‘Knew Covid had been engineered to make it infectious to humans but were told to shut-up’

Guest Post by Angus Dalgleish

Covid was the name of the disease caused by a new coronavirus, which led to a new respiratory disease in Wuhan, China, which rapidly spread throughout the world, firstly Italy and then to the rest of Europe, America, South America and the Far East.

It was first recognised in the UK in late January 2020 and a major wave of infection became obvious in February and March 2020, when the Government panicked and on the advice of SAGE and modellers introduced a totally unnecessary lockdown as, by the time it was introduced the first wave was decreasing. In retrospect, the virus was clearly in Europe in November and December and although a wave of acute illness was first recognised in Wuhan in November 2019 there were reports of a similar disease as far back as September 2019.

It was rapidly established that the cause of Covid was a coronavirus and that it was different from the two previous outbreaks, namely SARS-1, which involved direct bat transmission to an intermediary animal known as the civet, and MERS, which broke out in the Middle East and involved camels as the intermediate.

When the virus was identified and sequenced and called SARS-COV-2 it was immediately assumed by all that this clearly had come from a bat and hunt for an intermediate, especially in the meat markets, was sought.

The narrative around the world that this was clearly a virus that had come directly from a bat (and possibly involving another animal) at the notorious wet markets in Wuhan, which were not that far from a major virology institute, known as the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). It was not unrealistic to assume that Covid was the cause of another jump from a bat to a human coronavirus because the last two epidemics had been shown to be just that.

As soon as the virus sequence was published my colleagues in Norway, Birger Sørensen and Andres Susrud immediately assessed the sequence with regards to designing an optimal vaccine. I had been involved with their very successful attempt to create a unique HIV vaccine, which actually was very effective and did not follow any of the principles that the mainstream HIV vaccines had pursued for 30 years without any success.

Rather than just use the whole of a component of a virus, such as the envelope or spike, their approach was to look for the Achilles heel of the virus and design the vaccine around that.

Whilst looking closely for these features it became immediately obvious that this virus was extremely unlikely to have come from a bat, even via another animal, as it had inserts around the receptor binding region and – a feature not present on any similar virus – that would make it more infectious.

What lessons have we learnt from this? Essentially none, says Angus Dalgleish (Image: Getty)

Moreover, these features had been previously published by researchers in Wuhan, which was the largest coronavirus research laboratory in the world.

We, therefore, concluded that the chances that this virus was not natural but had escaped from the laboratory were extremely high and pointed out that SARS-1 had escaped from high-security laboratories on over six occasions since its isolation.

We wrote a manuscript and shared it with the Government, Cabinet and scientific advisors saying that it was extremely likely that this was a laboratory escape and had clear and present security implications. Imagine our surprise when we were told quite categorically that there was no way it could have been a laboratory escape and was a natural zoonosis. We tried to publish this on many occasions and each and every one of the top journals, including Nature, Science, The Lancet and many others refused to publish this as it was not in the public interest.

What was to follow was a complete suppression of any debate about the origin, which would appear to have been driven by Tony Fauci from the NIAID in America.

Indeed, he was so intent on quashing any evidence of the origin that he commissioned a paper from a group of scientists, who we now know also had concerns that it may not be natural but nevertheless, they published the paper in Nature Medicine saying all the evidence showed it was completely natural and was not a laboratory leaked virus.

This paper was published in Nature Medicine and then used by Tony Faucci as absolute proof that it was not a lab leak.

What was incredible was that this narrative was picked by governments throughout the world, all the mainstream media and the majority of scientists, who should have known better than to accept the narrative rather than look at the evidence.

Birger Sorensen and I were only able to get our observations out under the disguise of a vaccine paper, which was published in QRB Discovery, a journal with a biophysics bent which appreciated our argument that the inserts affected the charge of the virus and this was why it was able to be so infectious.

Although ignored, this paper was soon to be downloaded a record of over a quarter of a million times!

