Illegal biological weapons research in the USA
The Geneva Convention on Biological Weapons is an international treaty banning the development, distribution and storage of biological weapons. Will this contract still be kept in view of the enormous advance in biotechnological possibilities?
Dipl.Biol. Dörte Donker
Geneva Conventions: A question of the state of mind and one-sided interests using the example of Iran
While the U.S. has accused Iran of faking nuclear weapons under the pretense of peaceful use of nuclear energy, and this unjustified imposition has resulted in the most severe sanctions against a nation, the U.S. has allowed itself to conduct a range of research and technology under the guise of peaceful use to provide, which run counter to the Geneva Convention on Biological Weapons. While Iran has met all of the requirements of the nuclear agreement conscientiously, but has had to put up with the breach of contract by the USA, it is still being sanctioned, which leads to enormous suffering for the Iranian people. Nuclear facilities in Iran are monitored 24 hours a day by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The US, on the other hand, has prevented everything that international surveillance of certain worrying research could have enabled.
The technology in terms of genetic manipulation of insects, viruses, bacteria and the production of toxins are so advanced that control is urgently necessary. The previously unexplained source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the fact that so-called functional gain research has been carried out in the United States for years on potentially pandemic pathogens and that an infectious SARS virus has been produced in the USA, makes it even clearer that we as The international community must not allow such loopholes or even active disregard for the Geneva Conventions.
USA and its risk researchers as a loophole in the Geneva Conventions
You breed the most dangerous viruses with the excuse that if they arise in nature, you want to be prepared with drugs and vaccines. But every biologist knows that biological weapons can also be produced under this camouflage of peaceful research. 
This has long been discussed and warned against in research circles, but these discussions are ignored by the public. The mainstream press and politics are working to immediately dismiss theses and evidence in this regard as conspiracy theory, which in my opinion is a further tragic development and is apparently increasingly being exercised by internet censorship in Germany. In the USA, on the other hand, there was a more intensive discussion on this topic, at least in the years 2014/15, which can be seen in various publications and websites of the US government. 
Shortly after the appearance of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, my research focused on the SARS and MERS viruses, both coronaviruses that are said to have crossed the barrier from animals to humans and led to serious respiratory diseases. Both viruses were responsible for epidemics in China and some Arab countries. I have found more and more scientific publications that are so clear that it would not be presumptuous to assume that the current SARS-CoV-2 virus was produced in a laboratory.
It is a fact that such risk research has been carried out. Risk research means manipulating viruses and bacteria that only make animals sick or only occur in them in such a way that they become dangerous for humans. This also includes manipulating viruses in such a way that they develop even worse clinical pictures than they would naturally cause and B. can spread and propagate faster, so become more pathogenic and infectious. They are given new properties by incorporating foreign genes into them.
The new SARS-CoV-2 consists of two virus genomes: the SARS virus and the MERS virus. The mixing of the virus genomes (all of the genetic material) SARS and MERS components may also have taken place in nature; that shouldn't upset us. I will not go into further detail here that HI virus genes have also been found; but this gives us one more clue that SARS-CoV-2 could come from a laboratory. For the Nobel laureate and AIDS researcher Montagnier, the fact that he assumes that the virus comes from a laboratory is enough. But I will provide further valid evidence. 
GOF / PPP research
In the United States, there are several terms for this research to put viruses together and to equip them with new properties. On the one hand, it is called PPP research because it is research into potentially pandemic pathogens. On the other hand, they are called Gain-of-function Researches (GOF), which means that the manipulations lead to a functional gain in the viruses, such as their transferability to humans and a higher disease-causing potential. So you will find many articles on the net under the keyword GOF / PPP, including those from US authorities.     
We also find the term dual-use research, which means that it is research with a dual purpose; So once for humans, as a precaution in order to be able to access medicines and vaccinations in the event of an actual skipping; on the other hand, one is aware that these results meet the definition of a biological weapon and can be used as such. And that clearly violates the Geneva Bioweapons Convention. 
The Americans are aware of what this research means. As I went through the biotechnology databases, the NCBI,  I came across several science authors and other publications that discussed several US Congress debates on this dual-use research.   
In addition to SARS and MERS viruses, various flu viruses, as well as Ebola and anthrax were used. These gain-of-function studies on SARS and MERS are interesting for us. SARS and MERS research focused on the production of viral hybrids (hybrids), which in biology are called chimeras and have undergone functional manipulation. The focus of one of these works was, among other things, the genetic manipulation of the corona virus, which was taken from the horseshoe bat, in order to be able to infect humans and to be able to reproduce in humans.
