This post comes with Terms and Conditions. You acknowledge that “virus no-isolated” talking points are irrelevant to this post, and I discourage “drilled” repetitive narratives in general. Pandemics do not exist, they are faked by the governments with chemical agents, massive amounts of fear porn, fake PCR and hospital murder for money. “Pandemic preparedness” is a murderous government scam, from which a huge parasitic, militaristic industry is deriving profits and power. Click the button to acknowledge this and proceed to reading. Buy me a kofi while you are at it.
To complement the modest therapeutic effect of Remdesivir, DOMANE also identified Famotidine, a COVID-19 disease modifier from Johnson & Johnson; Pfizer’s Celecoxib, an anti-inflammatory product; and Merck’s Mectizan®, Ivermectin, an antiviral for clinical trials. To learn whether a combination of these FDA-approved drugs is more efficacious than current treatments, DTRA partnered with Quantum Leap Healthcare to conduct a clinical trial. This volunteer trial will evaluate drug combinations in COVID-19 patients who are having difficulty breathing.
“Latches on” is an apt choice of words, they are never too far from the ample government bosom to latch on to.
TLDR version:
Robert Malone was definitely contracted by the DOD/DTRA at the time - this is documented on his 2021 CV.
DTRA’s effort was orchestrated to look like they were searching for repurposed drugs, but it was fixed to promote their own asset - remdesivir (main component of the covid hospital murder protocol that generated the bulk of the “pandemic” they needed). From DTRA article: “Originally developed as an Ebola Zaire countermeasure, this DTRA-funded inhibitor transitioned for more advanced testing due to promising pre-clinical trials. Remdesivir inhibits viral replication in a wide variety of pathogens and was one of the first therapeutics identified in the Defense Department for repurposing to treat COVID-19.”
Pepcid (famotidine) was a decoy which did nothing but give legitimacy to the whole faked science effort. It would have looked too conspicuous if there was onl 1 or only 2 frontrunners.
Important! Funding for the Malone study came from the DOD, DTRA and DARPA:
This material is based upon work supported under Air Force Contract No. FA8702-15-D-0001. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Air Force. Funding was also provided by grants from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency HR0011-19-2-0020 (to A. G-S.); by CRIP (Center for Research for Influenza Pathogenesis), a NIAID supported Center of Excellence for Influenza Research and Surveillance (CEIRS, contract # HHSN272201400008C) and by supplements to NIAID grant U19AI135972 and DoD grant W81XWH-20-1-0270 to A.G.-S.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the Department of Defense (DoD), Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), and the Joint Science and Technology Office (JSTO) of the Chemical and Biological Defense Program (CBDP) for funding under the Discovery of Medical countermeasures Against Novel Entities (DOMANE) initiative. This work has also benefitted from advice, guidance, information and comments provided by Drs. Revell Phillips, Howard Haimes, David Hone, and Roland Seifert. We appreciate the valuable input provided by Dr Frank Weichold of the Office of Regulatory Science and Innovation (ORSI), Office of the Chief Scientist (OCS), Office of the Commissioner (OC), FDA/HHS, and Dr. Lawrence Callahan of the Office of Health Informatics, Office of the Chief Scientist (OCS), Office of the Commissioner (OC), FDA/HHS. We also thank Dr Anton Yuryev from Elsevier for his assistance in literature mining and reconstruction of the histamine signaling model. D.R. gratefully acknowledges the support of the MIT SuperCloud team. In the interests of expediting COVID-19 related scientific communications, the initial version of this manuscript was made available via the Research Square preprint server 23 May 2020 as DOI 10.21203/rs.3.rs-30934/v1.
Doc Malik Interview.
We arrive at January 16, 2024, and the world renowned expert, scientist, doctor, horse rancher, high speed writer of books, predictor of global pandemics, broker of multi-billion dollar defense contracts for pharma, black belt in the 5th gen warfare mind-psyops, self-appointed leader of the “health freedom movement” best known as the inventor of mRNA (hereafter for brevity called Biggus Expertus) went on Doc Malik’s podcast for a 2+ hrs long interview. Ahmad Malik had solicited questions from his followers and obtained close to 300 questions, some of which he asked in the interview. Immediately after the interview Biggus wrote a hit piece about Malik, called him a “defrocked surgeon” and whined about, well, the usual. That should teach Doc Malik a lesson…
Normally, I do not read Bob Malone’s stuff as I am not interested in his long essays puffing himself up or, alternatively, whining how everyone is out to get great Bob who invented mRNA and didn’t get the Nobel, etc. But this time I made a serious effort. I listened to the entire thing and made a transcript. It felt like swimming through a sewer, Shawshank Redemption style, but I did this for you, dear readers, so you don’t have to. But should you want to - here is the entire interview. There is a lot to unpack!
