Coronavirus Covid-19 Research History – May 2021

These are excerpts of May 2021 articles. For a quick sense of information and faster summary just read the red marked texted.

My primary source is the extremely well researched RFK jr.’s “Children Health Defense” organization. The CHD is suffering some severe censorship on social media because they are exposing government/corporate media inconsistencies, distortions and censored facts about the Covid pandemic!


2021-05-28 Wuhan Lab Deleted Files Showing Fauci Authorized Funding for Risky Coronavirus Experiments   The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) — a division of the National Institute of Health (NIH) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci since 1984 — has, for years, provided grants to the EcoHealth Alliance and others to conduct gain-of-function (GOF) research on coronaviruses.

In a May 11, 2021, Senate hearing, Fauci denied ever having funded GOF research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). This despite clear documentation proving otherwise.

In March 2021 the WIV deleted mentions of its collaboration with the NIAID/NIH and other American research partners from its website. It also deleted descriptions of GOF on the SARS virus.

The NIH/NIAID has funded GOF research to the tune of at least $41.7 million. Up until 2014, this research was conducted by Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina. After 2014, when federal funding of GOF was banned, such research was funneled to the WIV via the EcoHealth Alliance.

In August 2020, the NIAID announced a five-year, $82-million investment in a new global network of Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Diseases that will conduct GOF experiments to “determine what genetic or other changes make [animal] pathogens capable of infecting humans.”

2021-05-25 Everyone vaccinated for covid will DIE, warns French virologist   [MEK Note:  I am not in a position to comment on this frightening claim, although eliminating billions of people seems a possible scenario since governments and the 1% don’t seem very  concerned about passing legislation to counter the pending climate catastrophe!]   

After studying at length, the ingredients contained in the injections and what they do, Montagnier came to the conclusion that every single person who gets the shot will eventually die from antibody-dependent enhancement, or ADE.

Montagnier is credited with being the first to discover HIV, by the way, having warned last spring that the Wuhan Flu contains artificially spliced DNA from the autoimmune-provoking virus. It now appears as though these same alterations can be found in Chinese Virus “vaccines,” which are priming people’s bodies for eventual sudden death.

It is one thing for the genetically modified (GMO) virus to be intentionally released, but a whole different thing for the medical establishment to then introduce an injection for it right in the middle of an alleged “pandemic.”   In Montagnier’s view, this approach is an “unacceptable mistake,” at best, because all it will do is spread even more “variants” of the Chinese Virus and kill more people – which appears to have been the plan all along.   We have Donald Trump and his “Operation Warp Speed” scheme to thank for this nightmare, by the way. All of this would explain the mad rush to vaccinate people at “warp speed,” using any ploy or coercion tactic necessary to reach the desired target. Once enough vaccinated people start dropping dead, the remaining unvaccinated will more than likely resist, which is why the Biden regime is moving quickly to get as many people injected as possibly, preferably before July 4.

2021-05-23 Israel to end COVID-19 restrictions after vaccine success Israel will end local COVID-19 restrictions following a successful vaccine rollout that has nearly stamped out new infections, the country’s Health Ministry said on Sunday. With the majority of the population having received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, and about 92% of those 50 and older inoculated or recovered, Israel has been gradually reopening its economy after three lockdowns.

The country reported just 12 new virus cases on Saturday, down from a daily peak of more than 10,000 in January. Curbs on higher-risk activities and limits on how many people can gather in a specific area remain, with a government-issued “Green Pass” that indicates immunity post-vaccination or recovery from COVID-19 allowing greater freedom.

2021-05-22 How Many Have Died From COVID Vaccines? 

