The explanations of COVID-19’s origins by mainstream media simply do not add up and scientists are increasingly speaking out about this. Many experts theorize that the virus is manmade and was synthesized in a laboratory because the peculiarities of the virus’ genome that make it so transmittable could not have occurred in nature.
Experts who suspect COVID-19 has lab origins have strong evidence on their side. Research between the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to increase the infectivity and deadliness of a SARS-like coronavirus has indeed been conducted.1
The coronavirus experimental collaborations, called “gain-of-function” (GOF) research, were curtailed by the U.S. between 2014 and 2018 because of their obvious risks, but in 2017 the NIH announced the research would be resumed.2
Scientists willing to challenge the mainstream explanations of COVID-19’s origin face a backlash from their colleagues and scientific associations and have even been dismissed as “conspiracy theorists.” However, a new voice has been added to the body of scientific dissenters that will likely add to the credibility of their COVID-19 viewpoints.
French virologist Luc Antoine Montagnier, who was awarded a Nobel prize in Physiology in 2008 along with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Harald zur Hausen for discovering of the HIV virus,3 has now spoken out. Montagnier was a researcher at the prestigious Pasteur Institute in Paris.4
COVID-19 Was Manmade, Says Nobel Laureate
Many in the scientific community were shocked when the acclaimed Luc Antoine Montagnier appeared on the French cable TV show, CNews, on April 17, 20205 to say that the virus that causes COVID-19 is manmade and that elements of HIV and Plasmodium falciparum, a parasite that causes malaria, are found in the coronavirus’s genome.6 Montagnier said:7
“We were not the first since a group of Indian researchers tried to publish a study which showed that the complete genome of this coronavirus [has] sequences of another virus, which is HIV.”
The research that Montagnier refers to was posted on the science website Biorxiv January 31, 2020, and has since been withdrawn. The researchers wrote:8
“We found 4 insertions in the spike glycoprotein (S) which are unique to the 2019-nCoV and are not present in other coronaviruses. Importantly, amino acid residues in all the 4 inserts have identity or similarity to those in the HIV-1 gp120 or HIV-1 Gag …
The finding of 4 unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV, all of which have identity /similarity to amino acid residues in key structural proteins of HIV-1 is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature.”
COVID-19 Derives From a Failed HIV Vaccine, Says Montagnier
In a separate appearance on the French podcast Pourquoi Docteur, also April 17,9 Montagnier said the coronavirus had escaped in an “industrial accident” while Chinese scientists at the Wuhan city laboratory were trying to develop a vaccine against HIV.10 “In order to insert an HIV sequence into this genome, molecular tools are needed, and that can only be done in a laboratory,” said Montagnier.11
Montagnier also said he believes that the pandemic will naturally extinguish itself because of its synthetic origins:12
“Nature does not accept any molecular tinkering, it will eliminate these unnatural changes and even if nothing is done, things will get better, but unfortunately after many deaths.”
According to the website Corvelva, Montagnier said on the podcast that the pandemic would peter out because nature would override the synthetically inserted sequences that make COVID-19 so deadly:13
“With the help of interfering waves, we could eliminate these sequences … and consequently stop the pandemic. But it would take many means available.”
Montagnier Created His Theory With a Biomathematics Expert
Montagnier says he reached his conclusions, “With my colleague, biomathematician Jean-Claude Perez,” after they “carefully analyzed the description of the genome of this RNA virus.”14 Montagnier’s partner, Perez, is a French interdisciplinary scientist and biomathematics expert.15
According to an online bio, Perez has proved that DNA coding for genes is structured by proportions related to Fibonacci numbers,16 which are formulas in mathematics that are sometimes called “nature’s secret code.”17 In a paper Montagnier and Perez published on the Center for Open Science in April 2020, they write:18
“Using our proprietary bio-mathematic approach we are able to evaluate the level of cohesion and organization of a genome; … we then searched in this genome for possible traces of HIV or even SIV [related simian immunodeficiency virus]. A first publication reports the discovery of 6 HIV SIV RNA pieces.”
The HIV and SIV elements that Montagnier and Perez detect, called Exogenous Informative Elements, or EIEs, provide the basis of their theory that COVID-19 is not a simple derivative of SARS and bat-related viruses. They write:19
“A major part of these 16 EIE already existed in the first SARS genomes as early as 2003. However, we demonstrate how and why a new region including 4 HIV1 HIV2 Exogenous Informative Elements radically distinguishes all COVID-19 strains from all SARS and Bat strains …
… a contiguous region representing 2.49% of the whole COVID-19 genome is 40.99% made up of 12 diverse EIE originating from various strains of HIV SIV retroviruses …
a novel long region of around 225 nucleotides, appears to us to be totally new: this region is completely absent in ALL SARS genomes, whereas it is present and 100% homologous for all COVID-19 genomes listed in NCBI or GISAID COVID_19 genomic databases.”