First, let me address Robert’s very clear conflict of interest that most freedom movers prefer to ignore - he was (and still is!) under contracts with the US Government, the DOD and DTRA. Even if he is no longer performing any science projects, real or faked, he is still under non-disclosure agreements. 29 sec clip from around 15 min into the interview:
Transcript:
AM: “Do you have any current contracts of confidentiality agreements with US Gov?”
RM: “No. I have existing non-disclosure agreements and those typically last 5-10 years.”
AM: “How many more years left on them?”
RM: “Probably another 4-5.”
Here is the OTA covid countermeasures contract awarded to Inovio (the company Bob states he started) by the DOD on June 20, 2020. It was for the development of a prototype DNA vaccine for Covid-19 using an electroporation device. Translation: this is a way to drive DNA plasmids into your skin, i.e. transfect your largest organ with DNA plasmids containing chimeric genetic sequences and antibiotic resistance genes! But it’s for the good cause - to save your granny and for warfighter readiness…This contract has extensive confidentiality provisions and its term is redacted. It may very well be current today.
He also states in the interview that he has never worked for the CIA, but “forgets” to mention DOD/DTRA that are on his resume. That’s a good one, Bob!
I am searching for the right word here… searching … searching … ah! I think the word I am looking for is “controlled”. Bob is controlled by these still enforceable agreements with the US Government and the DOD. The existence of the DOD leash explains his otherwise erratic, unprofessional, bordering on incompetent behavior throughout the interview. He is doing a job.
Throughout the interview there are numerous examples of Bob the Expert not answering questions, obfuscating, belittling his interviewer, outright lying and being caught. Around 1:33:45 they discuss Bob’s famotidine paper.
Bob confidently states that in this study included “live virus!”
Here is 3 min clip, editing out long periods of Bob screaming “bullshit” and insulting Ahmad while looking for the paper online:
In this part of the interview The Expert confidently claims he used “live virus” to test whether famotidine is a potentially beneficial anti-viral drug. When asked to explain the provenance of the “live virus”, Bob immediately becomes defensive, starts screaming “bullshit!” and evades answering questions by making lots of noise, accusing Ahmad of being a “virus denier”, trying to bully by dropping names - “wait, whoa! Ok, there are multiple research laboratories all over the world that got this virus as soon as possible, because it was necessary in order for them to get contracts. SAIC has it, Emory has it, CDC has it…” and “virus was circulating the globe!”
From transcript of the interview:
Doc Malik: “this is 2021 right?”
RM: “ it was submitted first in 2020”
Doc Malik: “it was obtained commercially from ATUM - where did they get it from? Is that what you mean by live virus?”
RM: “Come on! This is no… it’s … it’s… there’s… you are… I don’t know what you are trying to…nitpick?” Doc Malik: “I am not!”
RM: “You’ll find, there is Chad Roy, look at Chad Roy’s work… Chad has the virus himself!”
Doc Malik: “Ok! Alright buddy… let’s move on.”
RM: “there are multiple, multiple laboratories that have this virus!”
Cultural note: ATUM maybe an acronym, but Atum is also the Egyptian god of all creation. Nice, huh.
The main ideological weapon to stop Doc Malik or anyone else, (especially in the credentialed medical community) from asking any more pointed questions about this topic was brandished much earlier in the interview, around 15 min. This is important - Bob needed to let Malik know that he will label him the “virus denier” and “flat earther” if needed! (34 sec)
This is the reason why an army of vicious, dumb and mostly anonymous trolls have been spun up on the internet repeating the same talking points: “virus hasn’t been isolated! I have FOIAs!” and they will flood any normal dialogue on this topic with garbage fake binary narrative and lots of aggression. The purpose of this tactic is to paint reasonable, valid, important inquiry (e.g., from the Baileys and Cowan) as leaders of the club of nutters, easily dismissible by a thought-terminating cliché. Just like Bob is doing here.
One more time, a shorter cut without music (14 sec) - now, do you see it?
This Stack is not deterred by these children’s games. Reminder - I ban the “no-virus” trolling.