  • Each year, more than 165 million Americans get the flu shot. There were 85 reported deaths following influenza vaccination in 2017; 119 deaths in 2018; and 203 deaths in 2019
  • Between mid-December 2020 and April 23, 2021, at which point between 95 million and 100 million Americans had received their COVID-19 shots, there were 3,544 reported deaths following COVID vaccination, or about 30 per day
  • In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 — a period of 15.5 years
  • As of April 23, 2021, VAERS had also received 12,618 reports of serious adverse events. In total, 118,902 adverse event reports had been filed
  • In the European Union, the EudraVigilance system had as of April 17, 2021, received 330,218 injury reports after vaccination with one of the four available COVID vaccines, including 7,766 deaths.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which found that VAERS catches a mere 1% of vaccine injuries,3,4 primarily because it’s a passive system and reports are filed voluntarily.  Many Americans don’t even know that the system exists, or that they can file a report, and most doctors won’t file reports when injuries are brought to their attention because the medical system doesn’t reward such fastidiousness. At most, 10% of vaccine side effects are ever reported to VAERS, according to a 2005 study in the BMJ.5

2021-05-07 The Roots of India’s COVID Crisis   Much of what has rendered India a disaster zone is the direct result of Modi’s policies. Yet even before Modi, India had deemphasized the importance of investing in public health and vaccine production infrastructure.   

When COVID-19 first arrived on the Indian subcontinent last spring, Modi’s veneer of swift action betrayed his characteristic callousness for the nation’s working poor. Using a 123-year-old law first intended to imprison colonial freedom fighters, he implemented a complete lockdown with four hours’ notice. Millions of migrant laborers were forced to walk hundreds of miles from cities to their villages and were sprayed with chemical disinfectants along the way like animals. While India’s urban elite and middle classes cloistered themselves in gated communities, social distancing remained impossible for most people. Instead of a robust, universal allocation of resources to help a nation in distress, the federal government largely relied on states to implement their own safety nets.

Back at the founding of the Indian nation-state, there was at least a nominal commitment to ambitious public health policies. Jawaharlal Nehru utilized an international fear of epidemic diseases to elevate the need for investment in Asia at the birth of the World Health Organization.     This foundational neglect for public health as a national priority helps account for just how far India’s public healthcare system has fallen. When economic liberalization and market reforms in the 1990s brought an expansion of the private healthcare industry.  But while the failure to invest in public health did not began with Modi, he has accelerated the government’s neglect. Two decades ago, at least 31 percent of medicine in inpatient treatments was available for free in public hospitals; now that figure is less than 9 percent.

There are those who have died more or less invisible in the eyes of the state, not counted as part of the obscene death toll due to draconian rules on documenting COVID-related deaths, piled ten to a funeral pyre, the collateral damage of a completely avoidable crisis. This is the price of neoliberalism, whose logic has lent itself handily to Modi’s fascism—and has robbed generations of their elders.

2021-05-05 What is a ‘vaccine passport’ and will you need one the next time you travel? The expectation is that with a vaccine, some aspects of life will return to normal – especially when it comes to travel – which has been particularly hard-hit. This is where a “vaccine passport” or “e-vaccination certification of compliance for border crossing regulations” might become a required travel document, to enable seamless border-crossing and the harmonization of varying national laws. A recent survey  showed strong support for vaccine passports, with more than three-quarters of people worldwide thinking they should be mandatory for travel.

The European Commission has announced it intends to open up to foreign tourists this summer, and plans for a digital certificate for travel, which would cover anyone vaccinated against COVID-19 or those who have had a negative test or have recently recovered. Its proposed Digital Green Certificate will facilitate safe free movement inside the EU during the pandemic.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has been looking into the use of technology in the COVID-19 response, and how it can work with member states toward an e-vaccination certificate. At the present time, it is WHO’s position that “national authorities and conveyance operators should not introduce requirements of proof of COVID-19 vaccination for international travel as a condition for departure or entry, given that there are still critical unknowns regarding the efficacy of vaccination in reducing transmission”.

The Common Trust Network, supported by the Forum, is combining the set of registries that are going to enrol all participating labs. Separately from that, it provides an up-to-date database of all prevailing border entry rules (which fluctuate and differ from country to country). Combining these two datasets provides a QR code that border entry authorities can trust. It doesn’t reveal any personal health data – it tells you about compliance of results versus border entry requirements for a particular country.

