Discussions about one of the most important topics in recent history, the origin of the COVID 19 vaccine, have been censored from the beginning. This goes against the everything that science is and stands for. When you see censorship, you know that science had been abandoned and is not present in any form. Science is a methodology for answering certain kinds of questions, it is a method for finding things out. There can be no per-conceived ideas of what the answer should or shouldn't be, can or can't be. Scientific inquiry is always guided by observable evidence, NEVER dogma- no matter what the implications. Science does not take sides. It was obvious from the beginning that the question of where COVID 19 came from was not being investigated in a scientific manner, that the process of inquiry was being guided by dogma and personal interests.
There were obvious signs all along. One is the term "wet market" itself, which was used to conjure up images of dirty and unsafe handling of food animals, one that played on western racist ideas of Asian people eating "disgusting" and exotic animals. The name "wet market" is essentially a translation error. A long time ago, there were food stores that sold only dry goods, and stores that sold fresh food as well, and ended up being called "wet markets" because "wet" is the opposite of "dry". So a "wet market" is a food market where fresh food such as fruits and vegetables and meats are sold. Any farmer's market in the US is therefore also a "wet market".
It is of vital importance that we figure out how COVID 19 came to be and how the pandemic happened, both because people need to be held accountable if there was any negligence or wrongdoing, and because we need to do everything we can to minimize the risk of a pandemic such as this happening again. Understanding the viral origins of the pandemic is essential.
Origins of COVID-19: An Examination of Available Evidence
Full Committee Hearing June 18, 2024
Homeland Security, Governmental Affairs
"The COVID 19 pandemic was one of the worst public health crises our country has ever faced. We lost more than 1 million Americans to the virus."
The following are comments made by Dr John Campbell talking about these hearings. He points out that the evidence doesn't point towards a natural spillover event to explain the origins of COVID because the virus would have popped up at various places and times, which it didn't; we haven't found an intermediate animal, we haven't found an evolutionary history of the virus, and there are no antibodies to the virus in the natural reservoir. What the evidence does show us- gain of function research was being done at the Wuhan lab, evidence including e-mails was intentionally destroyed, and open scientific inquiry was not allowed. This is the video in which Dr Campbell talks about the hearing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEyRQLEmNGk&list=PL00DD377C0ACD51FB&index=8
Testimony of Senator Rand Paul:
Contents of e-mails that have been recently made public by FOIA request include:
"The lab escape version of this is so friggin' likely to have happened because they were already doing this type of work, and the molecular data is fully consistent with that scenario." -Christian Anderson
"Ian Lipkin stressed the nightmare of circumstantial evidence to assess regarding the possibility of inadvertent release given the scale of bat coronavirus research pursued in Wuhan.
Bob Gerry said "I really can't think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus, or one very similar to it, to COVID 19, where you insert exactly 4 amino acids, 12 nucleotides, and all have to be added at the exact same time to gain this function. I just can't figure out how this gets accomplished in nature. It's not crackpot to suggest this could have happened given the gain-of-function research we know was happening at Wuhan."
Ralph Berrick (a world-famous researcher of gain-of-function who collaborated with Dr Shi at the Wuhan lab) said "So they (the Wuhan lab) have a very large collection of viruses in their laboratory and so as you know proximity is a problem, it's a problem."
"Dr Fauci himself, privately acknowledged concerns about gain-of-function research in Wuhan and mutations in the virus that suggest it might have been engineered, just days before he commissioned the proximal origin paper. Despite these private doubts, publicly these so-called experts and their allies were dismissing the lab leak theory as a conspiracy. Within days, Anderson, Lipkin, and Gerry were putting final touches on what would be remembered as one of the most remarkable reversals in modern history. In their "proximal origin" paper, these scientists concluded "we do not believe that ANY type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible." Privately they were saying one thing, publicly they were saying another."
Media went along with this and censored discussion of viral origins that didn't support the official story. Information and evidence was withheld by researchers and people in the federal government from the public and from congress. One example is Dr David Morenz of NIH deleting emails regarding early discussions and then commenting "I think we're safe now" to Peter Daszac at EcoHealth Alliance. NIH and HHS have withheld documents regarding gain-of-function research from congress, despite congress passing a law to make the evidence public. The people involved are saying there wasn't gain-of-function research but won't allow anyone to look at the supposed discussion. "This has been a deliberate, prolonged effort to deceive the committee about certain gain-of-function research experiments that the agencies have been withholding.
"What we've found as we've gone through this is that at every step there's been resistance, so the hearing today is to try to find out whether or not we can get to the truth. Do we know for certain it came from the lab? No, but there's a preponderance of evidence indicating that it may have come from the lab. Do we know viruses have come from animals in the past? Yes they've come from animals in the past. But this time there's no animal reservoir, no animal handlers with antibodies, there are a lot of reasons why...there are indications that this could well have come from the lab". He goes on to say that there will be scientists from both sides presenting evidence, and there should be a spirited debate.
