CORONA Boston University CREATES a new Covid strain that has an 80% kill rate — echoing dangerous experiments feared to have started pandemic
- Thread starter somewherepress
- Start date
BUBBAHOTEPT
Veteran Member
A statement worthy of the great Fauci himself….
BUBBAHOTEPT
Veteran Member
You know, that kind of reasoning is right up there with “we have to pass a bill to see what is in the bill”…
Just slightly more dangerous.
somewherepress
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Keep laughing troll. There is nothing emotional about stating the fact that someone is Evil/Criminal for actively promoting largely untested and deadly experimental injections which are ineffective in treating or preventing the spread of Covid 19--and/or those who are deliberately lying about the effectiveness of early treatment with such things as Ivermectin and Vitamin D. Medical personnel who have knowingly used their authority to promote these falsehoods are directly and indirectly responsible for millions of "vaccine" injuries and deaths. Hopefully Nuremberg II is coming and individuals who have engaged in these practices will be held fully accountable.
Attachments
You sound emotional as well. That is your right.
danielboon
TB Fanatic
Yes, he is trolling and I normally agree with simply not "feeding" them but if no one speaks out, then his words may do real harm to real people. This website has a very large audience, most are casual readers (who may never make a single post) and they may believe he is a caring respectable medical professional if they just read from time to time. I think this is the reason most of us who respond to him do so. It's hard for me to think of someone pushing people in front of a bus while laughing gleefully and me just standing there watching without even attempting to help.
Psychopaths are all around us. If you don't (think) you know a psychopath, you are incorrect as they are quite common and most are able to hide what they are pretty well. They are empty sad souls who were born that way and can't feel normally but learn to fake it very well. You can and should pity them but you must never believe a word they say.
bw
Fringe Ranger
I don't come here for groupthink. If I wanted that, I'd watch CNN. I want as many viewpoints as possible, and I suspect many visitors come here for the same thing. Our members and visitors should be adult enough to decide what they are interested in, and sophisticated enough to have mental filters. I recognize that those qualities are sometimes thin on the ground.
You respond because you can't bear to have anyone question the narrative you cling to.
You demonize as evil those you don't agree with. Just like the libs do those who don't toe the line with homosexuality, the woke cause of the day or any number of other of causes that you cant be bothered to discuss rationally. You want an echo chamber with no dissention. You react emotionally..."It's hard for me to think of someone pushing people in front of a bus while laughing gleefully".
What is YOUR credentials in diagnosing over the internet someone you deem to be a "Psycopath" or treating COVID? I've provided my credentials to mods to verify. Have you?
I have said my piece/peace? I will not clutter up this thread anymore. BW is correct. at a certain point people have to come to their own conclusions.
Sounds good. We can agree on that at least.
somewherepress
Has No Life - Lives on TB
These are clear instances of the iron law of woke projection and the marxist tactic of accusing others of what you are doing yourself.
Why do you continue to cling to the Big Pharma narrative?
Why can't you admit that you have been proven wrong about both early treatment and the clot shots?
BUBBAHOTEPT
Veteran Member
BS...bs...bs…
somewherepress
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Echo this, you contemptible clot shot pedaling troll.
View: https://twitter.com/JamesfWells/status/1582265555419299842
James Freeman
@JamesfWells
"Until proven otherwise, it is likely that Covid mRNA vaccines played a significant or primary role in all unexplained heart attacks, strokes, cardiac arrhythmias, & heart failure since 2021"
@DrAseemMalhotra
Full interview out today
@10DowningStreet
@theresecoffey
video rt 0:32
110.4K views
2:01 AM · Oct 18, 2022·
And still you are the only one talking about the vaccine.....Echo this, you contemptible clot shot pedaling troll.
View: https://twitter.com/JamesfWells/status/1582265555419299842
James Freeman
@JamesfWells
"Until proven otherwise, it is likely that Covid mRNA vaccines played a significant or primary role in all unexplained heart attacks, strokes, cardiac arrhythmias, & heart failure since 2021"
@DrAseemMalhotra
Full interview out today
@10DowningStreet
@theresecoffey
video rt 0:32
110.4K views
2:01 AM · Oct 18, 2022·
LightEcho
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Pardon me for straying with the new discussion. I have been out of touch here for some time. Is rondaben pushing the vaxxxes?
