4 New Hospitalizations

Boy, you’ve got to be trying not to pay attention to argue that rich people don’t care about money

“Animals which were outlawed and not allowed to be in a market where people can be in contact with them were actually brought there because they bring in a lot of money,” Fauci said. “That’s the thing that you really want them to come clean on.” ”

What kind of animals are “outlawed and not allowed to be in a market where people can be in contact with them”?

Sounds like infected lab animals is what he is talking about.

And that, my friend would be a lab animal, lab escape, lab release, lab origin.

Call it what you want, it came from a lab, no matter how you slice it, intentionally, or accidentally.

Fauci is spilling the beans, however honestly, or dishonestly.

He is trying to implicate China, to absolve his own culpability.

Let’s not forget, there were two strains released, A and B.

There is evidence that B was released before A.

That would suggest a lab association.

Two different strains of a zoonotic origin would not emerge anywhere near each other, or nearly simultaneously, and definitely not near each other, AND simultaneously.

But if different groups of numerous lab animals infected with B and then A, were sold to the wet markets, in subsequent events, there you have it…

A lab release, with the wet market as an amplifier, times two. It took numerous spillovers for the viruses to “take root”, and spread. At least 8, from what I have gathered.

“The most recent research indicates that COVID-19 started in wildlife available at the market.”

-Kym Kemp-

This is surely possible.

Please consider that the “wildlife” that was available for sale at the “wet market” could easily have included black market experimental animals that could easily have included animals intentionally infected with coronavirus, in a lab such as the nearby WIV, for such things as passage adaptation experimentation, etc.

Both could be true.

As Fauci doesn’t specify, for whatever reason, what he means by his cryptic statement:

“Animals which were outlawed and not allowed to be in a market where people can be in contact with them were actually brought there because they bring in a lot of money,” ”

Maybe he was talking about live animals, that were of species known to have the potential to transmit coronavirus to humans, and/or that came from a lab, illegally, or well at least immorally.

Please see my attached post on china’s “updated rules” concerning “safe carcass disposal” not to include “returning to the market”, from August of 2021.

The virus could have started, or emerged, or been amplified, VIA the wet market, from intentionally infected animals from experimentation at the nearby lab, that were sold to a vendor there, from an unscrupulous individual entrusted with the proper disposal of the infected lab animals, who profited more, by disposing of them improperly, for human consumption, possibly on an ongoing periodic basis…

It has been estimated that it would have taken at least a dozen separate zoonotic “transfers”, for the outbreak to have “succeeded”. It must have required multiple animals, over time, for that to have happened, also, please consider there were more than one initial strain doing the original infecting.

Some say that weakens the lab origin theory, but I would beg to differ.

It would not be at all unusual for a lab to be experimenting with more than one strain of coronavirus, especially if there was passage adaptation going on…

There is a precedent, that resulted in a disease outbreak.

The man made millions.

(It’s a strong motivator for wrongdoing, and it has happened before.)

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1179747.shtml

Laboratories in China have paid insufficient attention to biological disposal, Yang said.

Lab trash can contain man-made viruses, bacteria or microbes with a potentially deadly impact on human beings, animals or plants.

Some researchers discharge laboratory materials into the sewer after experiments without a specific biological disposal mechanism, Yang explained.

A minor SARS virus infection in Beijing and Anhui in 2004 was resulted from insufficient management and improper inactivation process at a lab, according to the People’s Daily.

The small outbreak originated at a diarrhea lab of the virology department affiliated with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the article said. After the virology department was sealed off, no SARS patients were found.

Medical staff and experts have long been asking for better regulation and supervision of biological research institutes in China, but with mixed results.

A top academician at the Chinese Academy of Engineering earned 10.17 million yuan ($1.46 million) by illegally selling off lab animals and experimental milk, according to a report in the Shanghai-based The Paper.

Li Ning, a leading expert at transgenic technologies at China Agricultural University, was sentenced to 12 years in prison on January 2 for grafting 37.56 million yuan.

Management on biology labs is an issue not just for China. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also launched actions in August 2014 to improve its laboratory safety following incidents where research fellows failed to process virus samples properbly.

The previous rules must have been inadequate…

https://amp.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3144005/china-tightens-lab-animal-rules-amid-calls-covid-19-laboratory

“The bodies and tissues of animals used in experiments should be disposed of safely. Animals used in experiments cannot go back on the market. The treatment process needs to be fully traceable,” the draft says.”

“Since the outbreak of Covid-19 in China … the Chinese government and society as a whole have become much more aware of or concerned about animals used for different purposes in China, and human-animal relations, which is one of the very few or the only positive in the aftermath of the pandemic,” Cao said.”