What really happened AFTER Wuhan?

I’ve just finished Sharri Markson’s excellent and thorough book on the lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, whose reality I believe she establishes beyond reasonable doubt through testimonies from whistleblowers at the lab to Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State under the last US president, as well as through examining the science of SARS-CoV-2 itself.

Much is yet to be discovered, of course, because of the deception practised by multiple players. But the most likely broad picture is that SARS-CoV-2 is a chimeric virus developed at the Wuhan lab by gain-of-function, under the dual control of civilians looking to prevent pandemics and the military researching biological weapons to cause them. That is complicated by the fact that in China, there are no true civilians because obedience to the State is everything.

Nevertheless, the CCP’s panic response to the leak suggests that it was almost certainly accidental, produced by a combination of lax safety standards and corruption (it seems used animals were probably sold for profit to the local wet market), not to mention the fact that belief in totally secure laboratories appears illusory anywhere in the world.

The Chinese authorities covered up the leak comprehensively and far more aggressively than they did SARS, reflecting both the increased autocracy of the Xi Jinping regime, and in all likelihood an opportunist weaponisation of the epidemic to disadvantage the rest of the world rather than China alone.

The second major strand is the reprehensible cover-up by the western virology community, notably Anthony Fauci who funded much of the Wuhan research and was always a gung-ho gain-of-function advocate, and Peter Daszak through whose ironically-named EcoHealth Alliance the money was channeled. The Fauci e-mails suggest that, although too many scientists were too cosy with the Chinese authorities, they too were wrongfooted by the leak, but Fauci organised a rapid cover-up in a conference-call (which for British readers included Sir Patrick Vallance), and Daszak went on to orchestrate a long propaganda campaign to persuade the scientific community, the press and US intelligence agencies that the experts knew of a certainty that COVID’s origin was natural. Many more died because of this withholding of vital information.

The banality of evil is shown by the obvious motivations of these virologists to avoid blame for killing millions, and to retain the millions of dollars in funding for gain-of-function work. If nothing else, this shows that entire bodies of scientists, whose research was ostensibly intended to prevent potential pandemics, can be willing to both to lie and vilify truthful scientists whilst allowing an actual pandemic to run out of control through their deception. This shows a total lack of moral compass in an entire branch of medical science. I doubt that their professional ethics are unique, which ought to make us deeply suspicious of technocracies run by experts.

The third major player closely tied to all this, and mentioned by Markson, is the corrupt WHO, from the start in the pocket of the Chinese government (a fact known publicly from early days as Tedros its Director was known to be, essentially, a CCP appointee). Apart from its part in assisting the Chinese cover-up, the WHO was responsible for appointing a team led by Daszak to perform a whitewash investigation of the SARS-CoV-2 origins; and even in today’s news, for appointing conflicted individuals to 1/3 of the positions in the new, “last chance” WHO investigation.

I will return a little later to the fact that Markson has been closely focused on investigating the lab leak since early in the pandemic, suffering the now familair “right wing conspiracy theorist” abuse from scientists, politicians and other journalists for her pains. At this point I use that fact to identify those she implicates in her summary chapter in this crime against humanity. So, apart from the CCP, the scientists involved, and US agencies apparently more committed to the Chinese government than their own, she mentions the general body of non-involved scientists who, out of hatred for Trump and, I suspect, religious zeal for Science™ pushed the natural origins line with no regard for the evidence. She particularly blames the scientific journals in this respect – many of which have financial dependence on China, as do the universities. The censorship of the tech giants is of great importance too, and it is worth remembering the single sentence in the book that mentions how Google, which also owns YouTube, of course, has invested in EcoHealth Alliance since 2010. It also appears that large parts of the US (for which one may read “Western”) intelligence services were willfully blind to the evidence, for motives either of hatred for their own sitting President, or unwillingness to upset China. Finally, the author blames the mainstream media, whose lack of inquisitiveness and blinkered pro-China partisanship certainly requires some explanation.

The most extraordinary thing of all about this can of worms, though, is that it’s peripheral to the issues that have persuaded large sections of the public, and many medics and scientists, to conclude that something is very weird about this pandemic. Although there has been some discussion of the lab leak, especially since May 2021 when for reasons as yet unclear, the Biden administration decided it was worthy of de-censoring, the origins of COVID have been of relatively minor interest. Previous scares this century have not produced widespread suspicion as this one has. Markson has indeed opened a can of worms – but she was not even looking at the one others had already opened.

One should be careful when official sources say that it makes no difference whether COVID’s origins were natural or artificial, because they may well be obfuscating to divert attention from Chinese malfeasance for whatever convuluted reasons. Yet in the absence of hard information, most of the “COVID skeptical” community have also treated this as a tangential issue. Few believe that the pandemic is a well-organised Chinese biological war, and probably (like me) take it for granted that a centrally-organised totalitarian government like China’s would inevitably produce another Chernobyl situation accidentally at some stage and cover it up – Communism, being based on lies, cannot help but attempt to deceive. What has raised antennae and convictions that “something is wrong about all this” has not been the lab leak at all, but the totalitarian response of the supposedly democratic nations.

Markson demonstrates how plenty of Western intelligence existed about the Chinese cover-up, some of which surely reached the ears of governments other than Donald Trump’s, even if there should not have already been deep suspicions about China’s policies and lack of transparency. Governments must have been well aware of the corruption of the WHO, not only because the press was talking about it early on, but because the same scientific advisers serving them were, in many cases, also serving during the previous scandal over Swine Flu and the WHO’s collaboration with Big Pharma and vaccine-agencies, back in 2009.

