Bruttel et al.: 'report a high likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated as an infectious clone assembled in vitro.' (that is, in a dish); finds that SARS-CoV-2 is an anomaly, more likely product
of synthetic genome assembly than natural evolution. We found that SARS-CoV has the restriction site fingerprint that is typical for synthetic viruses.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.18.512756v2
‘Abstract
‘we report the likelihood of observing such a pattern in coronaviruses with no history of bioengineering. We find that SARS-CoV-2 is an anomaly, more likely a product of synthetic genome assembly than natural evolution. The restriction map of SARS-CoV-2 is consistent with many previously reported synthetic coronavirus genomes, meets all the criteria required for an efficient reverse genetic system, differs from closest relatives by a significantly higher rate of synonymous mutations in these synthetic-looking recognitions sites, and has a synthetic fingerprint unlikely to have evolved from its close relatives. We report a high likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated as an infectious clone assembled in vitro.
Lay Summary To construct synthetic variants of natural coronaviruses in the lab, researchers often use a method called in vitro genome assembly. This method utilizes special enzymes called restriction enzymes to generate DNA building blocks that then can be “stitched” together in the correct order of the viral genome. To make a virus in the lab, researchers usually engineer the viral genome to add and remove stitching sites, called restriction sites. The ways researchers modify these sites can serve as fingerprints of in vitro genome assembly.
We found that SARS-CoV has the restriction site fingerprint that is typical for synthetic viruses. The synthetic fingerprint of SARS-CoV-2 is anomalous in wild coronaviruses, and common in lab-assembled viruses. The type of mutations (synonymous or silent mutations) that differentiate the restriction sites in SARS-CoV-2 are characteristic of engineering, and the concentration of these silent mutations in the restriction sites is extremely unlikely to have arisen by random evolution. Both the restriction site fingerprint and the pattern of mutations generating them are extremely unlikely in wild coronaviruses and nearly universal in synthetic viruses. Our findings strongly suggest a synthetic origin of SARS-CoV2.’
Where is the evidence any of these variants are infecting patients? We have a closed loop of sequencing information and no evidence natural immunity to the most conserved proteins across all coronavirus is impacted in any way by GoF mutants or that GoF have the fidelity to spread as claimed. Jay Couey's chat with Wolfgang Wodarg gets into the finer points of the biology. These keyboard gene jockeys can cobble together their CRISPR clones and make vats full but cannot change how RNA functions in Nature regardless of all the pandemic propaganda. It's all a lie.
https://rumble.com/v48xyqo-2024-01-19-conversation-with-wolfgang-wodarg-19-jan-2024-brief-twitch203723.html
Hi ... have you looked at dr David martins work .. it goes back to the very first parents for the corona artificial constructs based on the original corona virus. It also records various iterations of this artificial construct and tracks all the players , the funding and the players involved and leads to the creation of the covid “plague” and the various protocols and media control necessary to deceive this world and drive populations into conforming with the nefarious plans..
There are other people with totally revelationary information that shows what he calls “ interlocking directorates and all of the necessary collusion and corruption that is required to give the world a “ plague “ on a global scale ...!