Yan Limeng's heavy report analysis: 3 key evidence points to virus man-made

 Direct translation

[Tang Jingyuan Quick Comment] Yan Limeng's heavy report analysis: 3 key evidence points to virus man-made

The CCP's postgraduate chemical weapons have produced 127 viruses | Hot interaction 09/15/2020

Ref : https://www.ntdtv.com/gb/2020/09/16/a102941694.html

Analysis of Yan Limeng's heavy report: Three key pieces of evidence point to the creation of viruses; the CCP has developed chemical weapons and has produced 127 viruses. (Quick comment by Tang Jingyuan)

Hello, everyone, today is September 15. Welcome everyone to continue to pay attention to us.

Today I would like to discuss with you a piece of heavy news yesterday, that is, Dr. Limeng Yan, a virologist who fled from Hong Kong to the United States, has officially announced the first research report on the source of the virus by her and her team. This report is 26 pages long and shows an overview of the research conducted by Dr. Yan's team on the source of the Chinese Communist Party virus.

It is an overview because this report is not the entire content of their research. Yan Limeng herself also said that there will be further reports that will be released one after another, introducing more evidence.

All friends who have read this report, I believe they will share the same feeling with me, that is, the content is very professional and difficult to understand. I also consulted Dr. Sean, the former director of the Virus Laboratory of the Walter Reed Army Academy of the United States, before I had some superficial understanding of this report.

Let's discuss the main points and content of this report, and what significance it has for countries currently ravaged by the epidemic. I am not an expert, so the discussion here may also contain errors or problems. Friends are welcome to correct me at any time.

First of all, this report unequivocally pointed out from the title that the CCP virus, which is the WHO standard name SARS-CoV-2 used in the report, has the characteristics of laboratory modification and is not a natural evolution. In the following a lot of rich and even complicated content, they are all from different angles to demonstrate why the virus originated from laboratory transformation.

As far as my personal understanding is concerned, for the sake of objective accuracy, we temporarily understand it as a hypothesis. Of course, this hypothesis has very strong arguments and reasons. Let's sort out the most important parts.

The report bluntly stated that the CCP virus was transformed from two new coronaviruses discovered by the CCP military in 2018. The specific unit is the Military Medical Science Institute of the Nanjing Military Region. They extracted it from bats living in Zhoushan, Zhejiang. The two viruses have been separated, code-named ZC45 and ZXC21 respectively. For convenience, we collectively refer to them as Zhoushan virus here.

Zhoushan virus and CCP virus have high similarity. Their complete gene sequence identity reached 95%. Before the disclosure of RATG13 virus that was hidden by Wuhan virus for 7 years, Zhoushan virus was homologous to CCP virus. The most sexual virus.

But in this high degree of similarity, there is a very important anomaly.

According to the report, most of the proteins in the sequence of the CCP virus and Zhoushan virus are very similar. For example, the identity of the E protein is 100%, the N protein is 94%, the M protein is 98.6%, and the S2 protein (S protein second half) is 95%.

We can see that although these values ​​are not the same, the gap is very small, and the consistency is generally at the same level. Only the most important S1 protein, that is, the first half of the S protein, the sequence identity of the two viruses suddenly dropped to 69%, which is very different. This is a very rare phenomenon from the perspective of natural evolution.

Having said that, we must add an explanation of what S1 protein and S2 protein are.

We all know the origin of the name coronavirus because the surface of the virus particle has many protruding structures like pushpins, which is the S protein.

This S protein is extremely critical because it is the key to the virus and can open the lock on the surface of human cells. Without this key, the virus cannot infect the human body.

Since it is a key, we all know that it must be divided into two parts, one is the front end inserted into the keyhole, which is the very unusual S1 protein just mentioned, and the other part is the part left outside the keyhole, just like when we unlock the lock. The part that I hold at the time is the S2 protein.

We all know that coronaviruses are a large family, and most of them do not directly infect the human body. Zhoushan virus is one of them, and the CCP virus can. Going back to the topic just now, the CCP virus and Zhoushan virus have high homology. They are very similar in most places, but one can infect people and the other cannot infect people. The most critical difference in this result is , Is the S1 protein, which can be inserted into the keyhole.

Having said that, I think everyone will definitely think: This is a coincidence.

Yes, it is a coincidence, and there are even more coincidences.

Why can the CCP virus open the lock of human cells and invade the human body? The reason is simple, because the S1 protein of the CCP virus is very similar to the S protein of the SARS virus and can bind to the ACE2 receptor of human cells. This is the process of unlocking. Therefore, Yan Limeng reported that the key was probably copied from the SARS virus.

But the report also pointed out that the key to the CCP virus and the key to the SARS virus are not exactly the same. There are still some differences between the two, but the strange thing is that all parts that are directly related to unlocking are the same and there are differences. The place does not affect unlocking.

You can see it, it's like you go to match the key, the locksmith didn't use the machine to fix it to copy the exact same one, he just took a look, took the file three times and divided five to make a key. You take it over and see that it's roughly the same, but there are many differences, and you worry that you won't be able to open the lock. The locksmith tells you that the key latches responsible for unlocking are the same, and it doesn't matter if the others are different, and will not affect unlocking. You take it back and have a try, it's no problem. What do you think at this time? You must think, this locksmith is really a master.