Note: I will address Bob’s insistence that pandemic is something announced by the government in a separate post, it’s extremely important but this post is already long!
Let’s proceed with the FamotiGate inquiry. Maybe “the virus” was circulating the globe, but did YOUR study team obtain it, and if so - where did you get it from? How did you validate it was THE SARS-Cov-2 virus?
Recognizing that computational docking predictions are typically associated with about a 20% success rate, we applied the method of multiple working hypotheses (1890) to assess the mechanism of action of famotidine as a potential treatment for COVID-19. Relevant hypotheses tested included;
• Direct binding and action as an inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 PLpro.
• Action as a direct acting inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 infection or replication.
• Off-target binding and inhibition of either sigma receptors or a non-histamine H2 G-coupled protein receptor.
• Histamine H2 receptor inhibition.
Of relevance here are the first 2 bullets, because that’s where alleged “live virus” assays might have been used. Let’s look at the first one:
Does Famotidine Directly Bind and Act as an Inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 PLpro?
Production of Recombinant SARS-CoV-2 Plpro
An expression plasmid containing the sequence for (His)6-TEVsite-SARS-CoV-2 PLpro (nsp3 from Wuhan-Hu-1 isolate, polyprotein 1ab 1564-1878) was obtained commercially from ATUM. The plasmid was transformed into E. coli BL21 (DE3) pLysS. The expression and purification protocols were adapted from prior work (Lindner et al., 2005).
Production of Recombinant ISG15
The expression plasmid for proISG15 (2-165) was a gift from David Komander (Addgene plasmid #110762; http://n2t.net/addgene:110762 ; RRID:Addgene_110762) (Swatek et al., 2018). Expression and purification protocols were adapted from (Swatek et al., 2018). A size exclusion chromatography step on a Superdex 75 column (GE Healthcare) was added as a final step.
PLpro Activity Assays
Cleavage of ISG15 by SARS-CoV-2 PLpro was tested by incubating 4 nM of PLpro in 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.3), 150 mM NaCl, 2 mM DTT, 0.1 mg ml−1 BSA, with 10 µM of ISG15 in a final volume of 20 µL for 1 h at room temperature. Control was incubated without enzyme. Samples were subjected to SDS-PAGE.
First - what is SARS-CoV-2 papain-like protease (PLpro)?
Turns out, they mean what it sounds like - papaya. As in fruit. As in … remember the assassinated President of Tanzania who tested papaya for covid and got a positive? Yes, about that: Papain, also known as papaya proteinase I, is a cysteine protease (EC3.4.22.2) enzyme present in papaya (Carica papaya) and mountain papaya (Vasconcellea cundinamarcensis). It is the namesake member of the papain-like protease family. It has wide ranging commercial applications in the leather, cosmetic, textiles, detergents, food and pharmaceutical industries. In the food industry, papain is used as an active ingredient in many commercial meat tenderizers.
Ok, so this super novel deadly pandemic virus that may or may not have jumped form a bat, or maybe was engineered in Wuhan (damn you, CCP Chynaaaa!!) seems to have common parts with papaya, and also a goat and Coca-Cola and commercially available detergents… The papaya enzyme is a common chemical in pharmaceutical manufacture of synthetic products… M-kay…
So, this is where Bob used “real live virus” like he adamantly claims in the video interview, right?
Wrong.
The research team DID NOT use anything resembling the “real live virus” in this part of the experiment. What they used instead was a plasmid obtained from a commercial manufacturer (ATUM) which design is based on a small part of the allegedly “sequenced genome” of the alleged Wuhan-1 variant. The same piece just happens to be widely commercially used in all sorts of chemical manufacture, so that’s convenient!
Maybe he didn’t read his own paper? Idk, he is a busy man…
Does Famotidine Directly Bind and Act as an Inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 PLpro? Production of Recombinant SARS-CoV-2 Plpro. An expression plasmid containing the sequence for (His)6- TEVsite-SARS-CoV-2 PLpro (nsp3 from Wuhan-Hu-1 isolate, polyprotein 1ab 1564-1878) was obtained commercially from ATUM. The plasmid was transformed into E. coli BL21 (DE3) pLysS. The expression and purification protocols were adapted from prior work (Lindner et al., 2005).
