Lab Leak or Brain Leak?
Understanding the "Lab Leak" Distraction
The following is a brief excerpt from Mark Bailey’s excellent ebook “A Farewell to Virology” which addresses the belief that “the virus escaped from a lab.”
Instead of repeating what I’ve already said elsewhere, I’ll let Dr Bailey succinctly dissect the lab leak idea.
Please share with anyone who needs this information so as to see the scam more clearly.
THE "LAB LEAK" DISTRACTION
By Dr Mark Bailey
You here assume smallpox to be a thing, an entity. This blunder is committed by nearly all the followers of the self-styled “regular school,” and it will probably be a new idea to you to be told that neither smallpox nor any other disease is an entity, but is a condition. — Dr Montague R. Leverson, 1909.
On 19 May 2022, Jeffrey Sachs, the chair of the Lancet COVID-19 Commission, co-authored a paper with Neil Harrison entitled, “A call for an independent inquiry into the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”170
The publication opened with the following framing of the COVID-19 situation:
Since the identification of the [sic] SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan, China, in January 2020, the origin of the virus has been a topic of intense scientific debate and public speculation. The two main hypotheses are that the virus emerged from human exposure to an infected animal (“zoonosis”) or that it emerged in a research-related incident.
However, alleging that there are “two main hypotheses” relies on the acceptance that, “the identification of SARS-CoV-2,” means the particle has both a physical existence, and the specific biological properties required to fulfil the definition of a virus. That is, a transmissible replication-competent intracellular parasite that causes the alleged novel disease ‘COVID-19’.
As was outlined in The COVID-19 Fraud & War on Humanity, there is no evidence that either the particle or the proposed novel disease exists.171 Further, in this present essay there has been a more detailed breakdown of the Fan Wu et al. paper and their false claim regarding “identification” of a virus in Wuhan in early 2020.
On the other hand, lab leak proponents such as Sachs and Harrison start their analysis by wholeheartedly accepting virology’s unestablished premises.
In their paper they went on to cite aspects such as, “the collection of SARS-like bat CoVs from the field...[and]...the analysis and manipulation of these viruses,” complaining that, “the precise nature of the experiments that were conducted, including the full array of viruses collected from the field and the subsequent sequencing and manipulation of those viruses, remains unknown.”
They obviously do not realise that ‘SARS-like bat CoVs’ are nothing more than ground up bat intestines, claimed to be “pathogenic” by injecting the muck directly into the brains of neonatal rats. Manipulation of such samples may be a way to secure some funding and impress the uninitiated but it does not change biological reality.
Such experiments do not establish that their samples contain viruses or have any pathogenic properties in the natural world. If they can’t even demonstrate the existence of viruses in their promoted public attempts, there is not much to worry about — it doesn’t matter what goes on behind closed doors because they have no viruses to start with.
With regard to the ‘SARS-CoV-2 genome’ that the virologists have proffered, Sachs and Harrison stated they, “do not know whether the insertion of the FCS [furin172 cleavage site] was the result of natural evolution - perhaps via a recombination event in an intermediate mammal or a human - or was the result of a deliberate introduction of the FCS into a SARS-like virus as part of a laboratory experiment.”
They would be better advised to look into how it was established that any of the sequences or proteins they are analysing belong to a pathogenic virus. The debate over the past few years concerning the intricacies of the FCS is simply a microcosm within the wider flawed paradigm of “viral” genomics and proteomics.
Similarly, their mention of alleged virus research taking place at the University of North Carolina (UNC) or “leaked” grant proposals such as “DEFUSE” made to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency are not evidence of viruses.173
To be clear, it is not being disputed that institutions such as UNC have been experimenting with entities such as spike proteins for decades. Some of these sequences have been patented and used in the development of injectable biological agents, recently forced onto many people under the guise of COVID-19 vaccines.174 However, none of this requires the existence of particles that qualify as viruses.
