The following is the result of questions I have been asking since early 2020 and exploring where my research has led. The story that emerges is my experience of what has become a long-lasting pandemic. In 2023, it still surges in certain parts of the world, which have allowed division, cultural beliefs, politicisation and propaganda to keep drowning out facts. The Spanish Flu had various peaks starting in 1918, coinciding with the end of World War 1 and was 14 times more lethal than COVID-19, according to Oxford University Press.
My grandfather’s diary shows that flu returned in February 1923 with 200 cases at least in his school, but he only mentions the disappointment of his activities being interrupted. Also, during the Spanish Flu pandemic, various measures were taken to stop or reduce transmission, which made sense. Almost the opposite measures were prescribed during the covid-19 pandemic, such as ordering people to stay inside instead of encouraging fresh air and exercise, as in 1918 when only infected households were quarantined and infected persons contacted at a minimum.
Patents
One argument exploded before most people had thought much about the pandemic. This surrounded patents assigned to the Pirbright Institute in Woking, Surrey. As early as 23 January 2020, there came a heated denial of patenting Coronavirus by Pirbright in 2015, when the institute claimed to only work on viruses affecting farm animals. We already know flu passes between pigs, chickens and human beings. Let us look at the patents filed by the Pirbright Institute before 2020.
Mutant spike protein extending the tissue tropism of infectious bronchitis virus (ibv
Chimaeric protein
Attenuated viruses of infectious bronchitis – this particular one is of interest, when you look back at its history and explore citations. The description went from ‘in a subject’ in earlier versions, to ‘in a patient’ in the most recent update from 15th February 2019. Here is the Abstract for this patent:
THIS INVENTION PROVIDES A LIVE ATTENATED CORONAVIRUS THAT INCLUDES A MUTATION IN STRUCTURAL PROTEIN NSP-3 AND / OR ELIMINATION OF ACCESSORY PROTEINS 3A AND 3B. CORONAVIRUS CAN BE USED AS A VACCINE TO TREAT AND / OR PREVENT A DISEASE, SUCH AS INFECTIOUS BRONCHITIS, IN A PATIENT.
Attenuated viruses of infectious bronchitis – Erica Bickerton, Sarah Keep, Paul Britton, application filed by the Pirbright Institute on the 18th July 2018 – CL2018001946A1 published in Chile.
A Chinese – “Batwing – derived coronavirus vaccine for preventing COVID-19” – April 2020, linked to patent above.
I don’t claim to understand these patents above but there seems to be some mutation to natural viruses for use in vaccines involved or intended. By following the links, you can explore them for yourselves and search for mentions of “human” to see where they occur.
What I do understand is style of communication and one big issue for me, which has had a devastating effect on people all over the world is the rhetoric used by the scientific establishment, governments, press and key people, particularly since early 2020. This brings me onto:
Denial and Deflection
There are many sources of information about how to stop rumours from spreading or combatting speculation to protect one’s reputation. Why a research institute would be concerned with a few tweets, no-one had noticed in January 2020, before most people were aware of or concerned with the new virus, I do not know. This has only come to my attention retrospectatively. Surely scientists at the Jenner Institute, Oxford University, the UK parliament, to whom the Pirbright Institute directed their evidence of false allegations and called for Google, Twitter and Facebook to take action, the Gates Foundation, who funded some of this work were not going to worry about a few tweets by “QAnon MAGA conspiracy theorists” in January 2020?
However, they did worry. This is the beginning of what has been referred to in the past by social researchers as “violent rhetoric” such as this article on Wiley Online. Research carried out in 2023 (Georgiou et al, 2023) shows that scientific reasoning reduced belief or endorsement in Conspiracy Theories relating to COVID-19 by pointing out rational fallacies in the argument.
Calling something a conspiracy theory (or someone a conspiracy theorist) is seen as an act of rhetorical violence, a way of dismissing reasonable suspicion as irrational paranoia
Some Dare Call It Conspiracy: Labeling Something a Conspiracy Theory Does Not Reduce Belief in It – Political Psychology Michael J Wood – 6 August 2015 – original article here.
From early 2020, I wondered why labels such as “conspiracy theorist”, “dangerous misinformation”, “false accusations” and other quite aggressive rebuttals were used so often, particularly when political psychologists and academics studying propaganda and effective communication knew people’s beliefs would not be controlled this way. In fact, labels and name-calling seem to fuel the flames of speculation, which is exactly what happened. When and where did this divisive rhetoric begin, which has drowned out rational reason in public health to fight the Covid pandemic.
Here is an article about when trials for the Oxford University vaccine begun using pigs
Another article about animal testing to be covid at Pirbright
In January 2020, instead of responding to public speculation about patents, vaccines and biosafety on Twitter, the Pirbright Institute contacts the BBC, Reuters Fact Check, Buzzfeed, McGill University, Mother Jones and sends Written evidence submitted to parliament – January 2020 Quote;
Written evidence submitted by The Pirbright Institute – Submitted to parliament.At the end of January 2020, the Institute was the subject of a conspiracy post on Twitter regarding the COVID-19 outbreak.
Despite countless attempts to alert social media channels and reporting these inaccurate messages and posts, no action was taken from these companies including Google, Facebook and Twitter. Posts and
conspiracy theories are still continuing on social media and are potentially damaging the
Institute’s reputation and confusing the public around the origin of Covid-19.
Pirbright also put an FAQ on their own website, denying work on human viruses and funding from the Gates Foundation. See a forthcoming post, which disproves these denials.
Victim-like claims by the Pirbright Institute about being targeted result in escalation to an Online Harms progressing through parliament. Meanwhile, see a forthcoming post showing written evidence to parliament about Ivermectin by Dr Tess Lawrie, which is totally ignored by everyone responsible in parliament for COVID-19.
Further escalation on Online Harms Bill
Denials by Pirbright Institute through Reuters Fact Check to say their patents are only for coronviruses affecting chickens. In fact the avian Infectious Bronchitis virus is the first discovered coronavirus in 1938.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic
Naming the virus
Articles and journalists who are critical of the Gates Foundation are growing – more to follow in susequent post.
Dairy of A Nonny Moose 