In fact, the relationship between the CCP virus and the SARS virus S1 protein is similar to this situation, which makes people think that this can be done by a very powerful master.

This is a very important inference from the Yan Limeng report, that is, the CCP virus is assembled by using the Zhoushan virus as the backbone and replicating the S protein of the SARS virus. This kind of copying is not a simple one-hundred-percent copy, but a very accurate copy of only the parts needed for unlocking.

Of course, theoretically, this structure may also be caused by virus mutation. But the problem is that in the state of natural evolution and random mutation, without the participation of advanced intelligence, the extremely subtle structural changes of a virus can be so precise and ingenious. It is not bad. How high do you think it is?

Another very important anomaly is the emergence of a very unique sequence in the CCP virus.

On page 7 of Yan Limeng's report, she listed the sequence comparison diagrams of the two strains of the Chinese Communist Party virus, Zhoushan virus and SARS virus. The picture shows that this very unique sequence is exclusively owned by the CCP virus. In the comparison picture, Yan Limeng marked it with a short green line.

This sequence is marked with letters as SPRRA. What unique features does it have? With this sequence, the S protein of the Chinese Communist Party virus can be cleaved into S1 and S2 proteins by the human furin protease at this position.

What is the effect of this kind of shearing? It is very complicated to say in detail, and we don't need to understand those very professional biochemical processes. If you still use the key as an analogy, it’s like a small piece of copper. After cutting, it is divided into two parts, one is the part that is inserted into the keyhole, and the other is the part that is held in your hand, so you can go The unlocking will be very convenient and smooth, and the unlocking efficiency will be improved.

Therefore, the key word is this "efficiency improvement"-for the Chinese Communist Party virus, its S protein has this Flynn restriction site, which will greatly increase its unlocking efficiency, that is, the efficiency of the virus infecting the human body. increased. SARS virus does not have this special restriction site.

So in simple terms, this restriction site greatly simplifies the process of CCP virus invading human cells. It is much simpler than the SARS virus, and its efficiency is of course much higher. How high is it? Current research suggests that the gap is between 100 times and 1000 times. This is an important reason why we see that the CCP virus is much more infectious than the SARS virus back then.

What is surprising is that, so far, there is no such restriction site in all other β-coronaviruses in the same lineage in nature. This is the exclusive feature of the Chinese Communist Party virus.

Of course, in other types of viruses, some have such special structures, such as HIV and avian flu. This is also one of the main reasons why some people suspect that the CCP virus is grafted with part of the HIV function.

Some careful friends may have noticed, saying that you just said that this Flynn restriction site also exists in other viruses, then this restriction site of the Chinese Communist Party virus may also be natural like other viruses. What about the evolution?

In theory, this is possible, and the scientific community is currently able to realize that the only way for this to happen is through the term "gene recombination" that we often hear.

The so-called gene recombination refers to the exchange or recombination of genes that occur in organisms. The probability of occurrence in this way is much lower than that of gene mutations, and in fact no new genes will be produced, just a recombination of existing genes.

In other words, if the Chinese Communist Party virus wants to obtain the special structure of this restriction site, it must invade the same cell of a certain body at the same time as other viruses with this structure, and then the two are very coincidental. The gene recombination occurred, allowing the CCP virus to obtain this crucial special structure.

But the problem is that in order to form the CCP virus we see now, it just happens to be impossible. At least it must have an extremely coincidental encounter with the SARS virus at some point. Infected the same cell of the same host, and then recombined again, allowing the CCP virus to accurately obtain the key that can unlock the human cell lock.

What is the probability that these two events happened smoothly during natural evolution? This is a concept that is difficult to quantify, and friends can draw their own conclusions. I once consulted an authoritative expert who said that it is difficult to quantify, but in the general public sense, the probability is one in ten million, one in 100 million or even lower, which is not an exaggeration. .

Moreover, it was mentioned at the beginning of this report that the Zhoushan virus and the CCP virus have up to 95% sequence identity, which not only indicates that the two are likely to be related, but also that the time of their differentiation cannot be very long. It only appeared recently. In other words, the two genetic recombination events mentioned above must have occurred only in an era closer to the present.

In other words, the probability of two natural recombinations of key genes is already very low. Now it is required that these two recombinations should occur within a short period of time. This probability is of course even lower.

There is also a very unusual place that Shi Zhengli first announced the coronavirus named RATG13.

Shi Zhengli published a paper in February this year, claiming that they discovered that the -virus obtained by the Wuhan Institute of Virology 7 years ago has up to 96.2% homology with the CCP virus, and the sequence of this virus comes from a bat stool sample in Yunnan. Therefore, this RaTG-13 virus has also become the strongest evidence that the CCP virus originated from natural evolution.

As early as March of this year, some overseas experts issued articles questioning whether Shi Zhengli really possessed the virus. It was not until the end of May that Wang Yanyi, director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, came forward to accept an interview with the party media, admitting for the first time that they were only testing bat samples. In the process of sequencing, the virus sequence of RaTG-13 was known, but the live virus of RaTG-13 was not isolated and obtained.

