I heard a news report about an unknown new virus coming out of China and the next day I saw a clinical case report involving a circle of relatives at Wuhan Central Hospital.
Both mother and father had this strange pneumonia. Her son had no symptoms, but his own X-rays showed that his lungs had exactly the same lesions.
His doctor, Ai Fen, knew immediately that it was a new form of coronavirus (it obviously passed from human to human and obviously an asymptomatic form of the virus) but, he says, no one heeded his warnings.
When I first saw the viral genome in January 2020, I discovered something esoteric. The virus we would later call SARS-CoV-2 has what’s called a furin cleavage site (FCS).
FCS, which has never before been noticed in a coronavirus linked to SARS-CoV-2, is a genetic trait that causes a virus to infect human mobiles. So when I saw this FCS in SARS-CoV-2, I knew it would facilitate mobile infection and facilitate immune formula evasion through infiltration of neighboring mobiles.
Knowing that FCS were discovered in nature in those SARS-related viruses, I also knew that for years scientists had artificially introduced new FCS into the viruses to see what they were doing, and in every case I saw, in which they published their results, it has infectivity, increased transmissibility, pathogenicity or a mixture of them.
I found that when you observed this virus, I didn’t have any of the homes of an herbal infection and still don’t have any to this day. CoV-2 is a type of overflow infection that we have noticed in the past.
To me, this is much more like what would happen after a lab accident.
At the end of 2020, I conducted research in which I decided that there was a 99% chance that SARS-CoV-2 was not a plant zoonosis, but was derived from the laboratory.
Although I think very few people focused on theories about the origin of this virus at the time, I am one of the many other people in my box who have gained a lot of negative feedback on this premise.
I did a lot of radio and television interviews at the time, but I testified before Congress about my findings, I was never invited through any of the major left-wing media outlets.
Throughout my career, I have written 390 peer-reviewed articles and reports. Normally, the procedure consists of submitting an article that will be reviewed by the editors of qualified journals and academics. Then the document is reviewed; It is heavily criticized in a back-and-forth process and, in most cases, published later. My articles are better thanks to this peer review system.
But in 2020, my colleagues and I who said similar things submitted articles for peer review, but they were rejected without any review of the merits of knowledge and through who knows who in journals. In those cases, there were never clinical comments or criticisms, they simply effectively said, “We’re busy, we can’t bother sending it for peer review. “
Although my papers have since begun to be peer-reviewed, at this point I have the impression that they refused to have interaction in this type of research and then said in public, “Well, there is no peer-reviewed knowledge that shows that SARS-CoV-2 comes from a lab. “
In my opinion, they maintained this in a very immoral way.
There is a form of clinical debate that comes to what is called: “The argument of authority. “It consists of first reciting one’s diplomas, degrees, and educational positions, and then giving a conclusion about anything clinical. For example, someone who says, “I the earth is flat, and because I have a Nobel prize, it will have to be like this. “Well, I think this way of thinking is stupid.
Even though I granted a patent on an approach to treating coronavirus infections in 2015, I gained a lot of feedback about not being a coronavirus expert, from critics who didn’t need to interact with the evidence I presented.
I don’t feel justified through this research. We have lost millions to this virus; In my opinion, those guards, and some other people in positions of power, have not done their homework ethically.
I also believe that some of those pushing for research into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 are, in fact, a sign of virtue, knowing that China will not allow any research to take place. In my opinion, we say, “We have a lot of evidence, sit down as reasonable lay scientists, look at the evidence, and make an evidence-based resolution about the origin. “
I have the impression that we are witnessing what I call a slight thaw in the debate; I think lately it is appropriate to believe that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory-acquired infection, but it is not yet appropriate to state that there is evidence that the virus was manipulated with gain-of-function experiments and, in fact, is not a component of a biological weapons program.
By examining genetics loaded into the GenBank formula from National Institutes of Health from laboratories around the world, we discovered evidence of 3 types of ongoing gain-of-function experiments: one with the MERS coronavirus, which already has a case fatality rate greater than 30%, one with an influenza virus, which is 39% deadly, and another with the Nipah virus, which is estimated to be 70% lethal.
I don’t like to make grandiloquent statements about what might be called the existential risks of this kind of research; However, I am in the process of creating a mathematical style that can help look forward to the future.
The style examines modern society and what are the must-have features that keep us going—food, energy, the fitness system, the fireplace and police services, and the blank water fountain—and what it takes to derail those elements, and collectively. .
Next, I’ll use two parameters of the virus and see if the style ever predicts whether civilization will end as we know it; How fatal the virus will have to be and how simple it is to transmit it. We’re going to draw on some kind of two-dimensional map and show the regions on that map where we think civilization will be 200, 300 or 500 years ago.
I hope our style shows that other people are operating in this area right now. My current estimate is that any virus with a lethality greater than 10% and the same transmissibility as SARS-CoV-2 would wipe out civilization for many centuries. ; That’s what my gut says about this total experience.
I do not believe that the risks of nuclear war are even close to the risks of genetically modified viruses. Two atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and affected thousands of people, but the COVID-19 pandemic has affected everyone on the planet.
I don’t see any advantage in studies on service gain and I put a lot of pressure for forged railings to be placed there. While I believe that it will not be possible to ban it completely, I believe that there is still a non-lethal replacement. for maximum experiments.
I watch with envy the political capital around things like climate change, where the public is one hundred percent engaged and pushing their government to act. These kinds of virus studies are going to become a milestone for us in the next two decades, unless Acto: I just wish the public was also involved so that these kinds of studies were done properly.
In my opinion, if these kinds of studies continue, we will see a virus worse than COVID-19 in our lifetime. If we replace something, I think it’s only a matter of time.
Dr. Steven Quay is a medical scientist and of Stay Safe: A Physician’s Guide To Survive Coronavirus. He is the founder of Seattle-based biopharmaceutical corporation Atossa Therapeutics Inc. You can follow him on Twitter at: @quay_dr
All views expressed in this article are those of the author.
As Newsweek’s My Turn editor Monica Greep says.
Do you have an exclusive experience or private story to share?Email the My Turn team at myturn@newsweek. com