The plasmid was designed to produce (express) the LPro papaya thingy when added to a brew of chemicals (so molecular biology always claims). But we already established that the papaya thingy LPro is not a virus, but only claimed to be part of it by those people who uploaded the “covid sequence” into GenBank, based on 1 Chinese patient nobody ever saw or has a record of…. And neither it is “live”… It’s a synthetic chemical molecule, and only because of its very large size its is called a biologic product as opposed to a regular small-molecule chemical. You see, synthetic leather covering your chair is boring, but synthetic biology is exiting!
But wait, they used another thing, which Bob angrily claims was given to them by a big name researcher - ISG15! Is that a “live virus”?
No.
ISG15 (Interferon-Stimulated Gene 15) protein is minimally expressed under normal physiological conditions. However, it is aberrantly elevated in various human diseases, including multiple types of cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, inflammatory diseases, bacterial and viral infections, traumatic brain injury and many others. ISG15 is now considered diagnostic/prognostic biomarker and a therapeutic target for these ailments.
That ISG15 thing is a “target”. For example, if you go to the range to test your Glock, you can bring a paper target. ISG15 in this case played the role the target to set up an assay - an investigative (analytic) procedure for qualitatively or quantitatively measuring the presence, amount, or functional activity of a target entity. This assay would be measuring if there is a lot, a little or no papaya-thingy activity in various concoctions of tested drugs.
PLpro Activity Assays
Cleavage of ISG15 by SARS-CoV-2 PLpro was tested by incubating 4 nM of PLpro in 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.3), 150 mM NaCl, 2 mM DTT, 0.1 mg ml−1 BSA, with 10 µM of ISG15 in a final volume of 20 µL for 1 h at room temperature. Control was incubated without enzyme. Samples were subjected to SDS-PAGE.
However, ISG15 is the broadest possible target, activated by almost any human illness and injury. In my firing range analogy, the target would be the size of your entire range from one end to another. So, if you hit it, you ain’t a marksman.
And in this paper nobody bothered to describe how they validated that ATUM shipped the correct papaya thingy to Bob’s team! You see, when papaya-thingy plasmid comes from ATUM or another shop like them all you get is an empty vial. And a piece of paper saying that there is a magic spell in the vial based on GenBank or some other place, and for an extra $9.95 they named a star after you. They could drop a bit of papaya and some goat urine and/or Coca-Cola into that vial instead and, chances are, the assay with ISG15 will work, because it’s activated by just about anything. By the way, that’s how all the covid tests “work” if you ever wondered.
Here is an excellent layman-terms explanation by Dr. Mike Yeadon for those who missed my cross-post a couple of weeks ago:
Continuing with Malone et al Famotidine paper. Let’s look at the second hypothesis tested:
Viral Growth and Cytotoxicity Assays in the Presence of Inhibitors
2,000 Vero E6 cells were seeded into 96-well plates in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagles Medium (DMEM, 10% FBS) and incubated for 24 h at 37°C, 5% CO2. Two hours before infection, the medium was replaced with 100°ul of DMEM (2% FBS) containing the compound of interest at concentrations 50% greater than those indicated, including a DMSO control. Plates were then transferred into the Biosafety Level 3 (BSL3) facility and 100 PFU (MOI 0.025) was added in 50°ul of DMEM (2% FBS), bringing the final compound concentration to those indicated. Plates were then incubated for 48 h at 37°C. After infection, supernatants were removed and cells were fixed with 4% formaldehyde for 24 h prior to being removed from the BSL3 facility. The cells were then immunostained for the viral NP protein with a DAPI counterstain. Infected cells (488 nM) and total cells (DAPI) were quantified using the Celigo (Nexcelcom) imaging cytometer. Percent infection was quantified as ((Infected cells/Total cells) − Background) *100 and the DMSO control was then set to 100% infection for analysis. The IC50 and IC90 for each experiment were determined using the Prism (GraphPad Software) software. For select inhibitors, infected supernatants were assayed for infectious viral titer using the TCID50 method. Cytotoxicity was also performed using the MTT assay (Roche), according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Cytotoxicity was performed in uninfected Vero E6 cells with same compound dilutions and concurrent with viral replication assay.
TCID50 Assay
Infectious supernatants were collected at 48 h post infection and frozen at −80°C until later use. Infectious titers were quantified by limiting dilution titration on Vero E6 cells. Briefly, Vero E6 cells were seeded in 96-well plates at 20,000 cells/well. The next day, SARS-CoV2-containing supernatant was applied at serial 10-fold dilutions ranging from 10−1 to 10−6 and, after 5 days, viral CPE was detected by staining cell monolayers with crystal violet. Median tissue culture infectious doses (TCID50)/ml were calculated using the method of Reed and Muench.