More About Montagnier and Perez’s Theory
After in-depth sequencing of related genomes from many different countries, regions of countries and time periods using their proprietary biomathematic approach, Montagnier and Perez say their research enabled them to:20
“… demonstrate how and why a new region including 4 HIV/SIV EIE radically distinguishes all COVID- 19 strains from all SARS and Bat strains.”
They also find the presence of plasmodium yoelii in the COVID-19 genome, a parasite used in studies of “mice vaccine strategies.” This is another EIE not originally in the SARS and bat-related viruses, say Montagnier and Perez.21
“An analysis of amino acid homologies confirms the very probable insertion of this EIE [plasmodium yoelii] in COVID-19.”
As they decode the genomes of myriad COIVID-19 “relatives” in their research paper, Montagnier and Perez detect mutations in which the viruses seem to be trying to “rid” themselves of the exogenous EIEs, which the researchers believe were inserted deliberately.22
The virus mutations seem to verify Montagnier’s Pourquoi Docteur podcast predictions about how nature will eliminate “unnatural changes” — the reason he is hopeful the pandemic will come to a natural ending.23
Other Researchers Agree With Montagnier and Perez
Since Montagnier’s comments to French media, other researchers have agreed that COVID-19 appears manmade, with insertions that hint at lab construction. In June 2020, research published in the Quarterly Review of Biophysics makes similar claims.24 Norwegian scientist Birger Sørensen and British oncologist Angus Dalgleish refer to COVID-19 as a “chimeric virus” and write:25
“We show the non-receptor dependent phagocytic general method of action to be specifically related to cumulative charge from inserted sections placed on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike surface in positions to bind efficiently by salt bridge formations; and from blasting the Spike we display the non human-like epitopes from which Biovacc-19 has been down-selected.”
While conceding the Quarterly Review of Biophysics assertions were controversial, the scientific website Minerva wrote that the science should be pursued.26
“Minerva has read a draft of the article, and has after an overall assessment decided that the findings and arguments do deserve public debate, and that this discussion cannot depend entirely on the publication process of scientific journals.”
Like Montagnier, Sørensen’s background is HIV research work and he launched a new immunotherapy for HIV in 2008 that was acclaimed.27 In an interview with Minerva about his recent contentious research, he says:28
“We have examined which components of the virus are especially well suited to attach themselves to cells in humans. And we have done this by comparing the properties of the virus with human genetics. What we found was that this virus was exceptionally well adjusted to infect humans … So well that it was suspicious.”
The Sunday Times of London Weighs In
I previously interviewed virologist Jonathan Latham, and he expanded on his uncovering of this nondisclosed Wuhan virus. You can see more in the video below.
“The world’s closest known relative to the Covid-19 virus was found in 2013 by Chinese scientists in an abandoned mine where it was linked to deaths caused by a coronavirus-type respiratory illness.”
Among the many unanswered questions was why the deaths of six men in China in 2012, who had been exposed to a bat virus and quickly developed severe pneumonia, were covered up by Chinese authorities. According to The Times:31
“All the men were linked. They had been given the task of clearing out piles of bat feces in an abandoned copper mine in the hills south of the town of Tongguan … Some had worked for two weeks before falling ill, and others just a few days … while none had tested positive for SARS, all four had antibodies against another, unknown Sars-like coronavirus.”
A research paper titled “Coexistence of Multiple Coronaviruses in Several Bat Colonies in an Abandoned Mineshaft,” cowritten by Shi Zhengli, a researcher known in China as the “Bat Woman,” makes “no mention of why the study had been carried out: the miners, their pneumonia and the deaths,” says the Times.32
The deaths from the apparently new bat-related respiratory virus were also blacked out by Chinese media, says The Times, and could only be gleaned from a “master’s thesis by a young medic called Li Xu.”33
Adding to the many questions about the virus’ origins, wrote The Times, was the fact that “of the 41 patients who contracted Covid-19 in Wuhan only 27” had contact with the Huanan seafood market, which was officially named as the source. Moreover, a longtime bat researcher exposed to bat blood and urine who subsequently fell ill and might have been “patient zero” refused to talk to reporters.34
Thanks to the “gain-of-function” research that was conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, well-founded fears of escaped or leaked viruses preceded the acknowledgement of COVID-19 and were increased by China’s lack of transparency. For example, wrote The Times, even the fact that COVID-19 could be spread between humans was hidden:35
“China would not admit there had been human-to-human transmission until January 20, despite sitting on evidence the virus had been passed to medics.”
The True Nature of COVID-19 Remains Hidden
According to The Times, a sample of the virus that killed six in 2012 was housed at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and was described in a scientific paper cowritten by Shi that states it is a 96.2% match to the COVID-19 virus.36 The virus, called RaTG13, says The Times:
“… was the biggest lead available as to the origin of Covid-19. It was therefore surprising that the paper gave only scant detail about the history of the virus sample, stating merely that it was taken from a Rhinolophus affinis bat in Yunnan province in 2013 — hence the “Ra” and the 13.
