid development/deployment was absolutely helpful mitigating that. Subsequent vax versions were increasingly less effective, as the virus rapidly evolved to continually less virulent strains.

quote:

---

So the media and the left went after anybody (especially Trump) if they said it was the China virus or came from China.

---

The Chinese origin was never in question. The question was whether the Chinese had brought this on through lab incompetency at the WIV, or it had developed within their natural animal reservoir. The latter would not be their fault.

Fauci's papers make clear that by January 2020 we understood that there was a extremely high likelihood that CV19 was lab created. The NIH (Fauci), after recognizing their hands were filthy in terms of relations with the WIV and gain of function studies, commenced a massive effort to undercut any lab origin thesis.

The most glaring example of that effort was Dr. Kristian Andersen.

Andersen wrote Fauci on January 31, 2020 and said:
"The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered... [myself and my colleagues] all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory." Andersen's concern focused on the infamous furin cleavage site and genetic insertions in the spike protein.

Just one month later, Andersen turned up as the main author of "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2." It was an absurd paper published in a major scientific journal (nature medicine). In it, Andersen concluded that a laboratory origin scenario was "not plausible" and that the virus had a natural zoonotic origin. Neither of those "scientific" conclusions had any foundational basis whatsoever. In the case of the zoonotic opinion, not only once there are no basis scientifically for the conclusion there was massive basis against it.

It was an inexplicable turnaround, in an extraordinarily short timeframe. I say inexplicable, but there is the confounding fact that Andersen's labs were the subsequent recipient of millions and millions of dollars in NIH grants..