And rondaben, please cite your references for the concept that ivermectin & vitamin D are ineffective? I would love to read those studies. Since we have no real reliable trial research done with these vaxxes, it would be a nice change to read some debunking literature. And to condition my comment about no real trial data, there is some Pfizer data that was forced to be released more than 18 months late with alot of juicy information about horrific impacts on human life and well-being the vax caused.
And rondaben, please cite your references for the concept that ivermectin & vitamin D are ineffective? I would love to read those studies. Since we have no real reliable trial research done with these vaxxes, it would be a nice change to read some debunking literature. And to condition my comment about no real trial data, there is some Pfizer data that was forced to be released more than 18 months late with alot of juicy information about horrific impacts on human life and well-being the vax caused.
Zoner
Veteran Member
Gain of function research is not permitted in the US. That is why Fauci got NIH to fund the gain of function research in the WUHAN Lab. So evidently, this research in BU was not considered "gain of function" research, but "scientific" research...or whatever. But so what if it is kept locked away? They have announced what the evil perps need to do if they want to make a deadly virus and release it. There are bio-labs all over the world capable of replicating this research. What they now have is BU making their research public so that if this virus is released, it had to come from BU right? Russia and China have an open door imo.
Zoner
Veteran Member
Good post. TY.
great post here as well.
somewherepress
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Here is the full interview with Dr Aseem who says:Echo this, you contemptible clot shot pedaling troll.
View: https://twitter.com/JamesfWells/status/1582265555419299842
James Freeman
@JamesfWells
"Until proven otherwise, it is likely that Covid mRNA vaccines played a significant or primary role in all unexplained heart attacks, strokes, cardiac arrhythmias, & heart failure since 2021"
@DrAseemMalhotra
Full interview out today
@10DowningStreet
@theresecoffey
video rt 0:32
110.4K views
2:01 AM · Oct 18, 2022·
"Until proven otherwise, it is likely that Covid mRNA vaccines played a significant or primary role in all unexplained heart attacks, strokes, cardiac arrhythmias, & heart failure since 2021"
@DrAseemMalhotra
Video rt 39 minutes.
Freeman interviews Dr Aseem Malhotra
"Until proven otherwise, it is very likely that Covid-19 vaccines played a significant or primary role in all unexplained heart attacks, strokes, cardiac arrhythmias, & heart failure since 2021" - Dr
rumble.com
somewherepress
Has No Life - Lives on TB
View: https://twitter.com/JenGriffinFNC/status/1582396950850449409
View: https://twitter.com/driverdaniel67/status/1582421094614847489
www.bu.edu
Boston University is refuting a series of misleading claims about research at the University’s National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories (NEIDL). The reports, which first appeared on Monday in the United Kingdom’s Daily Mail, claimed researchers at the lab had “created a new deadly COVID strain.” In a statement Monday afternoon, BU called the reporting, which was picked up by other outlets, including Fox News, “false and inaccurate,” and said, “this research made the virus replicate less dangerous.”
The University also noted that the research was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC), which consists of scientists as well as local community members, and that the Boston Public Health Commission had approved the research.
“They’ve sensationalized the message, they misrepresent the study and its goals in its entirety,” says Ronald B. Corley, NEIDL director and BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine chair of microbiology, of the news reports.
The study set out to examine the spike proteins on the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (BA.1). Researchers were interested in comparing the variant with the original virus strain, known as the Washington strain. They wanted to find out if the virus was truly less virulent, says Corley, “simply because it wasn’t infecting the same cells as the initial strain.” They were “interested in what part of the virus dictates how serious of a disease a person will get.”
But Corley says the news reports pulled one line from the paper’s abstract out of context, with the Daily Mail suggesting in its headline that the researchers had created a “deadly Covid strain with an 80 percent kill rate.” The newspaper went on to make a series of other misleading claims, including that the study was “gain of function research,” alleging researchers set out to make a more deadly virus.
Not true, says Corley. And the University’s statement strongly denied it.