Even on the government side, there is talk of the literally worrying research. You can see there that you have tried to work out self-regulation so that this research is not misused. Some of these projects have not been funded further and working with certain pathogens has been prohibited. SARS and MERS have also been brought up in the course of these debates, but it is not clear whether this research has been discontinued. NCBI sources cannot prove a gap in GOF research at SARS. At the same time, another source says that research on SARS and MERS is not so worrying that it falls under the definition of PPP research. 
All restrictions on GOF / PPP research were dropped at the latest in 2017. 
In 2001, the United States refused to sign an additional protocol that could have independently controlled this dual-use research. The United States had refused because this control would, of course, have given them a deep insight into their technologies and military research. 
Production of an infectious SARS-CoV virus in the laboratory
In the course of this gain-of-function research, a demonstrable SARS virus was produced in 2016, which, as assumed for the current SARS-CoV-2, comes from the horseshoe bat. 
Ralph Baric from Chapel Hill University of North Carolina produced this virus with his research group and finally patented the virus.  
Already in 2008, a SARS virus chimera infectious to humans was produced in the USA and once again Ralph Baric from Chapel Hill is the top researcher, at that time still at the National Academy of Sciences. So they have been working on such viruses for 12 years, but they have not been able to manufacture drugs and vaccines, which should be the real goal. That makes things suspicious for me once again.  
I quote from one of the most unambiguous publications from 2016 as final proof that such a virus taken from the horseshoe bat has been equipped in the laboratory so that it can infect humans: 
(Translated from the English)
“Using the SARS-CoV-2 reverse genetics system, we generated and characterized a chimeric virus that expressed the tip of the bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone. The results show that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2) to replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and can achieve in vitro titers corresponding to an epidemic SARS-CoV strains… " 
In other words, a viral hybrid was made after it was isolated from the horseshoe bat and endowed with a spike protein that is, so to speak, a key to the locks in human airway cells. This virus can thus infect humans, which he could not do without this genetic manipulation. The human-made virus was called SHC014-MA15 and can not only penetrate human respiratory cells, but also multiply there robustly, which means that it can also infect other people. 
The chimeras SHC014-MA15 and the current SARS-CoV-2 virus have a 93% match in the gene sequences. This is not a little, because there is a 30% difference between SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 and a mean agreement of 89.1% with the bat SARS virus. This makes the virus from the laboratory in Chapel Hill an undisputable possible origin of SARS-CoV-2, especially since researchers have to admit that there is an evolutionary gap between SARS-CoV-2 and the bat virus.  
US military research: prohibited research into biological and chemical warfare agents
The U.S. military is one of the largest sources of funding for research, as well as dual-use research on chimeric viruses. It maintains high-security laboratories itself and works on viruses and other pathogens. Institutions like Darpa, an agency of the United States Department of Defense, are worth mentioning. Of course, we don't get much of their research unless their projects are subject to a government tender or patents have been applied for, both of which are the case with the Insect-Allies project.  
The project is about equipping insects to transmit viral vectors. This is a kind of genetic manipulation using insects from plants in the field, with the aim of modifying their genetic properties. This is a technology that, when used as a weapon, can be used to destroy crops. As a biologist, I can confirm that the latter is a fairly simple thing. This means that every state declared to be an enemy can be robbed of the food base in the long term. This is also research and provision of technologies that violate the Geneva Conventions and are disguised as research that is supposed to save human food resources in the event of natural disasters. The Max Planck Institute in Germany clearly says that this research violates the Geneva Bioweapons Convention. 
One of the institute's arguments is that the peaceful variant does not have to be equipped with genetically manipulating insects and even has to design a special drone and apply for a patent, but that spraying vehicles such as are already available in agriculture would suffice. This makes it clear once again how nonsensical some research is when you consider its actual usefulness in terms of its peacefulness and how suspicious such projects look after bioweapon research, creation of bioweapon technologies and provision of biological weapons.
The same excuse is used here as in the functional gain research on viruses that are manipulated in such a way that they can infect humans because one day they could really infect humans. If natural disasters could occur, e.g. B. floods, extreme hot and cold periods, one could use this technology; so the reasoning. As someone who has worked in the field of plant biotechnology for years, I think this is a nonsensical concept, because plants that have been damaged in this way can no longer be saved. It would therefore make sense to multiply and grow new plants in laboratories that have already been genetically manipulated for stress factors using biotechnological methods. And these methods can be used fairly quickly and flexibly.
