THE SCIENCE: An opinion…based on the now known facts.
What is extremely important to understand here is that this was a planned 5 year project that ran from 2014 to 2019 in which the experiments funding were approved by none other than Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Fauci created PEPFAR.
What is PEPFAR?
The U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief is The President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) is a United States governmental initiative to address the global HIV/AIDS epidemic
As of January 29, 2020, with support from the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and Special Representative for Global Health Diplomacy, Ambassador Deborah L. Birx, FDA launched a new interactive PEPFAR database that provides information to the public about antiretroviral (ARV) drugs tentatively approved or approved that are eligible for procurement under PEPFAR. The new database is managed by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research’s (CDER’s) Office of Communications (OCOMM), Division of Drug Information (DDI) and provides information on a mobile-friendly platform through interactive dashboards and in downloadable and searchable formats.
For the first time, providers, patients, and procurers can easily access FDA-reviewed product labeling and package labels for each drug product as well as updates on manufacturing sites, shelf-life, and other information. The product labeling includes information about dosage and administration, warnings and precautions, contraindications, adverse events, pediatric use, and more. The additional information is provided with authorization from each company that sponsored the application.
These enhancements will allow stakeholders to more efficiently gather, organize, and provide information related to FDA ARV drugs tentatively approved or approved under PEPFAR. Ultimately, FDA expects that this interactive database will improve the ability for providers, patients, procurers, and global stakeholders to address the global HIV/AIDS epidemic.
PEPFAR Liaison
The Liaison, known as the PEPFAR Coordinator, for all FDA activities under PEPFAR resides within FDA’s Office of Global Policy and Strategy. The PEPFAR Liaison serves as the FDA point of contact with all outside entities in coordinating Agency activities dealing with PEPFAR, including those associated with drug firms seeking to participate in the expedited review process for antiretroviral (ARV) therapies for use in the PEPFAR focus countries. The Liaison is also the point of contact with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Prequalification Unit to facilitate the sharing of confidential information to leverage review of antiretroviral products and facilitate posting of FDA tentatively approved and approved ARVs listed on the WHO website. Programs that have developed as a result of the PEPFAR initiative such as the White House Private Public Partnership for Pediatric Therapies, is also coordinated under this umbrella.
The Approved Funding: by Fauci through the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the organization led by Dr. Fauci, funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.
Who is The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) The NIAID is one of the 27 institutes and centers that make up the National Institutes of Health (NIH), an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). NIAID’s mission is to conduct basic and applied research to better understand, treat, and prevent infectious, immunologic, and allergic diseases.
What is NIH? The National Institutes of Health (NIH) (/ɛn.aɪ.ˈeɪtʃ/) is the primary agency of the United States government responsible for biomedical and public healthresearch. It was founded in the late 1880s and is now part of the United States Department of Health and Human Services. The majority of NIH facilities are located in Bethesda, Maryland and other nearby suburbs of the Washington metropolitan area, with other primary facilities in the Research Triangle Park in North Carolina and smaller satellite facilities located around the United States. The NIH conducts its own scientific research through its Intramural Research Program (IRP) and provides major biomedical research funding to non-NIH research facilities through its Extramural Research Program.
NIH pumped money into “ECO Health Alliance” run by Peter Daszak which he openly admits on Banned Video.
EcoHealth Alliance is a non-governmental organization with a stated mission of protecting people, animals, and the environment from emerging infectious diseases. The nonprofitis focused on research that aims to prevent pandemics and promote conservation in hotspot regions worldwide.
AND… Who is EcoHealth Alliance? ECO Health Alliance focuses on diseases caused by deforestationand increased interaction between humans and wildlife. The organization has researched the emergence of diseases such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Nipah virus, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome(MERS), Rift Valley fever, and Ebola virus.
EcoHealth Alliance also advises World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the World Health Organization (WHO) also on global wildlife trade, on threats of disease and environmental damage posed by these.
Here’s where it gets sticky…
You might ask …Who in the world is Peter Daszak? WELL! He is a VERY IMPORTANT player in this situation!
Here’s a little teaser below on just exactly who Peter is and what his role was. Click the link to read the complete story.
THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS
Peter Daszak, who bears the most responsibility for the 2019 Corona Pandemic, claims that any suggestion of a lab leak is “conspiracy theory.” But there was no conscious conspiracy between any of the actors involved in this debacle. It was an accidental escape of a man-made virus that had been gentically engineered to mimick what was believed to be the next spillover virus either directly from bats to humans or through a intermediate species that would cause a SARS-like infection. The idea was to develop a vaccine before the disease emerged – but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The SUPER-VIRUS OPERATION The facts are that this virus was purposely transferred from the US because it was too dangerous to be experimented on according to the British scientists, Peter Daszak, the director of 6 weaponization projects. Peter Daszak later admitted to the developed in China in their Wuhan BSL4 Lab because Anthony Fauci along with others knew they were opposing “Gain of Function” in which Fauci used deadly viruses, in order to develop SUPERVIRUS (combination of several viruses). MSN has an article explaining the concerns about Fauci’s use of Gain of Function here. Fauci most definitely approved the funding! You can read more about this here here. There’s many confirmations on this but of course the MSM isn’t telling you that.
