The following opinion on the origins of the China coronavirus was provided to us by Dr. Lawrence Sellin

There is ongoing censorship, even in the scientific literature, to restrict publication of information contrary to the accepted narrative that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring.

What follows is not an analysis of motivations or an indictment meant to assign blame, but a history of scientific investigation that eventually led to COVID-19.

You Might Like

A recent news article published in the scientific journal Nature noted, that while it is important to find the origin of COVID-19 to prevent reinfection, it has been difficult pinpointing the source.

TRENDING: AIN’T GONNA HAPPEN: Alan Dershowitz Says Americans Can be Forced to Take Coronavirus Vaccine (VIDEO)

“It is quite possible we won’t find it. In fact, it would be exceptionally lucky if we land on something,” said Lucy van Dorp, a geneticist from University College London.

It may indeed be impossible to identify a natural source, if COVID-19 was the product of bio-engineering.

Although there are hundreds of scientific publications on coronavirus, a few relevant to the present discussion will be highlighted.

Coronavirus research did not begin with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS, SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-1) epidemic of 2002-2004, but it was certainly accelerated by it.

Additional impetus for studying coronaviruses arose after the 2012 outbreak of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS or MERS-CoV).

That has been the consensus scientific opinion both for SARS and MERS, that it may have originated in bats, traveled through an intermediate animal host, civets and camels, respectively, and, along the way, acquired the ability to infect humans.

If such a contention is scientifically valid, then it is initially logical to presume that COVID-19 “jumped” from animals to humans in a similar fashion.

SARS may have originated in a bat population, but it was not the direct source.

In a 2008 bioengineering study designed to elucidate the origin of SARS, scientists “spliced” the SARS RBD onto a non-human-infecting bat coronavirus, thereby, producing a new viral entity of bat origin capable of infecting humans.

According to the present conventional wisdom, a COVID-19 precursor, while circulating in a bat population mutated, acquiring the ability to infect humans, perhaps through an intermediate host, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market.

That conclusion is not as scientifically solid as some would like you to believe.

It was already known by the end of January 2020, that the initial patients hospitalized between December 1-10, 2019 had not visited the market and bats were not sold there.

The Nature article, “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” widely cited to support the theory that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring also raises some not so widely cited doubts.

The fact that no natural source of COVID-19 has been identified, that scientific evidence exists suggesting bioengineering and the clear ability to do so, all demand an expanded investigation as to its origin.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired U.S. Army Reserve colonel, who previously worked at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases and conducted basic and clinical research in the pharmaceutical industry. His email address is [email protected].

[Note that we reported nearly a month ago that reports that the coronavirus occurred naturally are most likely propaganda coming from the Chinese regime in an organized disinformation campaign.

Yaacov Apelbaum at the Illustrated Primer shared with The Gateway Pundit information that supports the fact that the entire Wuhan bat soup story is fake news.  Various claims that the virus started at a wet market in Wuhan are almost certainly false.  Now we can add to this scientific support as well.]