One of the U.S. military's high-security laboratories was closed in summer 2019 due to massive security deficiencies. Highly contagious pathogens could also be released from such laboratories at any time, such as a corona virus, which once again shows the urgent need for independent control of such laboratories and research facilities.   At around the same time, a top-class US scientist, shortly before the outbreak of the epidemic in China, Prof. Dr. Dear  , arrested by the FBI in the United States; the indictment: espionage for China.   
His employees also allegedly tried to smuggle substances from the USA into China. Prof. Dr. Lieber had received enormous research funding from the US military. In this way, under the name of a researcher funded by the US military, I was able to find out what Prof. Lieber researched for the military. He is the inventor of virus-sized silicon nanoparticles; Particles with properties of viruses. Not only can they transmit information or serve as liquid computers,  they can also inject genetic codes into our cells. Therefore, nanoparticles are also needed to produce the new RNA vaccines that are supposed to integrate parts of the genetic code of the virus into our cells; but they can do much more.
Dr. Lieber says about his nanoparticles themselves that they are not only suitable for transmitting information, but can also destroy cells and entire biological systems.  Biological systems begin where cells organize themselves in tissues and end with complex ecosystems. We can also think about this area of application in our heads. 
RNA vaccines are undisputedly dangerous and have led to many fatal outcomes in animal experiments, due to inflammatory foci in the lungs and immunological overreactions.     Then such vaccines are to be administered to 7 billion people without appropriate tests for side effects, which can take many years.
These elaborate and lengthy vaccine tests are necessary because vaccines are not unproblematic and have the potential to trigger enormous side effects, which can also be fatal. In the case of the corona vaccine, however, a legal change regarding this test phase is being discussed.  And probably the vaccination procedure in Europe will be direct and indirect, which could harm or even kill more people than Covid 19 ever could.
If such research and projects also come up against questionable billionaire private individuals like Bill Gates, who wants to reduce the world's population and capitalist-imperialist interests, the whole thing takes on more than worrying dimensions.
Darpa: Agency for Advanced Defense Research Projects 
Darpa has ties to the pharmaceutical industry, especially those companies that are said to be producing a never-approved RNA vaccine, while others have previously worked on virus chimeras, including SARS and MERS. Darpa maintains questionable research laboratories in the Ukraine  , in the vicinity of which there are always unexplained deaths and which is also working hard to breed a SARS-CoV chimera. 
Darpa is also at the forefront of gene editing technologies  .  
Other programs enable viruses to be synthesized using computer programs, which provides further very suspicious possibilities for research into biological weapons.  In this way, has been restored an extinct horse pox virus artificially 2017 and also the production of the human smallpox virus thus represents no more hurdle.    
I think my short remarks make it clear that we are facing enormous problems with uncontrolled research activities, which, combined with a variety of power interests and new unimagined opportunities in the field of biotechnology, pose a greater threat to humanity than conventional weapons.
We must ensure that this issue is discussed in public and that international control bodies are created. Certain states, like the United States, cannot be left to control themselves because we can see from the examples mentioned that this does not work. Nor should we put up with the fact that these necessary discussions are pushed into the corner of conspiracy theories, because all the things I have mentioned here are not supported by second-hand sources. Most of them come from scientific publications and announcements by government bodies in the United States.
1. A New Approach to Evaluating the Risk–Benefit Equation for Dual-Use and Gain-of-Function Research of Concern (http://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3...)↩︎;
2. Deliberative Process on Gain-of-Function Research (https://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/Gai...)↩︎;
3. Nobelpreisträger sagt: Coronavirus entstand im Labor – Südtirol News https://www.suedtirolnews.it/chronik/nob...tstand-im-labor ↩︎
4. Institutional Oversight Policy http://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/Inst...lOversight.aspx ↩︎
5. Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) (http://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/defa...)↩︎;
6. United States Government Policy for Oversight of Life Sciences DURC (http://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/USGOversightPolicy.aspx)]
7. United States Government Policy for Oversight of Life Sciences Dual Use Research of Concern (http://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Documents/...durc-032812.pdf)]
8. Deliberative Process on Gain-of-Function Research (http://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/GainOfFunction.aspx)]
9. Gain-of-Function Research: Ethical Analysis https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11948 (https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985)-016-9810-1)]
