Clowns to the left of me jokers to the right here I am stuck (locked down) in the middle with you
Clowns to the left of me jokers to the right here I am stuck (locked down) in the middle with you
Highlights of this short article (that are unlikely to be raised during the covid inquiry)
· Recent (2021-23) specific evidence emerges on why the SARS-CoV-2 transmission narrative and response was so fundamentally flawed.
· Why it was so important to identify that the virus escaped from a laboratory (gain of function research) resulting in a pandemic that had unique characteristics.
I was watching Vallance’s recent testimony to the UK Covid Inquiry. During that testimony he stated that, the self-confessed non-scientist Boris Johnson, questioned the fact that the impact of the virus was going up and down irrespective of interventions. A valid point that was entirely dismissed by Vallance. Prompted by his lack of honesty and his abject failure to provide any evidence during his testimony I have decided to write this article.
It seems quite distant when the two brothers Grimm used to stand in front of cameras and announce the dead and the impending doom that we all faced. I, like many, look back in despair at the ill-informed response led by these two individuals. Had they both had a perspective / responsibility bypass?
Fortunately, we can perform our own research and draw our own conclusions as we have access to the biggest library in the world in the form of the internet. This facility has been portrayed by many of our “experts” as potential misinformation. The Noble prize winner Professor Michael Levitt tweeted the following comment about my Substack article questioning (1) the transmission narrative:
In retrospect what were the biggest areas of misinformation spread by Whitty and Vallance?
There were early warning signs that something odd was going on in the world at least as far back as early 2019. Examining excess mortality data, we can see that there were significant positive dips occurring at the same time all over Europe.
What caused these dips in excess mortality? I was badly misled by the conventional viral replication and transmission narrative. My original understanding was that a virus entered our bodies, hijacked the replication mechanisms of our cells to generate viral particles, which then were released to infect other cells or an external host. This is known as a cell free transmission mode. Studies on other viruses dating back to at least 1992 (2) indicated a second transmission mode. This involves the direct connection of cells within a host and transmission of viral particles and / or fragments between those linked cells. This cell to cell mode has a survival advantage in that it can evade the environment external to the cell such as neutralising antibodies. Evidence identifying this mode of transmission for the analogous respiratory viruses influenza was generated in 2015 (3) and specific to SARS-CoV-2 in 2021 (4). A further SARS-CoV-2 study (5) identified that the virus was using the concentration of receptor binding site protein (ACE2 protein) to regulate which mode to select. As the ACE2 protein increased the transmission mode would switch from a cell free to a cell to cell transmission. In addition, the expression of this protein increased as an infection progressed and therefore a switch from cell free to cell to cell transmission would result.
To ascertain just how gullible I was I googled viral replication and transmission and to this day in stills only comes up with the cell free mode outlined above and completely omits the second cell to cell component.
This dual replication / transmission concept explains the dips in mortality seen in the graphs above. A genetically engineered virus rapidly enters a significant proportion of the population as there is a lack of prior immunity. There is also a lack of viral diversity as it has been created in a laboratory (gain of function) in a relatively “pure” form. Gain of function research is where (dangerous) scientists amalgamate some of the pathogenic qualities of several viruses to study how this may be dealt with should it occur naturally. A virus requires a host to replicate, mutate and create diversity in the viral population. The initial lack of diversity allows our immune systems to readily identify and develop an effective immune response and create neutralising antibodies. The virus senses this and switches to a predominantly cell to cell transmission mechanism. During this phase, because of the virus can hide from the immune system, the majority of those infected do not feel that sick and therefore it is not identified within the population. The significant cell to cell spread occurring in the population results in pathogen interference (6) suppressing other diseases and this results in a nett reduction in expected mortality seen above. The virus has an opportunity during this cell to cell transmission phase to replicate, mutate and diversify. This provides mutations that have the capability to escape the prevailing state of the host immune systems and cell free transmissions occurs. The virus has evolved seasonally activated mechanisms that enable it to optimise the time to accelerate the replication stage and release infectious viral particles potentially to an external host (1). This resulted in the relatively sharp mortality and infection peaks seen during the pandemic that were questioned by Boris Johnson.
Summary
I think it is safe to say our “experts” have let us down very badly. Vallance and Whitty are classic examples of “a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest”. Professor Devi Sridhar ‘s, one of Nicola Sturgeons pandemic advisors, zero covid stance flies in the face of any real world data. Has she ever visited the planet earth?
The dual transmission concept is also in conflict with the vaccine efficacy model in that inducing an antibody surge will potentially switch a virus to cell to cell transmission and effectively kick the can, to a possibly worse place, down the road. There is also the specificity of the antibody response and the implication for original antigenic sin that have been discussed in a prior article (7). These alternative concepts are being ignored / suppressed by big pharma and governments presumably to try and preserve the established narrative.
The additional evidence described in this article highlight some of the survival mechanisms that respiratory viruses have evolved through an infinite number of mutations and selective pressures. Not to mention gain of function research. This underlines the pathetic attempt of interventions such as masks and lockdowns. I recollect an early analogy that the non-pharmaceutical measures were like trying to stop autumn by getting the army to stick the leaves back on the trees.
Will a greater truth ever emerge? Certainly not from the Covid Inquiry.
References
(1) Were Charles Darwin and Robert Edgar Hope-Simpson right about Covid-19? Part 1 (see previous posts for parts 2 to 6)
(2) Cell-to-cell spread of HIV-1 occurs within minutes and may not involve the participation of virus particles
https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6822(92)90038-Q
(3) Influenza A Virus Uses Intercellular Connections to Spread to Neighboring Cells
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.03306-14
(4) SARS-CoV-2 Can Spread Via Cell-to-Cell Transmission
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2111400119
(5) Human ACE2 protein is a molecular switch controlling the mode of SARS-CoV-2 transmission
(6) Pathogen interference:
(7) The pandemic a tale of original antigenic sin and why did we ignore the positive mortality data?