Anonymous ID: 9f5d23 Dec. 24, 2021, 7:49 p.m. No.15250877   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>0889 >>0919 >>0989

So what's you guys take on Omicron being a white hat op? Have you seen the analysis on how everything points to it being lab/man-made?

 

things like

https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/omicron-is-not-normal

 

"Omicron was clearly created in a lab / It's apparent at this point that there were no predecessor mutations released into the wild. It's origin comes from a early 2020 strain, then magically it appears in the wild in late 2021 with ZERO connection to any of the most common variants.

Take a look at the NYT's corona variant tracker. Most variants have 5-7 changes to the spike protein.

How many does Omicron have? 50+"

https://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/353531578

Anonymous ID: 9f5d23 Dec. 24, 2021, 8:10 p.m. No.15250960   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>0989

>>15250919

>Supposedly it's a white-hat concoction to barrel roll the Delta strain into a harmless contagion

>Who knows ?

indeedโ€ฆ i was hoping minds here might have worthy takes. followed a few threads on the matter on halfchan and it's been very interesting. Some vied for almost complete certainty of man-made omicron. But then the theories on who it was, that's another thing

Anonymous ID: 9f5d23 Dec. 24, 2021, 8:28 p.m. No.15251020   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun

>>15250996

>30 to 50 never before seen mutations to a dramatically far less pathogenic agent = white hat monkey wrench in the gears of the destroyers.

 

https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/omicron-is-not-normal

 

Omicron is Not Normal

Everything suggests this variant was leaked from a laboratory engaged in gain-of-function research.

 

Omicron is not normal. No immediate progenitors are known; its closest relatives are viruses last seen in early- to mid-2020. The orthodox explanation for this awkward fact, is that it has spent the last 18 months lurking โ€œin a geography with poor genomic surveillance โ€ฆ or โ€ฆ in a chronically infected individual.โ€ The simpler explanation is that it leaked from a laboratory.

 

As el gato malo and others have indicated, evidence is strong that Omicron circulates preferentially in the vaccinated. In all likelihood, it is the result of gain-of-function research, in which SARS-2 was passaged repeatedly through convalescent or vaccinated plasma, in the hopes of helping the virus evade acquired immunity. The purpose of this research would be to anticipate future immune-escape variants that vaccines might target.

 

Omicron carries a series of highly unlikely and suspicious mutations in its spike protein. It is hard to imagine that these mutations can have arisen via natural processes, because all but one of them are nonsynonymous โ€“ that is, they code for different amino acid sequences. Starkly mutated variants favoured by natural selection should have a great many meaningless synonymous mutations as well.

 

Omicronโ€™s ancestors may have spent a significant amount of time adapting to mouse cells, before re-entering human hosts. Omicron appears selected to replicate primarily in the bronchial tract. Deeper in the human lung, it functions far less efficiently than Delta or the first strains from Wuhan. This is probably why it causes mostly mild illness, and it is reminiscent of techniques used to make live attenuated influenza vaccines safer for use in humans. Such vaccines are cold-adapted, that is, selected to circulate primarily in the cooler upper respiratory tract rather than in the warmer, more vulnerable lungs.

 

The balance of the evidence is that Omicron leaked from a lab engaged in SARS-2 vaccine research. There are many possibilities: It might represent a live, attenuated virus vaccine used informally among researchers, that mutated back to virulence and escaped; it might have been released accidentally; it could even be an attempt to develop a self-spreading vaccine to immunise animals or third world populations.

 

UPDATE: Igor Chudov points to his own similar analysis from 2 December.

Anonymous ID: 9f5d23 Dec. 24, 2021, 8:31 p.m. No.15251031   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>1057

>>15251012

> there's that Danish study on vaccine efficiency

basically, at 91-150 days, v efficiency goes all the way down toโ€ฆ -95%.

so the boost gives a small short boost, there's a drop, and there you wind up worse than you would have been otherwise.

 

vaxxed? welcome to your monthly lifetime subscription service.

Anonymous ID: 9f5d23 Dec. 24, 2021, 8:56 p.m. No.15251094   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>1101

>>15251083

>Aren't we just observers, ultimately?

sigh, feels a lot like so.

things like occupy and 2012 in Quebec showed that it didn't take much for a momentum to be had, and people giving each other the power they don't realize they have.

but, the social programming that came soon after was brutal.

i wish i knew what butterfly effect, Franz Ferdinand detail it would takeโ€ฆ