Nature itself does not combine viruses. Let me explain what the exact definition of a genetically modified organism and what constitutes genetic engineering varies. With the most common being an organism altered in a way that “does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination“. A wide variety of organisms have been genetically modified (GM), from animals to plants and microorganisms. Genes have been transferred within the same species, across species(creating transgenic organisms), and even across kingdoms. New genes can be introduced, or endogenous genes can be enhanced, altered, or knocked out.
Now for the article…
Babies’ Mysterious Resilience to Coronavirus Intrigues Scientists
COVID-19 is often mild in infants. Learning why could help scientists better understand the disease—and point the way toward possible treatments
By Shannon Hall
Credit: Getty Images
As the new coronavirus continues to burn through populations, studies are beginning to shed light on its impact on infants. And so far the findings have been promising for parents and researchers alike.
The initial data suggest that infants make up a small fraction of people who have tested positive for COVID-19. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study released in April reported 398 infections in children under one year of age—roughly 0.3 percent of all U.S. cases at that time for which age was known. In addition, most of these cases appear mild in nature: a recent review published in the Italian Journal of Pediatrics that looked at infants up to the age of six months found that those who were infected would typically exhibit only a slight cough, runny nose or fever, which disappeared in a week or so. Other studies have suggested similar minor reactions. The question is: Why?
One of the favored hypotheses focuses on how easily the new coronavirus can gain access to the body’s tissues. Infection occurs when particles of the virus, SARS-CoV-2, enter human cells through a receptor called ACE2 and hijack those cells’ machinery to make copies of themselves. These copies then invade new cells. The thinking is that infant cells have only a few ACE2 receptors, whereas those of an elderly person might harbor thousands. With fewer available points of entry in a baby, it could be harder for the virus to break in. Alternatively—and perhaps counterintuitively—an infant’s immune system might simply be too immature to attack SARS-CoV-2. Given that most of the damage in severe COVID-19 cases seems to be caused by strong immune responses, that immaturity may work in babies’ favor.The latter possibility could even explain a subtlety within the data: although infants appear resilient to COVID-19, they might be at a marginally higher risk than older children. Early data from China suggested that 10.6 percent of infected children younger than one had severe or critical illness—a rate that decreased dramatically with age. “It’s a dance that takes place between the virus and our own immune system,” says Rana Chakraborty, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the Mayo Clinic. If the body’s defenses react too little, the virus will be able to take over. An overreaction can be equally deadly, however. So children older than about one year of age might be in a sweet spot between infants, whose immune system has not yet fully kicked in, and adults, whose defenses are sometimes overzealous.
Indeed, the April CDC study similarly found that infants younger than one account for the highest percentage of hospitalizations among young children. But Leena B. Mithal, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Northwestern University, argues that this trend could simply be because all newborns taken to a hospital routinely undergo a full examination to ensure they do not have an underlying bacterial infection—a process that can take days. She conducted a study involving 18 infants younger than 90 days who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago and found that although half of the babies were hospitalized, none required intensive care. “I think that is reassuring, that young infants actually may not be at a specifically higher risk of severe and critical illness, as we initially were worried about,” Mithal says.
Although some of the details still need to be teased out, it is clear that infants are uniquely resilient to COVID-19—a finding that could aid in treatment development efforts. Scientists have already identified drugs that block certain inflammatory pathways in the body, and several are in clinical trials in COVID-19 patients. Another possibility is that drugs that target the ACE2 receptor could be the key to a vaccine or treatment.
Scientists have also hypothesized that children are more likely to have recently been infected with other coronaviruses, which could provide cross-protective antibodies. Or maybe the answer comes down to the fact that infants and older children often do not yet have underlying health problems. “That would give them a better head start—at least biologically,” says Aimee Ferraro, a senior core faculty member at the School of Health Sciences at Walden University.
The high rate of mild cases in infected children seems promising—both for researchers who would like to target treatment and anxious parents. But the data remain limited, and experts continue to be cautious. It is important to remember that we simply do not know the long-term consequences of COVID-19, Ferraro says. This ignorance is evident in a number of cases in which youngsters initially became mildly sick with the disease and later developed a potentially life-threatening condition known as multi-system inflammatory syndrome in children, or MIS-C, in which various organs become inflamed. Although this phenomenon has mostly occurred in children older than one, Mithal argues that it is too early to tell whether infants can develop it or not.
“Parents should be aware that it’s important to protect children—not [just] from the infection itself—because it’s mild—but also from this postinflammatory syndrome,” says Asif Noor, a clinical assistant professor of pediatrics at New York University, who specializes in infectious diseases among children. With that warning in mind, he advises that parents should limit visitors during a baby’s first few months and ask that everyone—even those who are asymptomatic—stand at least six feet away from the newborn. Although informing grandparents that they cannot hold their new grandchild might be heartbreaking, he argues that doing so is undoubtedly for the best. And Ferraro notes that cases among newborns might appear lower for the sheer reason that many have been shielded from the world—family members included—since the beginning of the pandemic. “I think this is a new normal,” Noor says.
— Read on www.scientificamerican.com/article/babies-mysterious-resilience-to-coronavirus-intrigues-scientists/
The Trailblazing Patriot 