In the ongoing saga that is the beginning of the fall from grace for Dr. Anthony Fauci, yet another piece of incriminating evidence was extracted from the trove of emails uploaded to the internet by Buzzfeed journalist Jason Leopold. The emails, which were obtained through a FOIA request, contain details of Fauci’s associations during the initial outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis along with some of the unsavory agents with whom Fauci was associated.
The latest warning came from Kristian G. Andersen, an immunology expert with Scripps Research Insitute and a graduate of Cambridge University. He’s no slouch. On January 31, 2020, Fauci received an email from Andersen detailing the genomic breakdown of SARS-CoV-2, initially stating that the virus “looked” totally normal.
Thanks for sharing. Yes, I saw this earlier today and both Eddie and myself are actually quoted in it. It’s a great article, but the problem is that our phylogenetic analyses aren’t able to answer whether the sequences are unusual at individual residues, except if they are completely off. On a phylogenetic tree the virus looks totally normal and the close clustering with bats suggest that bats serve as the reservoir.”
So from initial analysis, Andersen is stating this looks like a normal bat-borne virus. Andersen continues (emphasis added):
The unusual features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (<0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered.
Remember, we were all told we were crazy for believing this came from a lab, but one of the nation’s foremost experts on immunology felt the that potential that this was engineered was significant. And he wasn’t alone. Anderson continues (emphasis added):
We have a good team lined up to look very critically at this, so we should know much more at the end of the weekend. I should mention that after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike, and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory. But we have to look at this much more closely and there are still further analyses to be done, so those opinions could still change.
Andersen later published a paper identifying the result of the studies, and suddenly they were convinced that the virus was of a likely natural origin, stating that no virus could have been used as the backbone to SARS-CoV-2. While I certainly am no virologist, you’d think that a virus that shares 96.4% of its genomic code as well as nearly 29,000 nucleotides, would have provided an excellent backbone for SARS-CoV-2. That virus, RaTG13, was discovered in a bat-infested cave in China in 2013 after it infected several miners, killing three (meaning, it had already made the leap from bats to humans).
Additionally, according to the very article that Dr. Fauci sent to Andersen, Wuhan Institute of Virology scientists were able to create 5 genetically altered versions of RaTG13 in 2019, the year before the pandemic outbreak, including WIV2, WIV4, WIV5, WIV6 and WIV7. Could it be there was an additional virus created (SARS-CoV-2) and then accidentally released? If we can say they were definitely conducting gain-of-function research on these new viruses, why is it so hard that they may have created SARS-CoV-2 at the same time?
Another interesting fact about Dr. Andersen? He sits on a US committee called the “Standing Committee on Emerging Infectious Diseases and 21st Century Health” with our old friend, Peter Daszak.
Stay tuned. Daszak seems to have the same email problem Fauci has.