What if exaggerating the dangers of GOF is part of the psyop?

Is it possible that people "thinking out of the box" were also being played?

Someone recently posted a 2019 article gain-of-function research being done with H1N1 (aka “bird flu”). The timing of this post made me wonder…

What if exaggerating the dangers of GOF is part of the psyop?

What if we are trapped in a pre-determined debate between those who support GOF research versus those who oppose it? How many sincere truth-seekers believe the mystery of COVID-19 will be "resolved" if the scientists who defended the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 are thrown under the bus?

What if scientist who say SARS-CoV-2 came from nature share the same ultimate goals as their high-profile "opponents" who claim the virus was generated in a lab?

What if both sides promote worst case scenarios of worldwide pandemics in order to compel the general public to accept countermeasures that undermine civil liberties?

Despite concerns that the dangers had been greatly exaggerated, I personally spent a great deal of ink trying to shed light on the origin of the virus. My first disappointment was learning that some collaborators of DRASTIC were totally on board with forcing COVID “vaccines” on college students. Consequently, as an unwitting participant in the controlled opposition I feel morally obligated to shed light on approved counter-narrative versus the painful truths. These ideas are not my own, so I urge readers to open the reference links to give these truth-seekers the credit they deserve. Here is my outline:

1. People died because they were denied early treatment. People died because they were murdered by government-mandated hospital protocols.

2. Hospitalized COVID patients succumbed to a cytokine storm due to failure to use immunosuppressant steroids. Hospitalized COVID patients succumbed to septic shock due to failure to pre-treat the pneumonia with antibiotics.

3. The body count was high because hospitals failed distinguish between “dying from COVID” and “dying with COVID.” The body count was high because of widespread systemic fraud in combination with many verifiable deaths caused by fentanyl.

4. PCR testing generated false positives because the thermal cyclers ran too many cycles. PCR testing generated false positives because the PCR primers were designed to pick up a pre-existing background signal that had little to do with a (non-existent?) novel virus.

5. People were vaccine-injured because of DNA contamination, or graphene oxide, or SV-40, or lipid nanoparticle toxicity, or spike protein toxicity, etc…

   People were vaccine-injured because the transfection process is so damaging that it is ONLY used on research animals that are scheduled to be sacrificed.

6. The WHO pandemic treaty must be voted down. The US must withdraw from the WHO.

7. Gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology generated a novel virus that went around the world. Gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology generated a red herring that prevented many truth-seekers from discerning the full extent of the psyop.

To my knowledge, the ONLY symptom truly unique to COVID-19 is the long-term loss of taste and smell, and even though I have yet to learn of a satisfactory explanation for this phenomenon I am still open to the possibility that there was no novel pathogen. If this indeed is the case, what do we make of the early treatments for “COVID-19” like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine? Are they novel alternatives for treating influenza, or did they do little more than spare patients from the murderous hospital protocols?

Kudos to neurobiologist Jonathan Couey for leading me out of this cave. After wasting so much time on the origin of SARS-CoV-2 my first impulse was to double down, but research by similar truth-seekers like Jessica Hockett, Denis Rancourt, and Mark Kulacz made it increasingly obvious that I had been played.

Scene from the 1944 movie “Gaslight”