Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 11, 2023 - Epoch Times

16:33

CDC Virologist EXPOSES Covid 'Viral Cleavage Site' as Evidence of Lab Origin

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	After taking back the House in January, Republicans set up several different committees.
	And one of these new committees is called the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.
	And it was exactly this new subcommittee which held a hearing just two days ago, which was titled Investigating the Origins of COVID-19.
	Now, during the hearing, Dr.
	Robert Redfield was brought in to answer questions.
	And in case you've never heard of him before, Dr.
	Robert Redfield is a virologist As well as the former director of the CDC. He led the agency for a period of about three years from 2018 to 2021, basically throughout the majority of President Trump's term in office.
	And what Dr.
	Redfield said during his testimony was shocking to say the least, including the fact that there is no doubt in his mind that American tax dollars, meaning URMI tax dollars, were paying for gain-of-function research over in the Wuhan lab in China.
	The fact that Fauci was actively working behind the scenes to shut down debate on the origins of COVID, and that in his professional opinion, the virus does not look like something that came out of nature.
	Let's in fact go through some of the highlights of his testimony together.
	And as we're doing so, really consider two things.
	The first is consider smashing those like and subscribe buttons so this video can be shared out to ever more people via the YouTube algorithm.
	And secondly, as you're listening to Dr.
	Robert Redfield, who is, again, a virologist, as well as the former director of the CDC, as you're listening to what he's saying, really take in the fact that everything that's coming out of his mouth would have gotten you banned from social media over the past two or three years.
	Everything that this former director of the CDC was saying would have branded you, and likely has branded many of you, as conspiracy theorists.
	Regardless, here's Dr.
	Redfield answering a question regarding American taxpayer funding of Chinese gain-of-function research.
	Dr.
	Fauci was affirmatively told in an email that NIAID had a monetary relationship with the Wuhan Institute through EcoHealth Alliance.
	He was told this in January 27th of 2020.
	Do you think that Dr.
	Fauci intentionally lied under oath to Senator Paul when he vehemently denied NIH's funding of gain-of-function research?
	I think there's no doubt that NIH was funding gain-of-function research.
	Is it likely that American tax dollars funded the gain-of-function research that created this virus?
	I think it did, not only from NIH, but from the State Department, USAID, and from DOD. Then, in terms of the effects of this research, whether it actually helped to prevent a pandemic, well, here's what Dr.
	Redfield said.
	Proponents of this research claim it may result in vaccines or maybe even stop a pandemic.
	Dr.
	Redfield, has gain-of-function created any life-saving vaccines or therapeutics to your knowledge?
	Not to my knowledge.
	Has gain-of-function stopped a pandemic, in your opinion?
	No, on the contrary, I think it probably caused the greatest pandemic our world has seen.
	Then, in terms of the physical evidence for why he thinks that the virus might have come out of the Wuhan lab, Dr.
	Redfield began by pointing out three suspicious events that took place in the Wuhan virology lab back in September of 2019.
	I will say, if you go back and look, it's declassified now.
	And I'm sure you all have your classified briefings.
	But the declassified information now, in September of 2019, three things happened in that lab.
	One is they deleted the sequences.
	It was highly irregular.
	Researchers don't usually like to do that.
	Second thing they did was they changed the command and control of the lab from the civilian control to the military control.
	Highly unusual, and I've been involved in dual-use labs when I was in the military.
	And the third thing they did, which I think is really telling, is they led a contract to redo the ventilation system in that laboratory.
	So I think clearly there was strong evidence that there was a significant event that happened in that laboratory in September.
	It's now been declassified.
	You can read it.
	I'm sure there's more classified information around it.
	Then, tapping into his virology background and going a bit further into why he thinks that the virus might have come from a lab rather than just from nature, Dr.
	Redfield discussed the unique characteristics that are present in the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
	Here's what he said.
	I also expressed as a clinical virologist that I felt it was not scientifically plausible that this virus went from a bat to humans and became one of the most infectious viruses that we have for humans.
	All viruses are not the same.
	So when you look at coronaviruses for SARS and MERS, for example, when they entered the human species, which they did via an intermediate, they never learned how to go human to human.
	Even to this day, they don't know how to go human to human.
	January 31, 2020, Dr.
	Fauci is warned by Dr.
	Christian Andersen that some of COVID-19's features potentially look engineered.
	And the genome is inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.
	Dr.
	Redfield, did you agree, in your opinion, with Dr.
	Anderson's assessment at the time that this virus did look engineered?
	I was concerned because of the presence of the furin cleavage site that we've talked about.
	And I think it's important to understand what that cleavage site does.