“We want to address the false and inaccurate reporting about Boston University COVID-19 research, which appeared today in the Daily Mail,” said the BU statement. “First, this research is not gain-of-function research, meaning it did not amplify the Washington state SARS-CoV-2 virus strain or make it more dangerous. In fact, this research made the virus replicate less dangerous.”
Corley says the line pulled out of context actually had nothing to do with the virus’ effect on humans. The study began in a tissue culture, then moved to an animal model.
“The animal model that was used was a particular type of mouse that is highly susceptible, and 80 to 100 percent of the infected mice succumb to disease from the original strain, the so-called Washington strain,” says Corley. “Whereas Omicron causes a very mild disease in these animals.”
That 80 percent number is what the media reports latched onto, misrepresenting the study and its goals.
“This was a statement taken out of context for the purposes of sensationalism,” says Corley, “and it totally misrepresents not only the findings, but [also] the purpose of the study.”
In fact, according to BU’s statement, “this research mirrors and reinforces the findings of other, similar research performed by other organizations, including the FDA.” That’s supported by one of the lead researchers on the study, Mohsan Saeed, a NEIDL investigator.
“Consistent with studies published by others, this work shows that it is not the spike protein that drives Omicron pathogenicity, but instead other viral proteins,” says Saeed, a BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine assistant professor of biochemistry. “Determination of those proteins will lead to better diagnostics and disease management strategies.”
“Before anything is done in the NEIDL, it goes through multiple layers of careful safety review and this is done through committees that are part of Boston University and also committees that are outside of, independent of, BU, such as the Boston Public Health Commission,” says Davey. “We get a completely independent look at anything that’s about to be done. Only after all that is approved and double-checked are you then allowed to proceed with the work. And that work only occurs with the oversight of the environmental health and safety group at BU.”
The study was conducted in the lab’s biosafety-level 3 facilities. All studies are conducted in a biosafety cabinet, with researchers having to enter their workspace through a series of interlocked doors. All floors and walls are sealed, and the lab is fitted with sophisticated filtration and decontamination technology. And if the researchers had seen anything untoward during the study, they would have immediately shut it down and reported it.
“We take our safety and security of how we handle pathogens seriously, and the virus does not leave the laboratory in which it’s being studied,” says Corley. “Our whole goal is for the public’s health. And this study was part of that, finding what part of the virus is responsible for causing severe disease. If we can understand that, we can then develop the tools that we need to develop better therapeutics.”
“Ultimately, this research will provide a public benefit,” according to the University’s statement, “by leading to better, targeted therapeutic interventions to help fight against future pandemics.”
View: https://twitter.com/driverdaniel67/status/1582421094614847489
NEIDL Researchers Refute UK Article about COVID Strain
Boston University is refuting a series of misleading claims about research at the University’s National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories (NEIDL). BU called the reporting “false and inaccurate,” and said, “this research made the virus replicate less dangerous.”
www.bu.edu
NEIDL Researchers Refute UK Article about COVID Strain
BU calls the reporting “false and inaccurate,” and says it misrepresents what researchers actually found
OCTOBER 17, 2022Boston University is refuting a series of misleading claims about research at the University’s National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories (NEIDL). The reports, which first appeared on Monday in the United Kingdom’s Daily Mail, claimed researchers at the lab had “created a new deadly COVID strain.” In a statement Monday afternoon, BU called the reporting, which was picked up by other outlets, including Fox News, “false and inaccurate,” and said, “this research made the virus replicate less dangerous.”
The University also noted that the research was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC), which consists of scientists as well as local community members, and that the Boston Public Health Commission had approved the research.
“They’ve sensationalized the message, they misrepresent the study and its goals in its entirety,” says Ronald B. Corley, NEIDL director and BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine chair of microbiology, of the news reports.
The study set out to examine the spike proteins on the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (BA.1). Researchers were interested in comparing the variant with the original virus strain, known as the Washington strain. They wanted to find out if the virus was truly less virulent, says Corley, “simply because it wasn’t infecting the same cells as the initial strain.” They were “interested in what part of the virus dictates how serious of a disease a person will get.”
But Corley says the news reports pulled one line from the paper’s abstract out of context, with the Daily Mail suggesting in its headline that the researchers had created a “deadly Covid strain with an 80 percent kill rate.” The newspaper went on to make a series of other misleading claims, including that the study was “gain of function research,” alleging researchers set out to make a more deadly virus.