The rapid adoption by most governments of lockdowns and management policies originating in the Central Committee of the CCP therefore beggars belief, and it seems inadequate as an explanation that many of their chief scientific advisers were also complicit in the lab-leak cover-up. After all, as I have suggested before on The Hump, the best worldly strategy for virologists who have unwittingly helped precipitated a pandemic would be to hide their role (which they did) and to deal with the pandemic in the most effective way so as to become established as heroes. Ideally (from their point of view), and because pandemic policies mandated it, they would have kept things running as close to normal as possible, and played down the mortality figures. Admittedly, Fauci has become a hero to some, by force of personality rather than by the consistency or effectiveness of his advice, but those like Whitty, Vallance or Ferguson over here have had a much less glowing press.

One might put a lot of the confused response down to incompetence on the part of politicians or their advisers, but it is decidedly odd that those advisers, being quickly aware that the bug was close to those their own research had already produced, should abandon well-laid pandemic plans in favour of imitating China.

Perhaps the oddest factor, in my book, is that throughout the pandemic Western governments have been working hard to maximise the figures on cases, admissions and deaths, greatly exaggerating them in many ways, some of which I have written about here. These include the maximisation of PCR false positives by the test protocols, and their indiscriminate hoovering into the published statistics, and the manipulation of death certificate and disease codes, the latter showing dramatically lower figures then analysed according by the statistician John Dee.

This seems to me the one weakness of Markson’s book. It serves her case to emphasise the heinousness of the cover-up by stressing the virulence of the virus and the high death rate, but the truth is that as a bioweapon it is not that deadly, as the excess death figures across the world show. The IFR is comparable to influenza, and the mortality primarily amongst the immunologically weak. In fact, what makes it exceptional is only really the damage from the political response to it.

At the start of the pandemic, we might imagine those in the know believing that China might have released a fully-weaponised biological weapon and panicking. Even apart from that, lack of knowledge of the virus in the acute phase requires spreading the diagnostic net as wide as possible in the hope of containing the outbreak early.

But the continued over-diagnosis of COVID, and misinformation about its lethality, has only served to increase the economic and social disruption of our nations, playing into the hands of China, whose economy has been cashing in on our hardships opportunistically or designedly. From their point of view, a moderately dangerous bug that destroys the Western system is obviously better than a highly deadly one that is likely to burn itself out quickly, like Ebola. Unless, that is, one could develop a virus that targets one’s own race less than those one wishes to weaken – a strategy mentioned in some Chinese military publications cited by Markson. It’s actually quite hard to find data on East-Asian mortality compared to other ethnicities, because for some reason they are usually aggregated with Indians, but there are certainly ethnic disparities.

Apart from China, who then benefits from exaggerating the dangers of the virus?

One set of indicators would point to Big Pharma and the other corporations benefiting either directly from products related to COVID, or indirectly from the transfer of wealth overall.

Another set would point to globalist entities like the WEF, ID2020 and so on, which have openly announced their opportunistic exploitation of the crisis to bring in the sweeping changes they want for the world = 6uild 6ack 6etter and so on.

A third suspicion would be that Western governments are actively working towards their own versions of totalitarianism independently, having given up on democracy.

Lastly (though there may be more), shadowy bankers and financiers hoping to dismantle a failing financial system rapidly and replace it with a cashless one would naturally want the pandemic to achieve as much damage as possible.

But as has been the case throughout this pandemic, and before, the more potential bad actors one finds, the closer the links between them seem to be. The globalists are closely linked to vaccine interests, as well as to the banking system, which is heavily invested in China, whose government is greatly admired by the WEF’s Klaus Schwab, whose Young Leaders programme has trained some of the Western leaders, who are advised by the scientists who were doing gain-of-function and vaccine research… and so it goes on. We seem to be the only people not in on the game!

It looks as if Sharri Markson has some more work to do before we really know what has happened.

About Jon Garvey

Training in medicine (which was my career), social psychology and theology. Interests in most things, but especially the science-faith interface. The rest of my time, though, is spent writing, playing and recording music.
This entry was posted in Medicine, Politics and sociology, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to What really happened AFTER Wuhan?

  1. Robert Byers says:

    Take heed. I am persuaded the virus did not come from human lab leaks. Yes the chinese are a thord worl people still but in these things they have modern textbooks.
    Is this women really competent in getting to the foundational facts? i doubt it for many reasons. Starting that she should go to authority before a publisher.
    Its about probability. just go on wiki. Asia has contribted most of the new viruses in the last fifty years. Hong Kong flu and others that are fogotten. So its most likely a new virus would come from there. Thenm there are so many biollions over there its likely a virus from creatures would get into the humans thought its very very difficult. Yet the population curve suggests it. OTherwise someone must start off saying this is impossible for a virus to go from animal to man. if possible bets are in Asia and the next one.
    Probability odds teach China is most likely the one to get new virus. Simple.
    No leaky lab jazz.

    • Jon Garvey says:

      Except, Robert, that there is absolutely no sign on the ground of passage through animals to humans, as there always has been in the past. This bat virus doesn’t even infect bats, and humans are far and away its best host.

      And signatures in the virus genome itself indicate it’s a chimaera of bat and pangolin bits (animals that are not usually chums in the wild), with a feature enhancing infectivity that’s not found in any other Coronavirus.

      In fact Markson has interviewed not only many scientists on the subject, but the former head of the National Intelligence Agency, Mike Pompeo and Donald Trump himself.

      • Robert Byers says:

        trump doesn’t matter. not any intelligence group. Its all from medical investigators to have credibility.
        Few researchers would agree with this book I know.
        I don’t know its bats or bats to rats to dogs to humans.
        I do know probability curves would suggest China ten years ago for the next virus. likewise the next one.

Leave a Reply