COVID-19 Did Not Come From a Lab

It came from the WHO.

An honest, objective reading of records and timeline makes clear that COVID-19 (aka, covid) did not come from a lab. Continuing to say it did enables the perpetrators who staged a global pandemic.

• COVID-19 cannot come from a virology laboratory - be it in Wuhan, Wisconsin, Ukraine, North Carolina, or anyplace else - because COVID-19 is not a virus.

• COVID-19 is the name of a “disease” announced by the WHO on 11 February 2020 and pseudo-acronym that stands for Coronavirus Disease 2019 - an ‘illness’ with no unique etiology.¹ The Chinese had said ‘Wuhan Seafood Market Pneumonia’ and then, officially, Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (NCP). The WHO originally used 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease.²

• The WHO assigned COVID-19 emergency use codes U07.1. and U07.2 in its International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10). The codes reside not in the Respiratory Disease chapter (J codes) but within Codes for Special Purposes (U codes).

• The ICD entry does not name SARS-CoV-2 or any specific virus but says ‘virus identified”/”virus not identified’

  

• Neither the ICD-10 catalogue nor the coding guidelines issued on April 16, 2020 and April 20, 2020 give a sense of what “laboratory testing” is testing for. The test result did not need to be supported by clinical signs/symptoms in order for a case, hospitalization, or death to be coded U07.1, virus identified. The WHO’s resistance to using the name of the virus in early 2020 is well-documented and scientific only in the political sense.³

• A causal relationship between SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 was never proven, nor was human-to-human transmission. The virologists who re-named 2019-nCoV as SARS-CoV-2 were not charged with having to establish a link between the virus (or positive test therefore) and an illness. Indeed, it’s not clear that anyone was.

• In response to my questions about causality and transmission this summer, one member of the ICTV Coronavirus Study Group confirmed that these relationships are inferred through test results and prevalence of positive results rather than demonstrated:

  “When SARS-CoV-2 was detected for the first time in humans in the ever-increasing number of countries in early 2020, it became clear that there is human-to-human transmission. (There is no other sensible explanation for this pattern). The detection of this virus in sick & dead people, whose number grew fast, implicated this virus into the disease. That evidence was substantiated and expanded over numerous studies that used different methods. Due to a sheer number of infected in many hundred millions and considerable diversity of human population, symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection may include other than respiratory illness in some of the infected.”

A scenario in which “COVID came from a lab” could be true is if COVID has one or more additional, undisclosed meanings. For example, if it means/also means ‘Covert Operation for Vaccine Induced Disease’ and refers to a disease or condition resulting from the one-time or cumulative immunosuppressive effects of seasonal shots - which are developed in labs - then saying it ‘came from a lab’ is a reasonable characterization, if entirely at-odds with public perception.

Did SARS-CoV-2 come from a lab? is a different question altogether, as is Did SARS-Cov-2 leak from a lab?

As I explained elsewhere, most proponents of the “Lab-Leak” theory have not fully described or defended the mechanism(s) by which SARS-CoV-2 is supposed to have gotten from a lab(s) to everywhere else, or why the viral agent was ‘spreading’ without showing up in mortality or any other kind of data until governing authorities reacted to it and deployed mass testing. Granted, those who say virus came from a wet market or spread from animals to humans have not explained the dynamics and chronology alongside time series data and critical events either.

In an interview earlier this year, Jay Bhattacharya defined a ‘lab leak’ as a lab worker becoming infected with a viral agent that he or she is working with, getting sick, and spreading the illness to others.⁴ This includes instances when the worker is conducting gain-of-function research.

GoF research has long been connected to vaccine development. In contrast to what some have alleged, whether the experiments can or do result in a viable “deadlier” pathogen is irrelevant to the question of whether the experiments are being conducted.

There is no evidence that Gain of Function research can or has resulted in the “leak” of a transmissible pathogen capable of creating widespread illness or death, let alone outbreaks and mass casualty events in geographically disparate locations around the globe in short and/or successive order.⁵

We are still a long way from confronting the events of late 2019 and early 2020. “Did COVID-19 come from a lab?” is not among the most basic questions. It’s the wrong question altogether, and we already know it did not.

The Most Basic Questions

1. Spikeopathy Does Not Explain the 'Novel' Symptoms Associated with COVID-19

2. Timeline: The Finding & Naming of SARS-CoV-2

3. The SARS-CoV-2 Name Game

4. Bhattacharya [3:05]: “There’s a history of lab leak going back decades. And, especially if you have work being done in relatively unregulated labs, there really is a real danger — because a lab leak isn’t a nefarious thing. It’s just, you know, you’re human, you’re a lab worker, you’re doing pipetting, whatever, you get bored. The mask slips. You get a cut or something and you get sick, you go home, not knowing that you’ve been infected, you spread the disease - that’s what a lab leak is.”

5. See Virus Origins and Claim of Function Research (Neil & Engler)