Evidence of lab leak and laboratory modification of coronavirus with segments of HIV protein

AIDS protein was used in the creation of the virus

"Abstract: .. Our findings show that SARS-CoV-2 spike immunized mice antibodies cross-react with the HIV-1 Env protein. Cross-neutralization among the two viruses is uncommon, suggesting the presence of a non-neutralizing antibody response to conserved epitopes amongst the two viruses. ...
Source: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Email to Dr. Fauci:
“Hello Anthony,

“This is how the virus was created.

“Intervirion Fusion. HIV-luc(ACE2)(500 ng of p24) was mixed with 1,000 ng of p24 of HIV-gfp particles incorporating ASLV-A envelope, SARS-CoV S protein, or both envelopes in PBS at 4°C for 30 min to allow binding. Virions were adjusted to the desired pH with 0.1 M citric acid. PBS, TPCK-trypsin (final concentration 10 ng/ml), CTSL, cathespin B (CTSB) (final concentrations 2 ng/ml) or CTSL buffer alone was then added. Recombinant CTSL (R&D Systems) was preactivated by incubation for 15 min at 10 ng/ml in 50 mM Mes, pH 6.0, on ice. Recombinant CTSB (R&D Systems) was preactivated in 25 mM Mes, 5mM DTT, pH 5.0, for 30 min at 25°C. After a 10-min incubation at 25°C, proteolysis was halted by the addition of 300 nl of DMEM10 containing leupeptin (25 ng/ml) and STI (75ng/ml). Virions were then incubated at 37°C for 30 min to allow membrane fusion. 100 nl of the virion mixture was added in quadruplicate to HeLa-Tva cells pretrated for 1 h with leupeptin (20 ng/ml). The cells were spin-infected and incubated at 37°C for 5 h.”
Source: www.conservativeworldnews.com...
The actual email: 1.bp.blogspot.com...


Proof of lab origin and gain of function used to enhance the disease:

Paper 1: Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route

Reviews of the first paper above:
rapidreviewscovid19.mitpress.mit.edu...

rapidreviewscovid19.mitpress.mit.edu...

Paper 2 of Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route - Response to above review papers conclusively proving ghostwriting occured and vested interest groups unduly influencing academics into ignoring and disregarding evidence which does not suit the funders chosen narrative.

a reply to: natoshis

Such.... soooo much info being dumped, Thanks!
Keep up the good work👍🏼😊


😊

a reply to: natoshis

Great post with great info, thank you.

Fauci who cut his teeth on the HIV / AIDS debacle and did a terrible job overseeing that fiasco. I'm of the opinion that AIDS is also a manmade / laboratory modified illness used for population conrol and to generate additional revenue streams for governments and the pharmaceutical industrial complex.

Why anyone is listening to anything Fauci says given his history and the amount of times he has flip-flopped on covid alone is beyond me. The world will be just a bit safer when he is gone.

a reply to: Bigburgh

LOL, that's #ing hilarious.

Great OP, he said, in a second line attempt to remain on topic.

Looks like damning information, thanks for this.

All hail science. I understood a few words in that, generally on par with bla bla from here. Have caught a few associations with HIV since covid started. It is interesting to see how stocks in HIV medications have taken off recently. I will not be surprised to find those vaccinated will have there immune system smashed over the coming months and years, many professionals have been talking about it with ADE. There was one thread a few days ago showing the decline of immunity over time.

HIV was developed in a lab and announced as a bio-weapon in 1978 or 79. I have no doubt that they have now created an airborne version with the help of the SARs virus and the latest advances in virology.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I thought the alternate conspiracy from the cia theory is it was a result of a bad batch of polio vaccine distributed in africa from 1957 to 1959.

a reply to: natoshis

The craziest part is how this information is publicly available on the Wikipedia page for the Wuhan institute of virology and basically nobody knows about it.

I’m surprised no ones been in here yet claiming it’s all bs. Does this mean people at large agree on this? If so that’s rare as it gets here on ats.

I wonder how long until people who took the jab, realize they now have Fauci AIDES.

originally posted by: drewlander
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I thought the alternate conspiracy from the cia theory is it was a result of a bad batch of polio vaccine distributed in africa from 1957 to 1959.

I've been keeping my eyes open since the late 70s. I had a close friend who was more conspiracy minded then myself back then. One summer (perhaps the fall or spring, it was warm weather) in either 1978 or 79, he brought over the science section of either the Detroit News or Freepress newspaper with an article titled, "Killer Cell" with a drawn picture illustration of a virus, very similar to the virus images used today, but a drawing.

In that article it described a biological weapon developed by the U.S. military, a virus that attacked the human immune system causing sickness and death from other infections. They said it attacked the t-cells.

That article may still exist as a physical copy or on microfilm at some Detroit area library, but two years is a long hard search at multiple libraries.

The one conspiracy going around in the 80s was that Ronald Regan infected IV drug users and homosexuals to exterminate them, however, I didn't think much of that theory.

I think the big disclaimers on those links should cause some concern, don't you?

This manuscript does not demonstrate sufficient scientific evidence to support its claims. Claims are at times baseless and are not supported by the data and methods used. Decision-makers should consider the author's claims in this study misleading.


Consistently critical peer review has been received that this record does not follow the norms of scientific rigour or balance, and thus the main claims may not stand the test of scientific scrutiny. For example:

originally posted by: Brotherman
I’m surprised no ones been in here yet claiming it’s all bs. Does this mean people at large agree on this? If so that’s rare as it gets here on ats.