Not true, says Corley. And the University’s statement strongly denied it.
“We want to address the false and inaccurate reporting about Boston University COVID-19 research, which appeared today in the Daily Mail,” said the BU statement. “First, this research is not gain-of-function research, meaning it did not amplify the Washington state SARS-CoV-2 virus strain or make it more dangerous. In fact, this research made the virus replicate less dangerous.”
Corley says the line pulled out of context actually had nothing to do with the virus’ effect on humans. The study began in a tissue culture, then moved to an animal model.
“The animal model that was used was a particular type of mouse that is highly susceptible, and 80 to 100 percent of the infected mice succumb to disease from the original strain, the so-called Washington strain,” says Corley. “Whereas Omicron causes a very mild disease in these animals.”
That 80 percent number is what the media reports latched onto, misrepresenting the study and its goals.
“This was a statement taken out of context for the purposes of sensationalism,” says Corley, “and it totally misrepresents not only the findings, but [also] the purpose of the study.”
In fact, according to BU’s statement, “this research mirrors and reinforces the findings of other, similar research performed by other organizations, including the FDA.” That’s supported by one of the lead researchers on the study, Mohsan Saeed, a NEIDL investigator.
“Consistent with studies published by others, this work shows that it is not the spike protein that drives Omicron pathogenicity, but instead other viral proteins,” says Saeed, a BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine assistant professor of biochemistry. “Determination of those proteins will lead to better diagnostics and disease management strategies.”
Stringent Safety Procedures
Since its opening in 2009, NEIDL has allowed scientists to study a range of infectious diseases and pathogens in a protected environment. The lab is governed by strict safety procedures. Long before a researcher begins studying a disease or pathogen, their proposal has to go through a series of rigorous safety reviews, says Robert Davey, a BU Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine professor of microbiology, who is based at the NEIDL.“Before anything is done in the NEIDL, it goes through multiple layers of careful safety review and this is done through committees that are part of Boston University and also committees that are outside of, independent of, BU, such as the Boston Public Health Commission,” says Davey. “We get a completely independent look at anything that’s about to be done. Only after all that is approved and double-checked are you then allowed to proceed with the work. And that work only occurs with the oversight of the environmental health and safety group at BU.”
The study was conducted in the lab’s biosafety-level 3 facilities. All studies are conducted in a biosafety cabinet, with researchers having to enter their workspace through a series of interlocked doors. All floors and walls are sealed, and the lab is fitted with sophisticated filtration and decontamination technology. And if the researchers had seen anything untoward during the study, they would have immediately shut it down and reported it.
“We take our safety and security of how we handle pathogens seriously, and the virus does not leave the laboratory in which it’s being studied,” says Corley. “Our whole goal is for the public’s health. And this study was part of that, finding what part of the virus is responsible for causing severe disease. If we can understand that, we can then develop the tools that we need to develop better therapeutics.”
“Ultimately, this research will provide a public benefit,” according to the University’s statement, “by leading to better, targeted therapeutic interventions to help fight against future pandemics.”
Last edited:
bw
Fringe Ranger
They didn't increase the function, they just took the most dangerous one out there and made it more transmissible.
I call this playing fast and loose with the language.
somewherepress
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Zoner
Veteran Member
And let’s find out how much money BU got to do this “scientific research”
somewherepress
Has No Life - Lives on TB
Surprise! EcoHealth Landed $1 Million Grant To Work With '80% Mouse Death' Boston University On 'Future Pandemic Prevention' | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Surprise! EcoHealth Landed $1 Million Grant To Work With '80% Mouse Death' Boston University On 'Future Pandemic Prevention'
BY TYLER DURDENTUESDAY, OCT 18, 2022 - 08:20 PM
Monday's report in the Daily Mail that the University of Boston has engineered a chimeric COVID that has an 80% kill rate in humanized mice has caused quite the stir.
To review, in an effort to research what makes Omicron so transmissible - and funded in part by grants from the NIH and Anthony Fauci's NIAID - a team of researchers cobbled the Omicron spike protein to the original strain of Covid-19. The resulting virus was five times more infectious than Omicron.