The narrative that this could not have possibly come from a laboratory, even though it was very strange the outbreak should have occurred in a place not known for coronavirus outbreaks, was so strongly adhered to that even in the West any suggestion that it may have been due to a laboratory accident was shut down with cries of xenophobia.

Among many other put-downs was the allegation this was some sort of conspiracy theory.

The ‘lab leak as conspiracy theory’ narrative was so strong that it ended up censoring discussion on all the social media networks and only scientists who produced theories or suggestions that it came from a bat in an original roundabout way were allowed any voice.

China’s put-down was especially strong and it was so very obvious that they were covering up something as all specimens and databases were either altered or withdrawn.

Very belatedly, China allowed a team of international experts to investigate the cause of Covid and a team were allowed into China to essentially come up with an official report saying that it was clearly of natural origin.

Former Chief Medical Advisor to the President of United States Anthony Fauci (Image: Getty)

Now, more than two years later, two of the people involved with this, Professor Colin Butler from Australia and Delia Randolph from the University of Greenwich, London, have spoken out that it is clear now that all the evidence DOES support a lab leak and that there has been a suppression of the truth.

There has been secrecy and cover-up of this issue on a truly Orwellian scale.

First of all, why did it take them so long and why was the whole of the establishment, most mainstream media, and senior scientists, including those at the Royal Society, so prepared to ignore the evidence and go along with a narrative which looked weaker and weaker the more time rolled on?

It became obvious that there was a complete lack of evidence to support this virus coming from a natural source.

Indeed, all the evidence showed that this virus, unlike SARS and MERS, was so supremely adapted to infecting human cells that it did not need several months to adapt to infecting humans and causing disease, it had done so immediately.

Even though it was clear that the Chinese authorities lied about the initial infection and how it was spreading.

They refused to admit that it spread from person to person for several weeks and refused to share information with the World Health Organization.

Many argue if the WHO had done its job properly the virus would never have escaped outside of China, as planes were still leaving China, and Wuhan in particular, weeks after China had closed all its internal transport.

They instigated a mantra of lockdown, which was mindlessly followed by the British Government and many others worldwide, some of whom were even more draconian, such as Australia.

Indeed, only Sweden had enough sense to realise that lockdown would not work for a respiratory-born virus and in retrospect has one of the best outcomes of all the countries (with those having the worst lockdowns, often showing the worst death rates).

The worldwide community of scientists, including 2,000 eminent scientists in Sweden, were highly critical of Andres Tegnell, the Chief Medical Officer in Sweden who refused to advise a lockdown, that he nearly didn’t last and the Swedish Government showed great courage in standing by him.

Other scientists realised that lockdown was absolutely pointless and the best way to control it was by letting the virus spread in herd immunity and this led to the Great Barrington Declaration, which I was one of the early signatories to.

This was completely shouted down by all the scientists pushing for lockdown, including the ministers, such as Matt Hancock, who clearly said it was absolute madness and unscientific.

This failure to engage with a different mindset of eminent scientists and clinicians at this time has probably cost the UK Government at least a trillion pounds, given the long-lasting disastrous legacy of lockdown on everything from education, mental health and misdiagnosis leading to early deaths from cardiac and other diseases, such as cancer.

These will be manifesting for years to come, as will the lack of productivity of long-term sickness and working from home.

The British Government in the early days of the pandemic repeatedly said they were following the science. This, for me, has to be one of the greatest lies ever told to the British people as there was no science involved in this at all.

They appear to have been completely ignorant of the difference between lockdown and quarantine, the latter of which was effective and used by Norway to prevent people from China and other countries from entering the population.

Covid is a respiratory virus and lockdown should never have been entertained. The only time for lockdown is for a highly infectious disease, such as Ebola, and it was clear from the beginning we were NOT dealing with an agent that kills 70 percent of the people it infects.

What lessons have we learnt from this? Essentially none, but in future any new threat, infectious disease or pandemic must be addressed with open scientific debate and not the complete suppression of the truth, secrecy and coverup which unfortunately George Orwell foresaw as far back at 1948 as a possible dystopian terrifying future.