@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall And 100% of all the alleged market animal photos were taken in 2017. https://t.co/Vh4dKy6rvI there is a reason why that animal paper refused to release the per-month data of animal sales in the wet markets—the sales were completely banned in 2018 when the consumption of

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall Contraband animals were prohibited in an 2017 revision fo the CCP’s own “wildlife protection law”. This targets the main reason for consumption, which is to brag as a social status. No animals or their meat were ever sold in wet markets or online after that date. The only things

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall Ever sold after the date were desiccated and sun-dried parts for use in jewelry and for medicine. They are always thoroughly dried out which would inactivate all enveloped viruses incl. all coronaviruses within them if they were present.

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall https://t.co/2679qQiA0P
The claimed market origin is undermined by the presence of consistent positive SARS-CoV-2 detection in wastewater and in patient samples outside China in at least two different countries well into November 2019, which is before the first case in the wet

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall Market was ever reported. The gag order issued by the CCP forbode the release of any cases in China that would undermine or question the wet market origin narrative which was in effect all the way into March 2020, before of which

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall the cases which Holmes, woroby and Ronwell https://t.co/WV1bCdWQRA base their argument on was released as examples of human-to-human transmission from the market in several state-sanctioned epidemiological papers. https://t.co/4xJ1zo5Oys likewise, no thorough retrospective

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall searches of early cases were ever permitted, with all the samples ever collected before 01/01/2020 ordered to be destroyed and all testing on them stopped, and the result of which are kept under indefinite non-disclosure order unless permission is granted by the CCP for their

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall propaganda purposes, which is to boast the wet market origin narrative for the limited releases in the late Jan-late Feb 2020 epidemiology papers Woroby, Ronwell and Holmes bases their analysis on. https://t.co/lXcqpRyYOV Italy and Brazil reported SARS-CoV-2 consistently in

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall Wastewater in 10/12/2019 and 27/11/2019, placing their index case date one to three weeks before the first market case in China.

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall French IgG analysis also place their index case date at 02/December/2019, likewise is a week before the first confirmed market case in China. If you have global spread happening before the forced “date or origin” under the CCP narrative, then the claim that it originated in a

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall “Wet market” is also falsified due to the presence of human infections weeks before that claimed “index case”. The data manipulation is so severe that a visible scar in the form of a 5x jump in daily confirmed cases at 01/01/2020, which the standard for diagnosis was relaxed a

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall Little and newer case (by sampling and onset) samples were not included in the list of samples that are to be destroyed under the gag order after 01/01/2020. The standard for strict market tracing is also explicitly listed for all cases in 12/2019 under these standards

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall In late December 2019-early January 2020, influencing diagnosis at least until 14/01/2020 which is the date of the first claim that “limited human-to-human transmission” may exist in the official CCP narrative. The book is cooked from the very beginning. https://t.co/za5Nsl0kJV

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall https://t.co/8kCiFFrGHX

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall https://t.co/VSqvPCFH8S

No, but that\u2019s part of my point. We can\u2019t know if they are being \u201csilenced\u201d, and we have many reasons to believe that they can\u2019t speak their mind without taking a massive risk.

Unless we define \u201csilenced\u201d as \u201cunable to communicate at all\u201d, which doesn\u2019t strike me as useful.
— Derrick VanGennep (@VanGennepD) January 6, 2022

@JackDempsey2_2 @pathogenetics @ggronvall https://t.co/UucltV3fYF

@pathogenetics @ggronvall

More from Daoyu

More from All

You May Also Like