Thread by @HansMahncke

1/ "Research Proposal From 2018 Shows Remarkable Similarities to Pandemic Outbreak"

New from @themarketswork and myself.

theepochtimes.com/research-propo…

2/ The remarkable similarities between a recently leaked 2018 proposal from EcoHealth Alliance head Peter Daszak and the defining characteristics of Covid-19 raise new questions regarding the origins of the pandemic.

3/ The proposal sets out the Daszak’s plan to create entirely new, synthetic coronaviruses that were going to be made more virulent in humans by the insertion of a furin cleavage site, a feature that distinguishes Covid-19 from all other SARS-related coronaviruses.

4/ Covid, which was immediately well-adapted to transmission in humans, is surprisingly poorly adapted for infection in bats, indicating significant evolutionary hurdles in acquiring its human transmission feature through natural evolution in bat populations.

5/ This adaptation for human transmission was highlighted in a recent study in the science journal Nature, which noted that the Covid virus was uniquely adapted to infect humans, as it “exhibited the highest binding to human (h)ACE2 of all the species tested.”

6/ A furin cleavage site can be inserted using seamless technology, leaving no evidence of a lab insertion. Shi Zhengli supervised an April 2017 thesis that detailed how her lab was already performing experiments that replaced the “the S gene without traces” on bat coronaviruses.

7/ Daszak has dismissed the significance of the FCS as a conspiracy theory while failing to disclose his proposal to insert FCS into coronaviruses.

Shi conspicuously left out any mention of the FCS in her Feb 3, 2020 article which otherwise describes the virus in minute detail.

8/ The significance of FCS was acknowledged by Vincent Racaniello a virologist and natural origins proponent who frequently features Daszak & Co in his weekly podcasts. He wondered if the “insertion of a furin cleavage site allowed a bat CoV to gain the ability to infect humans.”

9/ Covid generally resembles other bat coronaviruses. Conspicuously, the virus’s genomic backbone doesn’t actually match any previously recorded backbone. The lack of a traceable backbone has been a primary argument used by natural origin proponents to support their position.

10/ Kristian Andersen specifically cited the lack of a traceable backbone in his highly influential Proximal Origin letter, when he stated that “the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone.”

11/ There are several problems with this natural origins argument which presupposes that all scientists diligently post their genomic backbone sequences to public databases. That's not the case. E.g. the Wuhan lab abruptly took its database of viral sequences offline in Sep 2019.

12/ Daszak’s proposal introduces another possibility, one that fits remarkably well with what is known about Covid's backbone. Daszak planned to create entirely new “consensus” viruses resulting in an entirely new viruses that wouldn’t be directly traceable on any family tree.

13/ Daszak planned to construct three to five such synthetic coronaviruses per year.

A recent study examined more than 13,000 bats and found many of them carried viruses related to the first SARS virus. But the study didn’t find a single instance of a virus related to Covid.

14/ If COVID was created according to Daszak’s proposal, it would explain why we haven’t found a good match for the virus in nature. A synthetic virus, by definition, would be different from all other viruses and not have any direct progenitor.

15/ The use of a synthetic backbone appears to have been a topic of discussion during Fauci's secret teleconference on Feb 1, 2020, where one of the participants emailed a question to the group: “We need to talk about the backbone too, not just the insert?”

16/ Daszak’s proposal also detailed a plan to release airborne nanoparticle coronavirus vaccines into wild bat populations in China. Dasak’s proposal had a remarkable overlap with work being conducted at the same time by the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

17/ Chen Ping, Fauci’s China representative sent an email to Fauci's office in Feb 2018 highlighting a new nanoparticle vaccine that had been developed by the Wuhan lab. When she tried to follow up, the report had been scrubbed and any links to the new vaccine were blocked.

18/ We knew that the level of detail in Daszak’s proposal indicated that the work was already being done. But the overlap between Daszak’s vaccine proposal and the Wuhan lab vaccine might be the first tangible piece of evidence that work on Daszak’s plan was already in motion.

19/ Daszak’s proposal was made just four weeks after the Wuhan lab completed the development of its new “nano-vaccine.” The lengths to which Chinese authorities went to scrub any information related to the new vaccine from the internet are equally noteworthy.

20/ Ultimately, there are only two possibilities for the virus’s origins. Either a virus was created at the Wuhan lab in line with Daszak’s 2018 proposal and escaped. Or a virus with the same characteristics contained in Daszak’s proposal evolved naturally—and emerged in Wuhan.