	That cleavage site totally changes the orientation of the binding domain of COVID. So it now, which could not see the ACE2 receptor, which is a human receptor, it totally changes the orientation now.
	So it has high affinity for a human receptor.
	So that furin cleavocyte bothered me.
	It didn't seem that it belonged there.
	And then when you look at the sequences that it used, and it's beyond the committee, but I know many of you have looked into it, the sequences that they used in those 12 nucleotides for arginine were the arginine sequences nucleotide triplet that coded for the human arginine.
	So why did this virus have the arginine sequences for human there, not bat?
	It was very disconcerting to me.
	It looked like this virus was engineered.
	What you're observing and speaking of, is this something that would be in line with gain-of-function research and the capabilities it would provide to the virus?
	Right.
	Yeah, I mean, basically this lab published in 2014 that they accomplished in allowing the coronaviruses that they were working with in the lab to bind to the H2 receptor in humanized mice.
	And the only way they did that was by reorienting the binding domain.
	And it was clear to them at this time that that was likely the issue in their private conversations.
	Yet by February 4th, a paper on the origins of COVID is drafted by four participants of the February 1 conference call.
	One of those participants, Dr.
	Anderson, completely reverses himself in an email to the president of EcoHealth, Peter Dosick.
	And says the main crackpot theories going around at the moment relate to this virus being somehow engineered, and that is demonstrably false.
	My question to you, Mr.
	Redfield, did you know of any evidence that they had found within three days from February 1st to February 4th to be able to confirm that it was not created in a lab?
	As I mentioned earlier, unfortunately, I was excluded from those conversations, which I found retroactively very disappointed, since I was obviously a virologist and very engaged.
	And I actually had asked Jeremy Frar, Tony Fauci, and Tedros to have these conversations.
	And then to be excluded, I found unusual.
	I do think it illustrates one point that's worth really focusing on.
	Alright, the sponsor of today's episode is a phenomenal company called AMAC, that's A-M-A-C, and it stands for the Association of Mature American Citizens.
	They are quite literally one of the fastest growing conservative organizations in all of America, and you should consider joining for three main reasons.
	The first is the money saving benefit, because as a member of AMAC, you get access to a ton of discounts at many different verticals.
	Things like vitamin stores, restaurants, retail shops, and so on and so forth.
	If you want to check out the full list, it's pretty exhaustive, you can do so over on AMAC's website.
	The second benefit is that you get exclusive access to the AMAC magazine.
	It'll be delivered directly to your doorstep, and it contains phenomenal coverage as well as deep analysis.
	And then the third benefit, the one that people say is their favorite, is that AMAC fights for your values over on Capitol Hill.
	In fact, you can check out the online version of this on their website.
	It's the AMAC Action Advocacy Annual Report and it shows exactly what they're doing on Capitol Hill in terms of fighting what they call the socialist storm that's brewing in this country.
	So head on over to amac.us forward slash facts matter and sign up today.
	I'll also throw a link down in the description box below.
	And I think it's important to look at prior to 2012, we didn't really have another mechanism other than nature.
	We weren't doing gain-of-function research.
	I'm a clinical virologist.
	I tried to explain to Dr.
	Fauci, who's an immunologist, that this virus, SARS and MERS, when they infected man from the intermediate host, civet cat in the case of SARS and a camel in case of MERS, they never learned how to go human to human.
	So those original outbreaks were less than a thousand people and the epidemics died.
	And so when everyone thought this was SARS-like, well, it's going to die too.
	But this virus was immediately the most infectious virus, not the most, I think probably right behind measles, virus that we've ever seen infect man.
	So I immediately said, wait a second, this isn't natural.
	And then you go back and look at the literature and you find in 2014 this lab actually published a paper that they put the H2 receptor into humanized mice so it can infect human tissue.
	And then you learn that the new COVID, which came from bats, now can hardly replicate in bats.
	So how does that happen?
	So I said that my view as a virologist, again, my hypothesis, and I never discredit them for their hypothesis, the spillover, was that this was most likely to come from the lab.
	Dr.
	Redfield, I want to stick with you.
	You have said before that you were locked out of conversations about the lab leak by Dr.
	Fauci and Dr.
	Collins.
	Do you think they kept you out of the conversations because you believe COVID-19 may have come from a lab?
	Yeah, I think I made it very clear in January to all of them why we had to aggressively pursue this, and I let them know as a virologist that I didn't see that this was anything like SARS or MERS because they never learned how to transmit human to human, that I felt this virus was too infectious for humans.
	There was a lot of evidence that lab actually published in 2014 that they put the H2 receptor in into humanized mice so it could infect human tissue.
	I think, you know, we had to really seriously go after the fact that it came from the lab.
	And they knew that that was how I was thinking, although I thought we had to go after both hypotheses.