Wang Yanyi's purpose in saying this is to show that the virus does not have this RaTG-13 live virus, and of course there is no possibility of leakage or artificial modification.

But in fact, everything has two sides. If what Wang Yanyi said is true, then from the other side, Shi Zhengli might forge this virus sequence. Because Shi Zhengli is the only person with this virus sequence, she can't come up with evidence of the existence of the virus in vivo, and it is not difficult for her to forge a virus sequence. It only takes a moment to type and type.

It may sound weird to everyone, but theoretically it is possible. Because Shi Zhengli herself is regarded as the biggest suspect in modifying the virus, in order to remove the suspicion for herself, she forged a natural-source ancestor for the CCP virus. This motive and logic make sense.

This is the third suspicious point mentioned in this report by Yan Limeng, questioning whether the RaTG-13 virus is suspected of forgery.

And from another point of view, the sequence of this RaTG13 virus is highly similar to that of SARS virus. Any expert familiar with SARS or coronavirus should just see its S protein sequence and immediately realize that this virus is likely to resemble SARS. As the virus binds to the human ACE2 receptor, it has the ability to infect the human body.

Shi Zhengli is a top expert on SARS virus, and she is fully equipped with this ability. But what is strange is that Shi Zhengli completely ignored such a dangerous virus for 7 years and showed an attitude that was extremely disproportionate to her professionalism. It was not until the outbreak of the epidemic in Wuhan that she seemed to wake up. Think of this virus immediately and publish its sequence immediately. No matter from which point of view, this is a very strange thing.

So, to summarize, Yan Limeng’s report mainly analyzes the S protein of the CCP virus, the Flynn restriction site, and the RATG13 virus that is considered to be a natural source of suspected fraud, and puts forward the possible source of the CCP virus. Hypothesis created artificially in the laboratory.

Of course, the report also gives possible technical ways to realize this kind of artificial manufacturing. This part is too professional, and strictly speaking, only the scientific community can evaluate and verify the effectiveness of these ways, so we won't be long-winded here. 

Finally, I would like to share with you my personal views on the report.

First of all, this report puts forward very sharp doubts about the source of the CCP virus from a very professional perspective. Such doubts have very sufficient theoretical basis and laboratory evidence, but objectively speaking, all these doubts are indirect evidence. We have not yet seen a very direct proof that the virus is artificially made in the laboratory. This is why we call it a hypothesis.

Secondly, this is the first time that a professional scientific team in the world has put forward a complete set of laboratory methods and approaches that may be realized on the possible artificial manufacture of viruses. Dr. Xiao En told me that, regardless of whether Yan Limeng has direct evidence, from the point of view of molecular virology, the test methods and techniques they proposed are feasible.

In other words, in theory, this virus may indeed be manufactured using current technology. Of course, it is feasible in theory and whether it can be achieved in practice, but this at least provides a more sufficient reason for Yan Limeng and many experts in the international community to question the origin of the virus.

The origin of the virus has always been ambiguous. The main responsibility is that the CCP has been covering up relevant evidence and refusing the international community to go to Wuhan for independent investigation. The CCP itself covered it and covered it to prevent people from seeing it, but just let people guess it. When others really guessed it, they jumped out and said that it was slanderous. This is a very rogue logic.

Third, even if the proposition of whether the CCP virus is man-made has yet to be confirmed, the CCP has been conducting research on biological weapons for many years. This has long been an open secret, and even the CCP itself does not hide this.

As early as May 2013, the Chen Hualan team of the Harbin Veterinary Research Institute published a paper in the international academic authority "Science". They reported that they used the H5N1 avian influenza virus, which is highly lethal but not easy to spread between people, and has low pathogenicity. However, the easily spread H1N1 human influenza virus combines into a super virus, which has the ability to spread among mammals.

The paper publicly declared that Chen Hualan's team hybridized 127 new viruses through similar methods, of which more than two-thirds are highly lethal to mice, 8 can be transmitted through the air, and 4 of which have high-efficiency air transmission capabilities.

This incident caused an uproar at that time. Lord Barong, the former president of the Royal Society, severely condemned that the study did not help prevent influenza. It was only driven by ambition without any common sense. He rebuked Chen Hualan’s team for “creating The dangerous virus that can spread between humans is very irresponsible."

Chen Hualan argued that he was engaged in vaccine research, but was ridiculed: Can you develop vaccines for 127 viruses?

This information shows that the CCP’s pursuit of weaponization of the virus is an objective fact. Although whether this is directly related to the current virus remains to be confirmed, the threat is real. I think this is reported by Yan Limeng. Another important significance is to let people all over the world wake up and see that the CCP’s danger to the world is all-round. The nature of this regime is anti-human and anti-social.

Okay, we will end the discussion here today, thank you, see you next time.

(Editor in charge: Li Hong)

Related paper : Li-Meng Yan etal,, Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory  Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route, Zenodo, https://zenodo.org/record/4028830#.X2Ayx2gzbIU; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa6VNhZZ4_8