TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Hatfield pointed out that below the furin cleavage site, there is a super antigen domain that appears to be engineered. It resembles one of the binary agents developed in the past, known for stopping the Soviet Union. This super antigen could cause tank commanders to die before reaching their target. Steven believes that this engineered super antigen is present in the current situation as well.

Scientists are investigating claims that COVID-19 was manipulated in a lab after a tiny DNA fragment matching a sequence patented by Moderna was found in the virus. The possibility of an accidental lab escape is being considered, as human error is always a factor. The Wuhan lab in China may have been conducting research on virus enhancement or gene modification, leading to an infection that spread to others. The scientists are currently analyzing the data to determine the validity of these claims. It will take time to thoroughly examine the genetic evidence.

Many viruses use a 2-step authentication process to enter cells, involving binding to a receptor and spike protein cleavage. Virologists have been adding furin cleavage sites to viruses since 1992, increasing their virulence. SARS-CoV-2, which likely originated from nature, contains unique furin cleavage site codons not typical in coronaviruses. This suggests a low probability of natural origin.

Today, almost any country can create a powerful biological weapon in a couple of months using current technology.

Research on potential pandemic pathogens, known as gain of function studies, has led to valuable public health insights. Previous NSABB reports support this. While I won't argue for the necessity of this research, there are many freely available studies showing how mutations identified through these studies have helped us prepare for epidemics and pandemics.

The discussion centers on gain-of-function (GoF) research, its regulation, and the motivations behind it. The first speaker notes the administration’s goal to end GoF research and asks where that stands. The second speaker says progress has been made, and the White House is working on a formal policy. He then defines the issue in stages: what GoF research is, why someone would do it, and how to regulate it to prevent dangerous projects that could catastrophically harm human populations. He clarifies that GoF research is not inherently bad, but dangerous GoF research is. He gives an insulin example: creating bacteria to produce insulin is a legitimate GoF that benefits diabetics. In contrast, taking a virus from bat caves, bringing it to a lab in a densely populated city with weak biosafety, and manipulating it to be more transmissible among humans is a dangerous GoF that should not be supported. The administration’s policy aims to prevent such dangerous work entirely, and the President signed an executive order in April or May endorsing this policy. Next, he discusses implementation: how to create incentives to ensure this research does not recur. He explains that the utopian idea behind such research was to prevent all pandemics by collecting viruses from wild places, testing their potential to infect humans by increasing their pathogenicity, and then preparing countermeasures in advance (vaccines, antivirals) and stockpiling them, even though those countermeasures would not have been tested against humans yet. If a virus did leap to humans, the foreseen countermeasures might prove ineffective because evolution is unpredictable. This “triage” approach—identifying pathogens most likely to leap and preemptively preparing against them—was the rationale for dangerous GoF work, a rationale he characterizes as flawed. He notes that many scientists considered this an effort to do bioweapons research under the guise of safety and defense. The work is dual-use. The U.S. is a signatory to the Biological Weapons Convention and does not conduct offensive bio-weapons research, but other countries might. The discussion highlights that the GoF research discussed during the pandemic can backfire and may not align with true biodefense, since countermeasures might not match whatever pathogen actually emerges. The speaker concludes that this agenda—pursuing GoF to prevent pandemics—has drawn substantial support from parts of the Western world and other countries for about two and a half decades, but he implies it is not deserving of continuation.

Gain-of-function research involves making a virus more pathogenic, virulent, and deadly, then developing a vaccine for it. The rationale for this research is to develop bioweapons and defenses against them. Anthony Fauci received a 68% raise from the military due to new military responsibilities related to this research.

Dr. Tony Fauci funded a study by Ralph Barrick, which aimed to develop a technique called seamless ligation. This technique allows for the hiding of any traces of engineering in a project. Dr. Fauci taught this technique to Chinese scientist Xing Liu Xing. This goes against the principles of public health, as it conceals any tampering or manipulation that may have been done. If the intention was to prioritize public health, there should have been clear indicators of any modifications made. The fact that Dr. Fauci taught others how to hide such modifications suggests a nefarious purpose.

You don't need a secret lab or a massive complex to create bioweapons. Unlike nuclear weapons, biological weapons can be developed discreetly, blending in with legitimate activities like vaccine production. This dual-use nature makes it difficult to detect a biological weapons program.

Researchers have been exploring the use of neuro microbiological agents to induce high morbidity without causing mortality. By modifying existing bacteria and viruses through gene editing techniques, they can create agents that make people sick rather than kill them. These agents can be spread through the internet, causing paranoia, anxiety, and sleeplessness. This leads to an influx of worried individuals flooding emergency rooms and creating a trust divide between the population and authorities. Additionally, researchers have looked into using modified Zika virus to affect subsequent generations and create long-term public health and economic burdens. Nano particulate matter can also be used to create invisible agents that clump in the brain, causing stroke-like symptoms. Finally, there are evolving devices, such as neurosensory immobilizing agents and intracranial pulse stimulators, that disrupt neural network function and alter people's sense of time, space, and place.

Scientists are reportedly combining viral and bacterial genetic material, creating something that wouldn't happen in nature. This could lead to the creation of superbugs. While some people might survive due to a resilient microbiome, many could die from these experiments. The justification for these experiments is to see what happens in case it occurs in nature later. However, the experiments are creating the very scenario they are trying to prepare for. The speaker argues that some scientific endeavors, like reproducing a dinosaur, should not be pursued because of potential catastrophic consequences like the dinosaur killing humanity. There is a need for better supervision of scientists and their labs.

