Posted on 07/09/2021 12:35:50 PM PDT by rxsid
Leaked Confidentiality Agreement Shows Moderna, NIAID Filed Covid Vaccine Candidate in 2019
A blockbuster report form Dr. Joseph Mercola has remained under the radar from the press. Even conservative and ‘fringe” outlets have barely scratched the surface of what should be considered a major scandal in the world of Big Pharm. Apparently, certain people at Moderna and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) had knowledge of the coronavirus long before the rest of the public. They even had enough time to file an application for a coronavirus mRNA vaccine candidate in December, 2019.
...
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
At that time, most were blissfully unaware of the pandemic that would change the world in the next few months. It wasn’t until December 31, 2019, that the COVID-19 outbreak was first reported from Wuhan, China,1 and at this point it was only referred to as cases of viral pneumonia, not a novel coronavirus.2 I say “most” because it seems some people may have been aware of something lurking much earlier than it appeared.
In confidential documents3 revealed by the U.K.’s Daily Expose, Moderna, together with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), sent mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill December 12, 2019 — raising significant red flags. As The Daily Expose reported:4
COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate Was Released Prior to Pandemic The confidential disclosure agreement relays a material transfer agreement between the providers — Moderna, NIAID and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) — and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The providers agreed to transfer “mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates developed and jointly-owned by NIAID and Moderna” to the university’s investigator.5
“The material transfer agreement was signed the December 12th 2019 by Ralph Baric, PhD, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and then signed by Jacqueline Quay, Director of Licensing and Innovation Support at the University of North Carolina on December 16th 2019,” Daily Expose noted.
...
Thank you for linking the actual document, which talks about MERS. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome was first identified in June 2012. It’s a coronavirus, like SARS2003 and SARS-CoV-2. The vaccinate candidates were for HIV, Ebola, Influenza, and MERS. It says so right in the document.
Much ado about nothing. As usual.
This is for MERS, which was first identified in June 2012. Has nothing to do with SARS-CoV-2, except that they share the same family of viruses, of which 7 different ones are known to infect humans.
Sorry conspiracy theorists, your princess is in another castle.
It mentions Zika virus too.
The document is an amalgamation of several different agreements over several different years with several different groups.
Questions remain as present in #28.
bookmark
I read the entire document.
It documents ongoing mRNA vaccine work on coronaviruses going back to 2015.
It presumably was started because of NIAID’s interest in SARS, its sponsorship of gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses, and Moderna’s pre-existing expertise in preparation of mRNA delivery vehicles.
It is a coincidence - but not more than that - that the NIAID and the Wuhan Institute of Virology were about to cause the massive planetary disruption of SARS CoV 2.
There are no specific references to SARS CoV 2 and nothing to indicate that they were aware of its existence.
Who is Ralph Baric?
Baric, who signed the material transfer agreement to investigate the mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidate before there was a known COVID-19 pandemic, pioneered techniques for genetically manipulating coronaviruses, according to Peter Gøtzsche with the Institute for Scientific Freedom,6 and these became a major focus for China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Baric worked closely with Shi Zhengli, Ph.D., the director of WIV’s Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases, also known as “bat woman,” on research using genetic engineering to create a “new bat SARS-like virus … that can jump directly from its bat hosts to humans.” According to Gøtzsche:7
“Their work focused on enhancing the ability of bat viruses to attack humans so as to ‘examine the emergence potential.’ In 2015, they created a novel virus by taking the backbone of the SARS virus replacing its spike protein with one from another bat virus known as SHC014-CoV. This manufactured virus was able to infect a lab culture of cells from the human airways.They wrote that scientific review panels might deem their research too risky to pursue but argued that it had the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks. However, the value of gain-of-function studies in preventing the COVID-19 pandemic was negative, as this research highly likely created the pandemic.”
Baric and others, including Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance president, to which he is closely tied, were quick to dismiss the lab-leak hypothesis, which suggests that SARS-CoV-2 accidently leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, China.
Regarding the novel SARS-like virus that Shi and Baric created in 2015, this research was conducted using a grant from EcoHealth Alliance.
“The work, ‘A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence,’20 published in Nature in 2015 during the NIH’s moratorium21 on gain-of-function research, was grandfathered in because it was initiated before the moratorium … and because the request by Shi and Baric to continue their research during the moratorium was approved by the NIH.As a condition of publication, Nature, like most scientific journals, requires22 authors to submit new DNA and RNA sequences to GenBank, the U.S. National Center for Biotechnology Information Database. Yet the new SARS-like virus Shi and Baric created wasn’t deposited23 in GenBank until May 2020.”
Meanwhile, both Baric24 and Daszak were involved in organizing the publication of a scientific statement, published in The Lancet and signed by 26 additional scientists, condemning inquiries into the lab-leak hypothesis as “conspiracy theory.”25
At the time The Lancet statement was released in February 2020, Daszak had advised Baric against adding his signature because he wanted to “put it out in a way that doesn’t link it back to our collaboration so we maximize an independent voice.”27 The authors also declared no competing interests.