10. National Center for Biotechnology Information (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) ↩︎
11. Moratorium on Research Intended To Create Novel Potential Pandemic Pathogens https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article...)↩︎;
12. A New Approach to Evaluating the Risk–Benefit Equation for Dual-Use and Gain-of-Function Research of Concern https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article.../↩︎;
13. Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky Research(https://www.nature.com/news/engineered-b...esearch-1.18787)]
14. Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky Research (https://www.nature.com/news/engineered-b...esearch-1.18787)]
15. Ethical and Philosophical Considerations for Gain-of-Function Policy: The Importance of Alternate Experiments (
16. USA lehnen Zusatzprotokoll zur Biowaffenkonvention ab | Telepolis (https://www.heise.de/tp/features/USA-leh...ab-3451713.html)]↩︎
17. A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence (https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985)↩︎;
18. US20170096455A1 - Methods and compositions for chimeric coronavirus spike proteins ↩︎
19. WO US US20170096455A1 Ralph Baric The University Of North Carolina At Chapel Hill
Priority 2014-03-20 • Filed 2015-03-20 • Published 2017-04-06
The present invention provides compositions and methods comprising a chimeric coronavirus spike protein. ↩︎
20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19036930/ ↩︎
21. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18305135/ ↩︎
22. beachte man da bitte auch, dass in dem Artikel von 2016 bereits von SARS- CoV-2 gesprochen wird, obwohl es ihn da noch nicht gab. Eine Publikation aus China aus dem Jahr 2008, die die gleichen Funktionsgewinnmanipultionen beschreibt, spricht ebenfalls schon von SARS-CoV-2. ↩︎
23. A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence (https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985)↩︎;
24. A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence (https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985)↩︎;
25. The COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comprehensive Review of Taxonomy, Genetics, Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Control https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article...)↩︎;
26. A Close Relative of SARS-Cov-2 Found in Bats Offers More Evidence It Evolved Naturally (https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/05/11/...)↩︎;
27. Insect Allies (https://www.darpa.mil/program/insect-allies)↩︎;
28. (https://beta.sam.gov/search?keywords=dar...ive=true&page=1) ↩︎
29. ↩︎ Ein Schritt zur biologischen Kriegsführung mit Insekten?
30. Bats, Gene Editing and Bioweapons: Recent DARPA Experiments Raise Concerns Amid Coronavirus Outbreak https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/...)↩︎;
31. Deadly Germ Research Is Shut Down at Army Lab Over Safety Concords (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/05/healt...)↩︎;
32. ↩︎ Charles M. Lieber http://cml.harvard.edu/people/charles-m-lieber
33. Harvard University Professor and Two Chinese Nationals Charged in Three Separate China Related Cases (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-u...e-china-related)]
34. Charles Lieber's nanoscale transistors can enter cells without harming them (https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2011/01/...zed-transistors)]
35. Nano-Bioelectronics (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4867216/)]
36. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2001/11/...-computing.html ↩︎
37. Charles Lieber's nanoscale transistors can enter cells without harming them
38. COVID-19: Therapeutics and Their Toxicities ↩︎
39. An Evidence Based Perspective on mRNA-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Development (https://www.medscimonit.com/download/index/idArt/924700)]↩︎
40. [Keyword: phase I trial on mRNA-1273] ↩︎
41. The spike protein of SARS-CoV — a target for vaccine and therapeutic development https://www.nature.com/articles/nrmicro2090)]↩︎
42. An Evidence Based Perspective on mRNA-SARS- CoV-2 Vaccine Development (https://www.medscimonit.com/download/index/idArt/924700)]↩︎
43. https://www.apotheke-adhoc.de/nc/mediath...a-virus-update/ ↩︎
44. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency – Wikipedia https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Ad...Projects_Agency)
45. US diplomats involved in trafficking of human blood and pathogens for secret military program ↩︎
46. Bats, Gene Editing and Bioweapons: Recent DARPA Experiments Raise Concerns Amid Coronavirus Outbreak ↩︎
47. Genome Editing ↩︎
48. Agricultural research, or a new bioweapon system? https://science.sciencemag.org/content/3...)↩︎;
49. Untitled ↩︎
50. DARPA Seeks Innovations in Rapid DNA Molecule Manufacturing ↩︎https://globalbiodefense.com/2020/04/10/darpa-seeks-innovations-in-rapid-dna-molecule-manufacturing/
51. How Canadian researchers reconstituted an extinct poxvirus for $100,000 using mail-order DNA https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/...)↩︎;
52. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29351298...iola&from_pos=1 ↩︎
53. Ausgestorbene Pferdepocken-Viren im Labor nachgebaut | 24.07.2017 https://naturwissenschaften.ch/service/n...abor-nachgebaut)]↩︎
54. Biotechnology: Genetically Engineered Pathogens (The Counterproliferation Papers, Future Warfare Series No. 53) https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a556597.pdf)]↩︎