	And I was told later, I didn't know I was excluded.
	I didn't know there was a February 1st conference call until the Freedom of Information came out with the emails.
	And I was quite upset as the CDC director that I was excluded from those discussions.
	Why would they do this?
	Because I had a different point of view, and I was told they made a decision that they would keep this confidential until they came up with a single narrative, which I will argue is antithetical to science.
	Science never selects a single narrative.
	We foster, as my colleague here just said, we foster debate.
	And we're confident that with debate, science will eventually get to the truth.
	This was an a priori decision Now, in that last clip, Dr.
	Redfield mentioned the infamous February 1st meeting, which eventually resulted in the infamous paper, the one that's called Proximal Origins of COVID-19.
	If you're interested in the full story behind that meeting and that paper, and what the released emails from within the government showed about Dr.
	Fauci's role in influencing the conclusion of that paper, well, you can click on that link right there because we did a rather long episode going step by step into what actually happened behind the scenes.
	But in short, what took place was that there was a conference call, the one that was discussed on February 1st, that was attended by several different scientists, including by Dr.
	Fauci as well as Dr.
	Francis Collins.
	Who at that time was the director of the NIH. And several of the scientists on that call, they were leaning towards the virus having emerged from the Wuhan lab.
	During the call, they said that the evidence that they saw was leaning them towards the possibility of a lab leak.
	But then wouldn't you know it?
	Just three days after that call, those same scientists published a paper, the one that's called Proximal Origins of COVID-19, where they wrote exactly the opposite, that in their opinion, the evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2 had most likely just emerged naturally.
	And of course, both Dr.
	Fauci and the media just ran with that paper and used it to discredit anyone and everyone who said otherwise.
	However, after a Freedom of Information Act request obtained emails from within the government, those emails showed that Dr.
	Fauci was actually actively involved in editing that paper behind the scenes.
	And that furthermore, shortly after the paper was published, those scientists, the ones who changed their tunes, they were given large sums of grant funding directly from the NIH. So that's the story in a nutshell.
	Here's what Dr.
	Redfield said when questioned about this particular episode.
	Because it was told to me that they wanted a single narrative and that I obviously had a different point of view.
	Okay.
	In emails following the conference call, four of the 11 scientists told Fauci that they all found the genetic sequence inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory, basically what you're saying.
	However, just three days later, these four scientists had drafted a paper arguing the exact opposite, and that's now the infamous proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2.
	Our investigations show this paper was prompted by Dr.
	Fauci, among others, with a goal to disprove the lab leak theory.
	What is the likelihood that these scientists came across additional information just three days after making these statements to conclude with such certainty that COVID-19 came from nature instead of the lab leak that they thought it was three days earlier?
	Yeah, I think it's unfortunate.
	Again, I've said this before, that this whole approach that was taken on February 1st and subsequently in the month of February, if you really want to be truthful, it's antithetical to science.
	Thank you.
	Science has debate, and they squashed any debate.
	Thank you.
	Given what we know now and looking at all the conversations in February of 2020 and before the release of the paper, do you think that Dr.
	Fauci used this paper to hide the gain-of-function research created this virus?
	I can't talk about Fauci's motivation.
	Do you think that the paper does hide the truth?
	I think it's an inaccurate paper that basically was part of a narrative that they were creating.
	Remember, this pandemic did not start in January at the seafood market.
	We now know there was infections all the way back into September.
	This was a narrative that was decided that they were going to say this came from the wet market, and they were going to do everything they could to support it to negate any discussion about the possibility that this came from a lab.
	Now, it's worth mentioning that we skipped around a lot with Dr.
	Redfield's testimony in order to keep it concise.
	But honestly, at least in my opinion, the entire thing is worth watching.
	The hearing was about three hours long, and if you're interested, maybe you have some time over the weekend, I'll throw the link to the entirety of the hearing.
	It'll be down in the description box below.
	You can watch it at 1.5, 1.75 speed in order to get through it faster.
	But after what we've been through in this country over the past three years, it definitely is an eye-opener in terms of what was really happening behind the scenes at the CDC itself with anyone who had wrong think.
	So if you want to check it out, the link will be right there in the top of the description box.
	And then also, lastly, I threw another link in the description box for an awesome supplement called Elderberry Extract.
	It's loaded with antioxidants, it's good for your heart, it's good for your immune system, and that particular brand is made right here in America over in the great state of Wisconsin.
	And with the link that they gave us, if you click on that link and use the promo code American20, that's American with an N20, they'll give you 20% off your entire order.
	And so give them a shot.
	If you're Keen on trying that sweet, sweet elderberry extract, again, made right here in America.
	And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epoch Times.

▲