reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0: It is based on the sworn statement of the late professor Doctor Francis Boyle, who has determined and concluded. Professor Boyle is the greatest authority in the field of bioweapons legislation. He is the author of it. So he knows what is legally meant by it. He knew. Like no other that the COVID-19 mRNA injection is a bioweapon. He has also made that loud and clear to the world known. After which despite being in good health, he passed away shortly after he had declared himself willing to give testimony under oath about this in court. The core of Professor Boyle's argument is that the COVID-19 mRNA injections contain derivatives of illegal military gene function research. As a result, the COVID-19 injections qualify by definition as a military biological weapon system, a bioweapon in other words. This bioweapon consists of two integrated components. The pathogenic load and the delivery mechanism. It is beyond doubt that the pathogenic load is the product of illegal gene or function research. Boyle refers to an article in the scientific journal Nature Medicine, of which I have included the link in this plea note. If you open that link, you will immediately read the warning that true scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus. You will also immediately know that what is called the new normal, true scientists, are not scientists but faith fanatics. These are the scientists behind whom the respondents hide. The article in Nature Medicine that Boyle reports on was published in 2015. And the title reads translated, a cluster of circulating coronaviruses in bats similar to SARS shows potential for human infection. I present to you. What the summary of this research included in the article reveals. It states based on these findings, we have synthetically created an infectious fully SHC zero fourteen recombinant virus developed and demonstrated robust viral replication. Both in vitro and in vivo. So it states, we researchers have created a SARS like coronavirus with a spike protein optimized for human infection. I cannot provide a better example of illegal gain of function research. And who wrote that article from 2015? Among others, researchers affiliated with UNC Chapel Hill and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Wuhan. Yes, Wuhan. You know, where according to the official narrative, people suddenly dropped dead on the street when COVID-19 broke out because there was a bat mutated. The spike protein, the pathogenic payload of the bioweapon is the result of this research. So it's not about a natural spike protein, but an illegally developed synthetically made pathogen that has been optimized for human infection. The spike protein mRNA with the instructions to human cells to produce this very pathogenic spike protein is one of the two crucial building blocks of the COVID-19 bioweapon. Now the delivery system, the NLPs, you know, the nanolipid particles that encapsulate the mRNA payload and deliver it into the interior of the cells. The propaganda term for this is fat globules. What did Boyle declare about it? Boyle declared that it is actually about a nanotechnology enhanced delivery platform. This technology is, as Boyle declared, paid for, developed, financed and conceived by the Pentagon and its research institute DARPA. This technology platform nanotechnology platform was not an afterthought. Doctor Boyle points out that the virus itself was aerosolized and engineered with nanotechnology from the very beginning. This indicates a long term program aimed at the application of advanced delivery systems. And this technology has been used in the COVID-19 injections. Boyle determined that the NLP delivery system in the injections is the result of a specific teacher sponsored program for nanotechnological biological weapons. In the presentation by Samsung you can read further about the legal implications of this. It is also argued that Gates and Borla qualify as suspects of crimes against humanity as defined in the Rome statute concerning the international criminal court.

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.

We need to be proactive in searching for emerging diseases before they become a global threat. Peter Daszak, who collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, discovered 50 previously unknown Coronaviruses in bats. These Coronaviruses have the potential to jump from wildlife to humans. Our organization works with labs worldwide, subcontracting the work and ensuring we have a country program officer in each location to manage our projects.

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.

We isolated coronaviruses from animals in the past to understand their threat to other species by culturing them on different cell types. This process, known as gain of function, involves enriching mutants that can infect new species. The speaker emphasizes that mass vaccination in humans is a significant gain of function experiment, leading to virus evolution. This real-world experiment involves constant virus changes due to human-to-human transmission under vaccine pressure.

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.

Animal viruses that jump to humans often struggle to infect effectively due to their evolution in animals. The first SARS virus in 2003 had a 10% mortality rate but only infected 8,000 people because it didn't adapt well to humans. In contrast, COVID-19 attached perfectly to humans, suggesting possible lab manipulation. Researchers used a supercomputer to find that the virus did not attach well to other animals, indicating it was pre-adapted for humans. Evidence points to a 2018 research project that aimed to create a virus similar to COVID-19. Despite this, obtaining records from the Biden administration has been challenging, even with bipartisan support for transparency. The situation remains frustrating, highlighting the need for further investigation.