2021-05-05 The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandora’s box at Wuhan? The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted lives the world over for more than a year. Its death toll will soon reach three million people. Yet the origin of pandemic remains uncertain: The political agendas of governments and scientists have generated thick clouds of obfuscation, which the mainstream press seems helpless to dispel.

There are two main theories about its origin. One is that it jumped naturally from wildlife to people. The other is that the virus was under study in a lab, from which it escaped. It matters a great deal which is the case if we hope to prevent a second such occurrence. I’ll describe the two theories, explain why each is plausible, and then ask which provides the better explanation of the available facts.

It’s important to note that so far there is no direct evidence for either theory. Each depends on a set of reasonable conjectures but so far lacks proof. So I have only clues, not conclusions, to offer. But those clues point in a specific direction. And having inferred that direction, I’m going to delineate some of the strands in this tangled skein of disaster.

From early on, public and media perceptions were shaped in favor of the natural emergence scenario by strong statements from two scientific groups. These statements were not at first examined as critically as they should have been.

A defining mark of good scientists is that they go to great pains to distinguish between what they know and what they don’t know. By this criterion, the signatories of the Lancet letter were behaving as poor scientists: They were assuring the public of facts they could not know for sure were true. It later turned out that the Lancet letter had been organized and drafted by Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance of New York. Daszak’s organization funded coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. If the SARS2 virus had indeed escaped from research he funded, Daszak would be potentially culpable. This acute conflict of interest was not declared to the Lancet’s readers. To the contrary, the letter concluded, “We declare no competing interests.”

A second statement that had enormous influence in shaping public attitudes was a letter (in other words an opinion piece, not a scientific article) published on 17 March 2020 in the journal Nature Medicine. Its authors were a group of virologists led by Kristian G. Andersen of the Scripps Research Institute. Unfortunately, this was another case of poor science... If a virus has been manipulated, whether with a seamless method or by serial passage, there is no way of knowing that this is the case. Andersen and his colleagues were assuring their readers of something they could not know. The two reasons the authors give for supposing manipulation to be improbable are decidedly inconclusive. The Andersen paper’s speculation about designing a viral spike protein through calculation has no bearing on whether or not the virus was manipulated by one of the other two methods. The authors’ second argument against manipulation is even more contrived.

And that’s it. These are the two arguments made by the Andersen group in support of their declaration that the SARS2 virus was clearly not manipulated. And this conclusion, grounded in nothing but two inconclusive speculations, convinced the world’s press that SARS2 could not have escaped from a lab. A technical critique of the Andersen letter takes it down in harsher words.

Science is supposedly a self-correcting community of experts who constantly check each other’s work. So why didn’t other virologists point out that the Andersen group’s argument was full of absurdly large holes? Perhaps because in today’s universities speech can be very costly. Careers can be destroyed for stepping out of line. Any virologist who challenges the community’s declared view risks having his next grant application turned down by the panel of fellow virologists that advises the government grant distribution agency.

The Daszak and Andersen letters were really political, not scientific, statements, yet were amazingly effective. Articles in the mainstream press repeatedly stated that a consensus of experts had ruled lab escape out of the question or extremely unlikely. Their authors relied for the most part on the Daszak and Andersen letters, failing to understand the yawning gaps in their arguments. Mainstream newspapers all have science journalists on their staff, as do the major networks, and these specialist reporters are supposed to be able to question scientists and check their assertions. But the Daszak and Andersen assertions went largely unchallenged.


Coronavirus Covid-19 Research History – Index


Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

About mekorganic

I have been a Peace and Social Justice Advocate most all of my adult life. In 2022, I am again running for U.S. Congress in CA under the Green Party. This Blog and website are meant to be a progressive educational site, an alternative to corporate media and the two dominate political parties. Your comments and participation are most appreciated. (Click photo) .............................................. Paid for by Michael Kerr for Congress with Peace and Justice C00803577
This entry was posted in coronavirus, Covid-19, pandemic and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s