This assay was used to find that remdesivir and HCQ inhibited the “virus”, while famotidine did not, and subsequently make some pointless conclusions about histamine and mast cells.
Was “live virus” used in this study?
That’s unprovable by what is described in the paper. There is no explanation whatsoever in the study on where the sample of the virus came from. In the interview Bob makes lots of noise and shouts over the interviewer, creating confusion (on purpose, it’s a known tactic) never stating how they obtained the virus - “lots of labs had it! CDC had it! it was circulating the globe!” He avoids answering and obfuscates the question of where, when and from whom his team got this sample for this experiment.
But something was used, wasn’t it? They got results, graphs, right? It’s peer reviewed, it has big names and universities attached - they can’t be lying, right? OK, let’s assume every single word in that paper is true, and let’s see if what is written in these paragraphs proves they had a sample of live SARS-Cov-2.
I simplified the on-purpose confusing science-speak into a flow diagram. It is full of holes:
There is as statement that cells were “infected”, but they do not bother to say with what. There are no validation or verification steps described to determine that the “supernatants” (fluid separated from dead cells presumably obtained from a person infected with SARS-Cov-2) are supernatants of THE SARS-Cov-2. The staining for NP protein is likewise not specified. NP protein is common to all coronaviruses, so again, where is the assurance that this is THE SARS-Cov-2?
Strange, isn’t it? Not so strange if we go back to the beginning of the interview, where Bob clearly states he is on the government’s leash. It’s a “classified” program for which he got paid quite lavishly by the DOD and signed to secrecy:
He can’t disclose where he got the “live virus” from and what that really was, and especially when he got it. He admitted in other places that his team started working on this monumental exercise on January 10, 2020! In parallel he was speedily writing a book on covid which was published about 3 weeks later on Amazon, wow. Simply wow.
That’s why he shouts, bullies, behaves unprofessionally, and otherwise creates distractions even though this makes him look like a fool. It’s a job! He had a sweet contract with DTRA to run this Pepcid decoy activity for remdesivir, and he is still CDA-ed for it.
Thanks to DemocracyManifest for pointing out this video from early 2020 in a recent article. This is the reaction from the Pentagon puppets (accompanied and possibly supervised by a WHO accessory) when asked the same question - “where did your covid virus sample come from?” at a press conference on March 5, 2020. The terrified look on their faces is absolutely priceless. The whole DOD video is full of gems and deserves a separate analysis.
Just in case you are wondering if a sample from ONE patient is enough to validate a diagnostic test of anything, here is the scientifically correct answer: LOL. LOL-LOL-LOL. LMAO!
These clowns bedazzled in various gleaming military titles, pins and badges for heroic acts of making chemical poisons at this pantomimed presser are not stupid enough to not know this (although I could be convinced either way). They don’t need a sample from any patient to do what they are about to do, and never needed it. Neither did Robert Malone for his famotidine paper.
The day after the epic Doc Malik interview, for some reason Expertissimus decided to go after my husband on Twitter, maybe he was hoping it will accomplish something…. He had blocked me before that… After blocking me, he started tweeting smears about me, at me, with a fake “question” about my husband’s supposed ties to the WEF…
Really, Bob the Expert?
I am searching for a generous explanation of this idiotic behavior… Did Jill beat you senseless that day? Did you fall off your tractor?
And looks like he does this routinely. Block a person on Twitter, and pretend to tweet at them. After all, he is the world’s expert on the 5th gen warfare counter-counter-psyop-ey-dope.
Says Mathew Crawford:
He also blocked me on Twitter so that I couldn't respond. I believe this is called "gas lighting", but you can make up your own mind. I think he'd call it "integrity."
Dear Expertus, please explain what are my husband’s connections to the WEF, because we can’t figure out what they are? Mike tweeted back asking Bob if he can get us tickets to Davos, and if so, we can meet at the CIA booth. Bob never replied…
PS - an account with MILLIONS of followers got 10 likes over several days? yeah…
Art for today is wildlife photography. This is my pet bear, Cinammon Boltitude. He was gifted to me by Putin. If you are wondering about the name, the alternative was “Dafuque!”, and we went with a more pleasing one, Cinnamon.
Due Diligence and Art is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Remdesivir inhibited a wide variety of pathogens by killing the host.
Doc Malik is a straight-shooter. Thanks for sharing his podcast Sasha!