Scientists analyzed the genetic code of viruses to trace their origins. By studying the molecular clock, they found that SARS-CoV-2 had no posterior diversity, indicating a single source in Wuhan. Research showed hospitals in Wuhan were clustered along a subway line connecting the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the wet market, and the international airport, suggesting a potential route of transmission. The speaker collaborated with the State Department in 2020 to investigate these findings.

The speaker discusses the global wildlife trade and its connection to the emergence of new diseases. They focus on SARS and how it originated from a wildlife market. Through surveillance of bats in Southern China, they have discovered over 100 new SARS-related coronaviruses that pose a threat to humans. Some of these coronaviruses can infect human cells and cause SARS-like disease. The speaker emphasizes the need for continued surveillance and understanding of these spillover events, as any one of them could potentially lead to a pandemic. They also mention the challenges in developing vaccines and antivirals for these diverse coronaviruses.

Recent computer modeling from early 2020 suggested that the virus might be man-made. Initially, the goal was to design a vaccine, but the modeling revealed that the virus was surprisingly well-adapted to humans, raising questions about its origin. Instead of identifying an exotic animal, the research pointed to humans as the closest match for the virus's ACE2 receptor binding. This unexpected finding led to speculation about whether the virus had adapted in a lab setting or was an accidental release. The research faced challenges in publication due to its divergence from the prevailing narrative. Additionally, the presence of a furin cleavage site in the virus raised further concerns, as it appeared unnatural in the context of viral evolution.

The coronavirus spike protein's shape before interacting with our cells is key to triggering an antibody response. To study this, we create the spike protein in the lab, maintaining its precise shape. This is achieved using a "clamp"—a small fragment of HIV protein—that holds the spike protein in its natural, pre-interaction conformation. This ensures the lab-made protein accurately reflects the virus's structure, allowing for effective antibody response studies.

We created coronaviruses by assembling a synthetic bat genome with the SARS clone. The genome was split into 5 kilobyte pieces with unique restriction sites to allow directional assembly. Initially, the virus couldn't replicate due to an entry defect, so we replaced the receptor binding domain with one from the human epidemic strain. This modification resulted in a virus that replicated efficiently. The growth curve data supported this success.

Chinese researchers have created a super virus by combining a protein from bats with the SARS virus found in mice. This virus could potentially infect humans, although it is currently only being studied in laboratories. The debate over the risks of this research is not new, with some scientists arguing that the benefits outweigh the potential dangers. However, others are concerned about the possibility of the virus directly infecting humans without an intermediate species. The US government had previously suspended funding for research aiming to make viruses more contagious, but this did not stop the Chinese research on SARS. Some experts believe the chances of the virus spreading to humans are minimal compared to the potential benefits, while others disagree.

Scientists sequence the virus and compare it to known pathogens like SARS. They discovered similar coronaviruses in bats and focused on the spike protein that attaches to cells. Chinese researchers created pseudoparticles with spike proteins from these viruses to test their binding to human cells. Each step of this process helps determine if the virus can become pathogenic in humans. Manipulating the spike protein in the lab is crucial for understanding the zoonotic risk. By obtaining the sequence, scientists can predict the virus's behavior more accurately.

In 2015, the National Library of Medicine published a study by 15 virologists and medical experts warning that SARS-like bat coronaviruses pose a potential threat to humans. The scientists, with decades of experience in studying coronaviruses, examined how SARS and MERS transmitted among humans. They modified a strain of coronavirus from Chinese horseshoe bats using gain of function technology and injected it into mice spinal cords. This study not only highlights the dangers of coronaviruses in bats but also demonstrates efforts to amplify the virus's contagion ability to better understand and prepare for future outbreaks.

Evolutionary virologists analyzed viral sequences from the current outbreak and in bats. They determined that the mutations required for the virus to jump from an animal to a human are entirely consistent with its evolutionary path. A paper detailing this research will be made available, although the authors are not currently named.

In South America and Southeast Asia, there are many bat species carrying unknown viruses, making them potential sources of future pandemics. The USAID EPT predict program and NIAID funding allowed researchers to predict and prepare for emergencies like the SARS outbreak. They discovered that SARS-like viruses originate from bats in China, with some being almost identical to SARS. Surveillance of bat hunters and nearby residents revealed the potential for spillover into human populations. While there are no vaccines or antivirals for these diverse coronaviruses, scientists can manipulate them in the lab by studying their spike proteins. This knowledge can aid in the development of better vaccines and therapeutics. However, predicting and anticipating pandemics does not guarantee prevention.