Who Knew What, and When?
We now have proof that Moderna and NIAID sent their mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates to Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in mid-December 2019. Were they aware that COVID-19 was circulating at that time, or did they have knowledge far before that such a vaccine would soon be in demand? The red flags, and cover-ups, continue to mount, but ultimately the truth will prevail."
So the question the article is getting at is not that coronavirus has been around for decades (known commodity), not that Moderna was working on mRNA vaccines for LOTS of other diseases...including "coronavirus" (known commodity).
The question is...WHICH coronavirus vaccine?
So this guy, Baric is
(a) tied to Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance,
(b) tied to the "bat lady" researcher at WIV,
(c) tied to "gain of function" research on dangerous viral pathogens,
(d) in 2015, together with the bat lady, created a "novel virus by taking the backbone of the SARS virus replacing its spike protein with one from another bat virus known as SHC014-CoV. This manufactured virus was able to infect a lab culture of cells from the human airways."
And you think this is a giant nothing burger?
Your not the least bit interested in finding out WHAT "coronavirus" vaccine "candidate" Moderna shared with this Baric at UNC mid Dec 2019 when undoubtedly his associate the "bat lady" at a minimum would have known there was an emerging novel coronavirus?
Trust Moderna though, trust the "science" too that this was a "wet market" incident and not a "lab leak."
There are no specific references to SARS CoV 2 and nothing to indicate that they were aware of its existence."
And that...is PRECISELY the entire point here.
Nobody should expect them to spell out in this document, that they know a new...novel coronavirus is spreading all over China and that they are transferring a potential SARS2 vaccine to Dr. Baric.
Since it's 100% known fact that our government, as well as the vaccine makers, have been hiding ALL KINDS of information on SARS2....
The question here, that the article posits is this....
WHICH "coronavirus" vaccine "candidate" did Moderna transfer to Dr. Baric at UNC? And why then?
Moderna announced their SARS CoV 2 candidate vaccine in mid-February 2020, about a month after China published the sequence.
If your point is that NIAID (and NIH, too) are acting guilty, I agree. When this story is told, maybe it won’t be the “Wuhan virus” but the “Bethesda virus”.
September 2019 Chinese hospitals were dealing with first cases of an unknown form of pneumonia.
lol!!!
Confirms the falsity of the article. Just confirms research on vaccines including utilizing mRNA has been going on for many years as has been public record - researching a variety of virus types including (but limited to) coronaviruses in those documents. Not a word about the new coronavirus "COVID" as the article falsely states - banking on the fact the readers will recall it was generically referred to as "The Coronavirus" before getting its official designation so they will read "coronavirus" in the document and then believe the article has validity, then adding "prior to the pandemic" - well, yes, decades of research would have indeed occurred prior to the pandemic of 2020, and these specific docs go back to 2016 for this series of research agreements...and the 2019 agreement wasn't even for a research related to human subjects, putting the final nail in the coffin for the credibility of this article.
Yet look at all of the usual suspects all giddy over - yet another - fake news story and another ornament on their false narrative tree that is demonstrably easy to verify as false even with a cursory review of the source documents. So embarrassing. But they are dedicated to the narrative, not the truth. Facts and reality do not phase them.
Thank you. I’ve posted Gates and Fauxi presented their mRNA-1273 vax (aka Moderna) at the Gates’ Foundation Event 201 in Oct. 2019 anyone ever heard of it and used the tagline, “Which came first, the vaccine or the virus” and caught flak from FR.
If Mr. Trump questioned big government, he certainly could have questioned big pharma. It is quite possible he thought he could control the other side through public opinion; however, he underestimated the scope of the group against him during COVID, which included *all* the hierarchy of the Republican party.
If you’ve followed PRESIDENT Trump, for any amount of time....you’d know that he HAS questioned BigPharma/vaccines, in the past (before he was PRESIDENT).
What he probably didn’t know, until in office, is the scope of the CCP/Big Pharma industry, that controls *all* hierarchy of BOTH parties, with maybe a couple of exceptions.
Curious....why do you refer to him as Mr Trump and not President Trump?
Yes, Mr. Trump had a past history of questioning pharmaceuticals, but during his Presidency -particularly during the state of emergency surrounding SARS-COV-2 -President Trump openly promoted these very same companies that have a terrible history of promoting bad drugs. Furthermore, government agencies gave them the contracts to produce the COVID vaccines and produce them without ANY FINANCIAL LIABILITY to see that they were safe and effective. Government agencies under his administration additionally allowed these companies to skip crucial testing requirements that all vaccines up until this point have always had to follow.
It is my personal opinion that this mistake on his part, has the possibility of undermining President Trump’s return to the office of President.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.