Unfortunately, virology’s book of claims has become so convoluted that most readers do not realise that it is largely composed of nonsense. A few days after Sachs and Harrison published their article, The Intercept thought they were also on an investigative trail involving, “the intriguing theory of viral engineering.”175
They reported on a 2016 UNC Chapel Hill study176 associated with Ralph Baric stating, “the scientists created a new virus using the spike of a bat coronavirus that had been isolated and characterized by the Wuhan InsEtute of Virology [WIV].”
It can be safely assumed that the author does not appreciate how deceptively the virologists use the word ‘isolated’. Additionally, Figure 1 on page 13 exposes the absurd claim that the WIV had “purified virions” that were then allegedly utilised by Baric et al. subsequently as they, “created a new virus.”
172 Furin is a protein-splitting enzyme that is present in humans and other animals. Virologists claim that when SARS-CoV-2 is being produced in a cell, furin cuts the spike protein at the ‘furin cleavage site’ before it exits the cell.
There was no evidence that either lab had anything more than abnormal monkey kidney cell culture soup.
The lab leak hypothesis is simply another narrative in the COVID-19 era that keeps alive in the public’s imagination the illusion of the material existence of SARS-CoV-2, as well as pathogenic viruses and microbe-related contagion in general. In recent months the fear-based narrative has continued with declarations of monkeypox outbreaks, alleged detection of polio “viruses” in London, and the COVID-19 lab leak theory even received backing from the Director-General of the World Health Organization in support of the phantom disease and pandemic he named.177
It seems likely there will be more “lab leak” stories in the future if they continue to capture attention so effectively.
Like the “Little Mountain Dog” story, the lab leak story doesn’t rely on any scientific demonstration of a virus, it relies simply on the belief that there is a virus, aided by some apparent supporting evidence. Along the same lines, in November 2020, the Lowy Institute, which describes itself as an Australian “international policy think tank,” published an article with the following introduction:
In April 2020 Dr Ai Fen, head of the emergency department at Wuhan Central Hospital, gave an interview to Chinese magazine Renwu. She described in great detail how, late in December 2019, she had begun receiving numerous patients into the emergency room with flu-like symptoms that were resistant to the usual treatments. She recounted how she “broke out in a cold sweat” when the first virus report of one of those patients came back.
She hastily circled the words “SARS coronavirus”, screen-shot the report, and sent it to colleagues. Very quickly, her report circulated around Wuhan medical circles. But instead of mobilising the hospital and authorities, Dr Ai’s actions saw her reprimanded by the hospital disciplinary committee for “spreading rumours” and “harming stability”. Rather than warning staff and the public, hospital authorities told staff not to wear personal protective equipment and relayed instructions from the local health protection committee that, to avoid causing panic, doctors were prohibited from sharing messages and reports related to the virus.178
To the credulous it may sound like an attempt by the authorities to cover up the start of the “viral pandemic” but those familiar with virology’s nonsense can see straight through the fallacies—none of this framing requires an actual virus.
Circling ‘SARS coronavirus’ on a “virus report” is based on nothing more than what Fan Wu’s and other teams have done in their dry-lab simulations.
Another doctor, Li Wenliang, hailed by the BBC as a “whistleblower,”179 was also reported as being censored by the Chinese authorities after he shared Dr Ai’s report. It was claimed that the 33-year- old Dr Li subsequently died of COVID-19 after he, “contracted the virus while working at Wuhan Central Hospital.” The corporate media and Wikipedia’s180 lavish promotion of the “cover up” would be comedic if it wasn’t part of a war against humanity.
All of these stories lead back to the same fear narrative involving a contagious and “deadly virus.” It allows this fraud to be propagated and paves the way for other similar frauds to be carried out in the future. It astounds the author that so many of the ‘health freedom’ community do not trust any of the corporate media’s claims about COVID-19, except the declaration that a deadly virus is on the loose, the biggest lie of all.
[Emphasis added. I too have found my jaw on the ground at the level of fanatical belief in “the virus” in the so-called “truth movement.” That’s one thing, but the added refusal to engage logic and TRY to understand the basic problems with virology has been cause for some despair. - Brendan M.]