This video discusses the coronavirus and the ongoing research programs to develop vaccines against similar viruses that have previously crossed over from animals to humans. The question is raised whether these viruses can be modified or adapted to combat the current virus. This research is being conducted globally, including in China.

Researchers have discovered various coronaviruses in bats, including ones similar to SARS. They focused on the spike protein, which attaches to cells, and conducted experiments in China. By inserting spike proteins from these viruses into pseudoparticles, they tested their ability to bind to human cells. This process allowed them to understand the potential pathogenicity of the virus in humans.

The speakers discuss the possibility of the Sarscov 2 virus being a laboratory-made chimera. They mention that it is possible to create a virus in the lab that is indistinguishable from a natural one. They also mention a database created by Professor Shi, containing information on over 20,000 bat and rodent viruses. The database included details such as GPS coordinates, virus type, and whether the virus was sequenced or isolated. However, the webpage containing this information was removed from the web in June 2020.

Joseph Sanson presents the statement based on the sworn statement of the late Professor Doctor Francis Boyle, who he says is the greatest authority in bioweapons legislation and the author of it. Sanson claims Boyle knew that the covert nineteen mRNA injection is a bio weapon and that Boyle declared this to the world before his death, which Sanson says occurred despite Boyle being in good health and willing to testify under oath in court. The core of Boyle’s argument, as Sanson relays, is that the COVID-19 mRNA injections contain derivatives of illegal military gene function research, and as a result, the injections qualify by definition as a military biological weapon system, a bioweapon. This bioweapon is said to have two integrated components: the pathogenic load and the delivery mechanism. Sanson asserts it is beyond doubt that the pathogenic load is the product of illegal gene or function research. He references an article in Nature Medicine cited by Boyle, noting that the article’s warning indicates true scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus, and that what is called the “new normal” are not scientists but faith fanatics behind whom the respondents hide. The Nature Medicine article, published in 2015, is described as stating that a cluster of circulating coronaviruses in bats similar to SARS shows potential for human infection, and that the researchers synthetic created an infectious fully SHC zero fourteen recombinant virus with robust viral replication in vitro and in vivo, with a SARS-like coronavirus having a spike protein optimized for human infection. Sanson names researchers affiliated with UNC Chapel Hill and the Wuhan Institute of Virology as authors of that article. According to Boyle, the spike protein mRNA, with instructions to human cells to produce the pathogenic spike protein, is one of the two crucial building blocks of the COVID-19 bioweapon. The other building block is the delivery system, the nanolipid particles (NLPs) that encapsulate the mRNA payload and deliver it into cells, referred to in propaganda as fat globules. Boyle is said to have declared that this delivery system is a nanotechnology enhanced platform paid for, developed, financed, and conceived by the Pentagon and its research institute DARPA. The technology platform is described as not an afterthought, with Boyle stating that the virus itself was aerosolized and engineered with nanotechnology from the beginning, indicating a long-term program applying advanced delivery systems, and that this technology has been used in the COVID-19 injections. Boyle’s presentation is also presented as arguing that Gates and Borla qualify as suspects of crimes against humanity as defined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

There are ongoing research programs worldwide, including in China, to develop vaccines for coronaviruses. These programs aim to modify existing vaccines or create new ones to combat viruses that have previously jumped from animals to humans. The focus is on understanding how these viruses can be altered or adapted to effectively protect against them.

In the lab, it's easy to manipulate spike proteins, which play a significant role in the zoonotic risk of coronaviruses. By obtaining the sequence and constructing the protein, we collaborated with Ralph Barrick at UNC to insert it into another virus. This allows us to conduct experiments and enhance our ability to predict outcomes based on specific sequences.

We focus on viral families that have transmitted from animals to humans. When we find a virus that resembles a known dangerous pathogen, like SARS, we examine its spike protein, which attaches to cells. Chinese researchers create pseudo particles with these spike proteins to test if they bind to human cells. This process helps us identify viruses that could potentially be harmful to humans. By narrowing down the field and reducing costs, we end up with a small number of viruses that appear to be dangerous. We then investigate if people living in the same region as the animals carrying these viruses have developed antibodies.

Scientists are investigating claims that COVID-19 was manipulated in a lab. They are analyzing data to determine the accuracy of these claims. The possibility of a lab accident cannot be ruled out, as humans make mistakes. It is being examined whether the Wuhan lab in China was conducting virus enhancement or gene modification, leading to an accidental infection. The team is carefully examining a genetic sequence that matches one patented by Moderna for cancer research. This analysis takes time.