The study that disproved the "natural spillover" theory of SARS2
I’m going to do a “Twitter Space” on Remdesivir today at 6 PM if anyone is interested. The topic is “Remdesivir discussion,” which will be anything related to Remdesivir. '
I was preparing an outline for discussion of my research on topics related to Remdesivir. One extremely important topic that is given no attention in the mainstream media or by any substack authors is my belief that SARS2 was created as a “universal coronavirus” to test against Remdesivir at Lugar Center in Georgia. Under the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, anyone can create a bioweapon as long as they say they are creating it to test against a vaccine or medicine, so that they would have the vaccine or medicine ready just in case someone else created a similar bioweapon and used it against them.
The basic prohibitions of the BWC are contained within Article I, which bans States Parties from activities surrounding the possession of biological weapons and their components. The Convention's drafters, however, recognized that this prohibition was problematic, as these items also have a number of legitimate peaceful purposes. Therefore, Article I also includes the right of States Parties to maintain items that can be justified for "prophylactic, protective, or other peaceful purposes." For example, States Parties can develop medicines and vaccines to combat naturally occurring outbreaks of diseases as well as defensive measure to combat the effects of biological weapons. The distinction between which items are prohibited and those that are allowed is a matter of purpose.
So again, SARS2 was very likely a bioweapon created to test against the antidote Remdesivir.
When creating my outline, I wanted to identify the parent study which seems to state that SARS2 was created as a universal coronavirus. This was an Institut Pasteur study. Now the reference is gone, so I thought I would share that fact here in Substack.
“Nature” took the Insitut Pasteur study and wrote an extremely deceptive article about it.
Scientists have found three viruses in bats in Laos that are more similar to SARS-CoV-2 than any known viruses. Researchers say that parts of their genetic code bolster claims that the virus behind COVID-19 has a natural origin — but their discovery also raises fears that there are numerous coronaviruses with the potential to infect people.
This is the “spillover” theory. Nature made it sound like the authors of the study were on the track to identify the intermediate host responsible for the spillover of SARS2. At a 96.8% match, the BANAL viruses were closer than MERS which was at 96.2%.
I actually read the underlying study instead of the deceptive spin of Nature and the rest of the media. If you ever decide to read the original sources of information, you will develop a far different perspective than what the media reports to you about the information that was in that original source, but most people are lazy and don’t bother.
In the case of the Institute Pasteur study, what they were saying was that the virus had been spliced together from several viruses. They didn’t say it explicitly, but that’s more or less what had to have happened. This is why I say that SARS2 was a “universal coronavirus.” The SARS2 sequence had a little bit of all types of coronaviruses, according to the scientists at Institut Pasteur.
I wanted to go back and find that study and read it again. But, as is often the case with things I read and report, when I went back to look at the original source, it was gone. Below is what I tweeted about the Institut Pasteur study on Oct 24, 2021. This was in response to a comment that Anthony Fauci had made to Rand Paul that it was impossible for Wuhan’s research to have been responsible. And I think Fauci is telling the truth about that, just not the whole truth.
The tweet below has some original language of the parent study, now MIA.
So read that.
Interestingly, the origin of several fragments of SARS-CoV-2 genomes could be assigned to several donor strains and not a unique donor sequence.
Institut Pasteur listed multiple viruses, including ones from bats and pangolins. The media disinformation program kept writing crap like “was it a bat or a pangolin” instead of “Ralph Baric or someone spliced this God-Damned thing together.”
First the media was on the hunt for the intermediate host, then after that failed, they shifted over to the lab they knew was not responsible. I still can’t shift the focus of the origins of SARS2 to what is very likely the true origin. SARS2 was developed for testing Remdesivir at Lugar Center, then they took it over to China and false-flagged Wuhan with it.
Anyway, guess what. The link I tweeted to the parent study was here. Now it says “access denied.” https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-871965/v1/986c09ca-d494-4a7c-a65b-9eec9c0a06b8.pdf?c=1631900665. This is one reason I like to publish work as I go, because the more you put out yourself, the more difficult it is to hide it later. At least I have some selvage from Twitter. Maybe it’s still out there somewhere, I don’t know. Click on the link and this is what you get now.
Nature has hidden their BS behind a paywall. Here’s another similar “spillover spin” article from Live Science though:
In a new study, researchers from the Pasteur Institute in France and the University of Laos captured 645 bats from limestone caves in northern Laos and screened them for viruses related to SARS-CoV-2. They found three viruses — which they dubbed BANAL-52, BANAL-103 and BANAL-236 — that infected horseshoe bats and shared more than 95% of their overall genome with SARS-CoV-2.
The results show "that sequences very close to those of the early strains of SARS-CoV-2 ... exist in nature," the researchers wrote in their paper, which has yet to be peer-reviewed.
Oh OK. They exist in nature. The article doesn’t mention that the authors said that the SARS2 sequence contained bits of quite a few of these viruses that exist in nature in the same virus.
That’s disinformation. See how that works? I’m here to tell you that the same thing is going on now with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It still involves Anthony Fauci very much, just at Lugar Center.
I figure since I’ve put a lot of time into researching this, and I’m the only one in the world telling you the truth as far as I’m concerned, it’s worth 7 bucks, but suit yourself. It’s not like I haven’t tried to get other people to take up this research, but they refuse.
As for the Institut Pasteur study, there is another version of it that was posted June 30, 2022, that does not include the language I referenced from them on Twitter back in October 2021.
Anyway, that’s it. If you’re interested tune in on Twitter. I expect the conversations to be more about hospital protocols, but I thought I would share the observation of the missing study with you.
Charles Wright