Smoking Gun: NIH Was Funding Research In China Into Producin

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, May 2, 2020 at 1:32:43 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 9:54:04 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, May 1, 2020 at 3:13:09 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 10:59:13 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, May 1, 2020 at 12:03:47 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 9:25:12 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 9:04:42 PM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 9:00:03 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 10:24:35 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 7:22:13 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 1:50:47 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 11:27:11 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 10:38:21 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 05:25:30 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>

That's a snap these days with the mRNA vaccines in which they can use the genetic sequence specifically coding for the RBD of the spike protein.
Did you ask yourself what's going to happen when the body develops immunity to the viral vector of such vaccines? Didn't think so.

Lunatics like you probably think that because the ACE-2 receptor the corona virus targets is designed to respond to a blood-pressure regulating protein

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angiotensin-converting_enzyme_2

This is your standard ploy of spouting even more idiotic gibberish to get out from under your previous idiotic gibberish.

You do take the attitude that anybody who doesn't accept your particular line of half-baked idiotic gibberish is spouting idiotic gibberish.

The fact that you can't understand it doesn't automatically make it idiotic gibberish, much as you might like that to be true.

the antibody is going to lock onto the same protein. This doesn't follow. The receptor-binding-domain can lock onto the ACE2 receptor without being a close match to ACE-2 enzyme - only the bit that locks on has to match the receptor - and if it were a problem it wouldn't be difficult to stretch the receptor binding domain in a way that made the antibody that recogised it less likely to go after the ACE-2 enzyme.

This is a fairly obvious problem, with an equally obvious solution, obvious to those skilled in the art, and even to me (who isn't).

You missed the point entirely. The immunity I was talking about was the for the viral vector whose job it is to infect cells and incorporate its DNA into the nucleus for the purpose of producing antiviral antigens. Care to explain how that's going to happen if the immune system is catching these vectors before they have a chance to infect cells, or killing infecting cells before they have a chance to produce antigen?

Easy. The viral vector isn't a corona virus. Corona viruses have an RNA core, for a start.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01221-y

" A virus such as measles or adenovirus is genetically engineered so that it can produce coronavirus proteins in the body."

Next - equally idiotic - question?

Note that I'm able to find and post links to published research that backs up what I have to say. You don't seem to be able to manage that, and when you try you turn out to have misunderstood what you thought supported your claim.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Saturday, May 2, 2020 at 2:23:09 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 1 May 2020 07:16:31 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 7:22:13 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Thursday, April 30, 2020 at 1:50:47 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 11:27:11 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 07:49:09 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 10:38:21 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 05:25:30 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:

snip

C19 could be natural. All the previous centuries of colds and flu
were. We get colds and flu every winter.

Not likely to be natural, it's too optimized for human infection.

Natural selection is perfectly natural, and any virus that show up in humans is selected for it's capacity to infect more human, which does means that when you run into one that has infected a lot of humans, it's going to look optimised for the job.

What's special about Covid-19 that has suggested - to anybody who knows what they are talking about - that it's had the benefit of intelligent design by humans?

Fred Bloggs clearly doesn't know what he is talking about, so hi opinion doesn't count.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

It doesn't have to be "intelligent design" by humans. Gain of function
started with and includes experiments whereby infection is moved
through species in the lab, to see what happens, to see how the virus
mutates and gains function, not with a specific design motive, though
that research has also been going on.


Nature does more genetic experiments every second than humans can do
in 1000 years. The most likely path of C19 is that some researcher
crawled into a cave somewhere, deliberately collected bat virus
samples, transported them to the lab in wuhan, and it got loose from
there.

Only in John Larkin's private universe. There are lots of other animals crawling into those caves who are just as well place to pick up a sample of bat corona virus, which can mutate enough to infect them, and spread out to infect other species. Many more than there are speleological virus researchers.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney