Former FDA chief: Growing circumstantial evidence that COVID ‘could have come out of a lab’

The Hill/By Joseph Guzman/May 24, 2021

Comment:  This is a classic example of how the official line on the origins of Covid-19 change.  This has been building for months.  What made it more embarrassing for the Feds to acknowledge this is that the US had supported research at that lab, though Fauci denies it was enhancement of function research.  This seems to enhance the possibility that the virus is so deadly precisely because it emerged from enhancement of function research.  Which means this is essentially a man-made pandemic where a natural virus was “enhanced” by human intervention.

One further shoe that has yet to drop is the suggestion that Covid-19 exposure may reduce fertility in women who are infected.  That possibility, together with Shana Swann’s new book “Count Down” about sperm fertility heading down toward inability to conceive, and the headlines on declining birth rates in general, may create a trifecta of diminished fertility which may dramatically reduce population.  If it were only humans that would be one thing, but the EDCs affecting human fertility are also at work in nature.

Michael

 

Scott Gottlieb, the former head of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), said Monday that there is growing circumstantial evidence suggesting that COVID-19 may have originated in a lab and not in nature.

CNBC’s “Squawk Box” co-host Rebecca Quick asked Gottlieb what he made of a Wall Street Journal article published Sunday that said three employees at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had sought hospital treatment for flu-like symptoms around the same time COVID-19 began to emerge in China.

“I think the challenge right now is that the side of the ledger that supports the thesis that this came from a zoonotic source, from an animal source, hasn’t budged. And the side of the ledger that suggests this could have come out of a lab has continued to grow,” said Gottlieb, who left the FDA in April 2019 and now sits on the board of Pfizer.

“People a year ago who said this probably came from nature, it’s really unlikely it came from a lab, maybe a year ago that kind of a statement made a lot of sense because that was the more likely scenario,” Gottlieb added.

He said the source of COVID-19 has yet to be identified and noted that the origins of related diseases were usually identified at this point following the initial outbreak.

“It’s not for lack of trying. There has been an exhaustive search,” Gottlieb said of COVID-19.

“I don’t think we’re ever going to get to the bottom of this,” he added. “Because unless we have a whistleblower — assuming it did come out of a lab, and I’m not saying it did, but assuming it did — unless we have a whistleblower or a regime change in China, you’re not going to truly find out.”

“The question for a lot of people is going to be: When are too many coincidences too much? When does it seem that there’s too many things suggesting that this could have come out of a lab?” Gottlieb said. “And right now there’s more and more circumstantial evidence, certainly.”

Read more here

Comments

0 Comments

Submit a Comment