Inquiries have established, however, that RaTG13 is almost certainly the coronavirus discovered in the abandoned mine in 2013, which had been named RaBtCoV/4991 in the institute’s earlier scientific paper. For some reason, Shi and her team appear to have renamed it.”
According to The Times, the obfuscation about how long the virus has been known to exist and its origins continues. In an interview with Scientific American, says The Times, Shi:37
“… mentions the discovery of a coronavirus that 96% matches the Covid-19 virus, and has a reference to the miners dying in a cave she investigated. However, the two things are not linked and Shi downplays the significance of the miners’ deaths by claiming they succumbed to a fungus.”
Was COVID-19 Created in a Lab?
With the many cover-ups and misleading information surrounding the coronavirus and resulting pandemic, is it possible COVID-19 came from a lab and was manmade? On this point, The Times is agnostic.38
“The final and trickiest question for the WHO inspectors [who investigated the virus in China] is whether the virus might have escaped from a laboratory in Wuhan. Is it possible, for example, that RaTG13 or a similar virus turned into Covid-19 and then leaked into the population after infecting one of the scientists at the Wuhan institute?
This seriously divides the experts. The Australian virologist Edward Holmes has estimated that RaTG13 would take up to 50 years to evolve the extra 4% that would make it a 100% match with the Covid-19 virus.”
Most of the mainstream media as well as the scientific community continue to dismiss such ideas. But the addition of the voices of a Nobel Laureate and well-known Norwegian researcher give the theory greater credibility. There are other questions unexplored by media, too.
Was COVID-19 Intended as a Bioweapon?
If COVID-19 were manmade and leaked from a laboratory, there is another pressing question. Was the synthesized virus intended as a bioweapon? In a published paper, Dr. Meryl Nass, a board-certified internist and biological warfare epidemiologist,39 wrote that such genetic engineering techniques have “resulted in biological weapons that were tested, well-described and, in some cases, used.”40
Many are unaware of just how many Biological Safety Levels (BSL) 3 and 4 labs there are in the world. They are found in the U.S., China, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, The Czech Republic, France, Gabon, Germany, Hungary, India, Italy, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan and the United Kingdom.41 People are also unaware of how often leaks occur.
For example, in 2017 at the BSL 4 lab on Galveston Island, there were serious questions about what happened to pathogens housed there after it was hit by a massive storm and severe flooding.42 Only two years later, the BSL 4 lab in Fort Detrick, Maryland, was temporarily shut down after protocol violations.43
When Hurricane Katrina struck in 2005, the greater New Orleans area housed at least five BSL 3 labs that were studying anthrax, HIV, SARS, West Nile and genetically engineered mouse pox. According to The Daily Bruin:44
“The National Primate Research Center, located at Tulane, housed nearly 5,000 monkeys in outdoor cages for ‘infectious disease, including biodefense-related work, gene therapy, reproductive biology and neuroscience,’ according to an article in Tulane University Magazine.”
The CDC Has Had Several BSL Safety Breaches and Accidents
Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has had leaks in its home-based Atlanta facility. In June 2012, the agency made headline news when an inspector reported that a building housing anthrax, SARS and monkeypox in one of its bioterror labs had a noticeable air leak. This was following similar reports in 2007 and 2008. Of the 2012 incident, ABC News said:45
“The documents suggest a breach in biosafety regulations, imposed nationwide by the CDC itself, that dictate labs housing the most dangerous inhalable infectious agents must be maintained under ‘negative pressure.’”
The CDC just seems to keep having accidents. For example, in June 2014, the CDC released a public statement46 stating “… approximately 75 Atlanta-based staff are being monitored after being exposed to live anthrax when … established safety practices were not followed.”
The CDC then pledged to do internal reviews of lab-safety policies and procedures. Six months later, in December 2014, Reuters47 reported that the CDC had created a new, high-level safety position to “identify problems, establish plans to solve them, and hold programs throughout CDC accountable for follow-up.”
But, in 2016, it happened again: Problems in an Atlanta BSL-4 lab working “with deadly Ebola and smallpox viruses and other pathogens that lack vaccines or reliable treatments” developed when safety seals and backup safety measures on its labs failed.48
In reporting on this incident, USA Today obtained copies of reports from a 2009 incident, and learned that certain CDC officials tried to hide the problems. USA Today asked Richard Ebright, a Rutgers University biosafety expert who has testified before Congress on these issues, to look at the reports and to give his opinion on the CDC’s actions. Ebright said:
“Overall, the incident shows that failures — even cascading, compounding, catastrophic failures of BSL-4 biocontainment labs occur … And the attempted cover-up within the CDC makes it clear that the CDC cannot be relied upon to police its own, much less other institutions.”
The CDC responded that “there was never any risk posed by the lab’s equipment failures.” What other accidents have we yet to hear about? If we are ever going to get a handle on this, we must listen to the experts on this topic, many whom I have interviewed. Although there may have been some valid research taking place at one time, most of these bioweapon labs are dangerous and should be shut down.