In contrast to previous coronavirus-related epidemics such as SARS and MERS, it has not been possible to identify an intermediate host that may have enabled the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 pathogens from bats to humans well over a year after the current pandemic. Zoonosis theory as a possible explanation for the pandemic therefore has no sound scientific basis.
The SARS-CoV-2 viruses can be surprisingly well coupled to human cell receptors and penetrate into human cells. This is made possible by special cell receptor binding domains connected to a special (furin) fission site of the coronavirus-zacken protein. Both properties together were not previously known in coronaviruses and indicate a non-natural origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen.
Bats were not offered at the suspected fish market in the centre of wuhan. However, the virological institute of the city of Wuhan has one of the world’s largest collections of bat pathogens, which originate from distant caves in southern China provinces. It is extremely unlikely that bats from this distance of almost 2,000 km made their way to Wuhan naturally, only to trigger a worldwide pandemic in the immediate vicinity of this virological institute.
A research group at the Virological Institute of the City of Wuhan has carried out genetic manipulations of coronaviruses over many years with the aim of making them more contagious, dangerous and deadly for humans. This is documented in the scientific literature by numerous publications.
There were significant safety deficiencies in the virological institute of the city of Wuhan even before the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, which are documented.
There is numerous direct indications of a laboratory origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen. A young scientist from the Virological Institute in Wuhan is said to have been the first to become infected. There is also numerous indications that the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen spread as early as October 2019 from the virological institute in the city of Wuhan and beyond. There is also evidence of a corresponding study by the Virological Institute by the Chinese authorities in the first half of October 2019.
“With the Supreme Court judgment in the measles virus trial any national and international
statements on the alleged measles virus, the infectivity of measles, and on the benefit and safety of vaccination against measles, are since then of no scientific character and have thus been deprived of their legal basis.”
“For almost one year we have been asking authorities, politicians and medical institutes after the scientific evidence for the existence of such viruses that are said to cause disease and therefore require “immunization”. After almost one year we have not received even one concrete answer which provides evidence for the existence of those “vaccination viruses”. The conclusion is inevitable that our children are still vaccinated on the basis of scientific standards of the 18th and 19th century. In the 19th century Robert Koch demanded in his generally accepted postulates evidence of the virus in order to prove infection; at Koch´s time this evidence couldn´t be achieved directly by visualization and characterization of the viruses, because adequate technology wasn´t available at that time. Methods of modern medicine have profoundly changed over the past 60 years, in particular by the invention of the electron microscope. And still all these viruses we get immunized against have never been re-examined using this technology?”
In the United States and many parts of the world, Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine is given to children between 12 to 18 months and then followed when they reach the ages 4 to 6. This is strongly being “pushed” by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) with the financial backing of course by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF). However in the CDC’s own data from 2003, Brian Hooker’s research in the Translational Neurodegeneration Journal revealed a 340% increased risk of autism in African-American children following the MMR vaccine. This study also “provides the most recent epidemiological evidence showing that African American males receiving the MMR vaccine prior to 24 months of age or 36 months of age are more likely to receive an autism diagnosis”.
Meanwhile, a CDC whistleblower named Dr. William Thompson also confirmed that “the CDC knew about the relationship between the age of first MMR vaccine and autism incidence in African-American boys as early as 2003, but chose to cover it up.” He also stated that they’ve “missed ten years of research” because the CDC is so paralyzed then by “anything related to autism” and that the CDC “is not doing what they should be doing because they’re afraid to look for things that might be associated.” He “alleges criminal wrongdoing by his supervisors, and he expressed deep regret about his role in helping the CDC hide data”.