The US is preparing for a new pandemic by searching for virus mutations. They may use defensive technologies offensively and create biological crises for global control.

The speakers discuss the potential dangers of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning in creating deadly viruses. They mention that AI has already been used to identify chemical combinations more lethal than nerve agents and explosive nanoparticles. They express concern that in a few years, it may be possible for individuals to create their own deadly viruses, leading to a mass casualty event. However, one speaker argues that the accuracy of such predictions is limited due to the quality of data and the complex dynamics of disease transmission. They suggest that a low-grade infection with long-term disability could be more catastrophic than a highly lethal virus.

To produce super viruses and super bacteria for large-scale use, the first challenge is to address the issue of genetic modification. The fear lies in the fact that this technology could fall into the hands of extremist terrorist groups who may not care about the consequences as long as it causes harm and instills fear in humanity.

Neuropharmaceuticals and organic toxins are being used as covert weapons to target individuals rather than large populations. By lacing someone's drink or immediate environment with low-dose drugs or toxins, their stability, thought patterns, and behaviors can be affected. This can lead to either complete incapacitation or a change in their capacity and engagement. If the targeted individual is a charismatic leader, their followers may blindly follow their altered beliefs or lose trust in them. These covert tactics can be used tactically, with agents assembled on-site or in small quantities for specific interventions. Additionally, high morbidity neurobugs can be modified to cause psychological and physical symptoms, creating panic and disrupting the public health system. Nano particulate matter and controllable robotic units at the nano scale can be aerosolized to create an undetectable swarm of biopenetrable materials, making attribution difficult. Obtaining neuroscience and technology is relatively easy, and nation states and non-state actors are funding research in these areas.

Dr. Tony Fauci funded a study by Ralph Barrick, which aimed to develop a technique called seamless litigation. This technique allows for the hiding of any traces of engineering in order to avoid detection. Dr. Fauci taught this technique to Chinese scientists, which goes against the principles of public health. Instead of ensuring transparency and accountability, this technique serves a nefarious purpose.

Gain of function research involves modifying a pathogen to increase its transmissibility or pathogenicity. This definition includes making a nonpathogen pathogenic. Regarding the Wuhan Institute, there are questions about whether they conducted gain of function research on coronaviruses. Proponents argue it could lead to vaccines or prevent pandemics, but there is skepticism. To date, gain of function research has not produced any life-saving vaccines or therapeutics, nor has it stopped a pandemic. In fact, it may have contributed to the current pandemic. While supporters of this research are well-intentioned, I personally see no tangible benefits from it.

We can now stabilize nano particulate matter for distribution. This matter is extremely small, smaller than a cell, and can be controlled to aggregate in specific areas based on biological or chemical sensitivity. Recently, it was discovered that nanomaterials can be aerosolized, creating a nano swarm that can penetrate various membranes, including the brain. These materials can be weaponized and are difficult to detect. Only a small amount is needed to affect a large number of people, and delivery can be done through drones or other unmanned devices.

The Chinese and us are both developing ethnic bioweapons, with labs in Ukraine collecting Russian and Chinese DNA to target people by race.

Scientists are investigating claims that COVID-19 was manipulated in a lab after a tiny DNA fragment matching a sequence patented by Moderna was found in the virus. The possibility of an accidental lab escape is being considered, as humans make mistakes. It is being analyzed to determine its authenticity. The team is examining whether the genetic sequence is genuine, which will take some time.

China has obtained the genomic sequence of every person in the US who has undergone gene typing. They are using this information to develop bioweapons that specifically target Caucasians. Chinese companies, such as BGI, dominate the genomic sequencing industry in the US. There is evidence suggesting that the COVID-19 virus originated from a lab in Wuhan, China, and was created through gene splicing and gain of function research. China has publicly discussed their interest in using advanced pathogenetic capabilities for warfare. The export of American genetic information to China is a significant concern, as it could be used to develop genetic weapons that target specific populations based on their genetic variations.

Lyme disease cases are increasing, with an estimated half a million cases a year. The diseases emerged in the 1970s near a US biological weapons testing facility, suggesting a possible connection. This situation highlights the risks of manipulating nature and creating new germs, leading to unintended consequences.

Scientists can learn how to teach the flu virus how to infect human tissue, and some are already doing this. The scientific community isn't trying to cause a pandemic, but they are arrogant about their ability to contain a respiratory pathogen. COVID evolved from scientific experiments in a laboratory that was trying to do good things, like make a vaccine vector, but it escaped, and over 20,000,000 people died. Nature will continue to try to change, but the species barrier for amino acids is pretty high. Some scientists believe gain of function research is needed to protect humanity against emerging pathogens, but they don't consider the fact that they may be emerging them like with COVID.

Weapon states and nation states can create biological weapons, and even small groups or individuals may have the ability to do so. The necessary technology is widely available to the public.

If we ignore the problem of felons in the US, we'll face more issues like H5N2 bird flu. The alleged H5N, avian influenza, is available for sale on the BEI Resources website since 2016. The concern lies in gain of function research in labs, where the recipe to make bird flu highly infectious for humans is already known.