The claim that “coronavirus” patent filings provide evidence that viruses exist can be dealt with briskly. In 2021, Dr David Martin of M·CAM® International, published, “The Fauci/COVID-19 Dossier,”181 as part of the company’s activities,
monitoring possible violations of the 1925 Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous, or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare (the Geneva Protocol) 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (the BTWC).
Despite the numerous patents involving, “methods for producing recombinant coronavirus,” and federal grants to the likes of “gain of function specialist” Dr Ralph Baric and his team at UNC Chapel Hill, there is nothing in any of these documents that contain scientific evidence that viruses exist. [Emphasis added]
Patent office staff and those approving research grants are not the arbiters of biological plausibility and simply carry forward that claims of the virologists.
The dossier was no smoking gun for “gain of function” activities involving pathogenic viruses. Perhaps those thinking it was did not heed Martin’s opening disclaimer that, “throughout this document, uses of terms commonly accepted in medical and scientific literature do not imply acceptance or rejection of the dogma that they represent.”
*End of excerpt*
📣 Brendan here again (miss me?).
I would add to all of this that if Bailey’s arguments have landed for you and you are grasping the problems with the beLIEf that a C19 “virus” exists and causes "disease” while hopping from person to person it might be time to cast a critical eye around the landscape and notice: which talking heads are STILL pushing this horse poop about “the virus” and the “pandemic”? (*cough* Del, RFK, Malone *cough*)
The fact that certain “mavericks” in medicine or “independent journalists” have so eagerly sprung to the aide of the official lie that the C19 virus exists and “caused the pandemic” is something that, three years into this scam, is now inexcusable.
REAL truth-seekers have had more than enough time to get the facts in hand and self-correct, based on evidence and logic.
As for Dr Malone, I’ll share more about him in an upcoming piece. I recently caved in to my inner shit-stirrer and posted on FB that, at BEST, he is a “complete moron,” however, I have looked into some detailed research on him and now have to say the situation is far worse and there is no way in hell this guy deserves the benefit of the doubt. Don’t say I didn’t warn ya.
Once again: No one has ever seen a “virus” cause any disease symptoms in anyone, let alone do that and then go on a little sojourn to find a new “host” in whom to replicate the original symptoms.
Hasn’t been done.
Never will be.
Because nature doesn’t work that way.
And we don’t need “viruses” to explain illness.
About Me/Brendan:
Host of Truthiverse podcast. Author of the epic, “The Grand Illusion: A Synthesis of Science and Spirituality — Book 1.” Founder of The Truthiversity 📽
If you’re not ready for the whole enchilada inside The Truthiversity, feel free to donate a subscription ⬇️ to support my work here - thanks in advance! :-)
Dr. Malone is a shill and controlled opposition.
NO so called VIRUS has ever been isolated.
NO so called virus has ever been proved transmittable.
...
But this is what really caught my attention in your statement - "They obviously do not realise that ‘SARS-like bat CoVs’ are nothing more than ground up bat intestines, claimed to be “pathogenic” by injecting the muck directly into the brains of neonatal rats. Manipulation of such samples may be a way to secure some funding and impress the uninitiated but it does not change biological reality."
I will leave it to others to do their own research and fact finding; but do you know what caused BSE / Mad Cow Disease ???... OK a hint ... they started to feed cows with a different food stuff that included ANIMAL FEED (including that of cows), so the cows basically became canibals... YEP... they did it to cut cost from vedgy feed used for hundreds of years ... and the cows went mad. Look it up as it is still on the UKand EU websites. So was BSA the test ???; in the UK the same prat was in charge of BSE and Covid = Neil Fergussen...
Fantastic, Brendan, thanks. The fraud, fake science known as virology was spawned by its mendacious, mother-bitch, germ theory. Both of these massive hoaxes are inexorably entwined with the murderous vaccine industry, a trillion dollar global racket of death and misery. This earth is run and controlled by monsters.