"The Omicron spike (S) protein, with an unusually large number of mutations, is considered the major driver of these phenotypes. We generated chimeric recombinant SARS-CoV-2 encoding the S gene of Omicron in the backbone of an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 isolate and compared this virus with the naturally circulating Omicron variant," reads the pre-print.
The authors speculate that their chimeric strain is unlikely to be as deadly in humans as it was in the mice because the specific breed used in testing are more susceptible to severe Covid.
Gain of Function?
"The research is a clear example of gain of function research of concern and enhanced potential pandemic pathogen (ePPP) research," said Dr Richard Ebright, a chemist at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey, adding "'It is especially concerning that this new US-government ePPP research - like the previous US-government ePPP research on chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses at Wuhan Institute of Virology that may have caused the pandemic - appears not to have undergone the prior risk-benefit review mandated under US-government policies."
The University of Boston refuted the notion that they were performing GoF research, adding that it was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC) and the Boston Public Health Commission (don't you feel safer already?).
"This research mirrors and reinforces the findings of other, similar research performed by other organizations," said a spokesperson. "Ultimately, this research will provide a public benefit by leading to better, targeted therapeutic interventions to help fight against future pandemics."
Peter Daszak again?
Which leads us to today's report...
Just two months before the '80% mouse kill rate' SARS paper was published, EcoHealth Alliance - the NYC-based nonprofit headed by Peter Daszak (and was also funded by the NIH and Fauci's NIAID to genetically manipulate bat Covid in Wuhan, China) - bragged about a $1 million NSF grant to work with Boston University on a project to 'work towards predicting and preventing future pandemics."
And from Boston University's press release announcing the partnership:
Of note, several researchers from the EcoHealth-allied National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories (NEIDL) were involved in the creation of the 80% mouse death chimeric SARS-CoV-2.
Last year we reported that 18 months before the pandemic, scientists in Wuhan, China submitted a proposal to release enhanced airborne coronaviruses into the wild in an effort to inoculate them against diseases that could have otherwise jumped to humans, according to The Telegraph, citing leaked grant proposals from 2018.
The bid was submitted by Daszak, who was hoping to use genetic engineering to cobble "human-specific cleavage sites" onto bat Covid 'which would make it easier for the virus to enter human cells' - a method which would coincidentally answer a longstanding question among the scientific community as to how SARS-CoV-2 evolved to become so infectious to humans.
Perhaps Daszak is teaching BU scientists about sequencing spike proteins?
video rt 27 sec
View: https://twitter.com/JustinEcheverr9/status/1473112091145949185?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1473112091145949185%7Ctwgr%5Ecf2c7c1ab48853a7e94ea8442623d1c48956a7fc%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fcovid-19%2Fsurprise-ecohealth-landed-1-million-grant-work-80-mouse-death-boston-university-future
bw
Fringe Ranger
It really depends on where you're standing. If they take the existing early lethal WuFlu strain and add the Omicron transmissibility, they didn't really make it more lethal, but if they add the lethal WuFlu strain to an Omicron spike they did.
It's like I got a recoilless rifle sitting on the ground and I got a jeep with a driver and a rifleman. If I put the recoilless rifle on the jeep, I didn't make it any more lethal, it just moves around better. No gain of function. But if I look at it from the jeep point of view, I just went from a rifleman to a recoilless rifle, and that is one kick-ass jeep. That's gain of function.
Maybe it's just me.
TammyinWI
Talk is cheap
Excellent...yes, join the club, I did that a long time ago. I think he is the only one I have on ignore.
pauldingbabe
The Great Cat
what?
i believe i made this point in a different thread.
Buzz phrase = 80% KILL RATE
pictures = bubble suit 'scientist' and fancy graphics of round bumpy things
That's about all the GP needs to read, well it's also all a lot of the alt-public needs to read also, and you get the echo chamber effect, and we have 4+ page threads that will grow faster than a scam virus grows.
"I hates mices to pieces" Ok let's kill 80% of them!
BUBBAHOTEPT
Veteran Member
Wildweasel
F-4 Phantoms Phorever
And maybe some people can now understand why Russia was so concerned about US-controlled bio-research labs next door to their border. Think they might have learned of similar "purely scientific research" going on in one or more of those places?