Did Novel Coronavirus accidentally escape from a Wuhan lab? This was a question in lots of people’s mind. You are well aware about Wuhan seafood market. On January 1st, it was shut down. Many of the early clusters of confirmed cases had been in the market, so officials feared that COVID-19 was linked to trade and wild animals. It sold everything, from snakes to birds to foxes and rabbits. But the viruses most similar to the new coronavirus that causes COVID-19 are from bats that live in caves a thousand miles away, but just because they're similar doesn't mean they're the same.

Origin of SARS-COV-2

I just am baffled about this story. As of late April, experts don't have all the information. we need to say where the virus started. If the Chinese know evidence, of course they're not telling us or anybody else. With the absence of crucial evidence comes many theories. One is that it came from nature, which scientists say seems most likely. Another theory is that it was a bioweapon, which scientists say there's zero evidence for. I guess without putting too fine of a point on it, it would fall in the real move conspiracy theory.

Wuhan Lab- Remarkable Coincidence or Conspiracy?

We're going to focus on one theory that both US intelligence and lawmakers are examining, that the virus accidentally escaped from a lab. At least two labs in Wuhan research bat coronaviruses, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Wuhan branch of the Chinese Centres for Disease Control & Prevention. They have become the focal point of suspicion, not only because of the work that they do but because of their location. Both are close to the market. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is about eight miles away, and the Wuhan branch of the Chinese Centres for Disease Control & Prevention is just 300 yards. Safety concerns at both labs have come up in recent years.

For instance, in this article, we see one of the scientists from the Wuhan Centres for Disease Controls & Prevention doing research on coronaviruses in bats while not wearing protective gear, but regardless, if researchers are in the field or in the lab, most bat coronaviruses scientists have identified aren't dangerous to humans. They're not considered major potential pathogens because they just don't grow very well in other species besides bats. That's why most labs who study bat coronaviruses do not require the highest level of safety protocols. The safety situation at the other lab is a bit different. The Wuhan Institute of Virology houses multiple labs, including one that has the highest level of biological safety protocols, biosafety level four. It is designed to contain some of the world's most dangerous viruses. BL-4 is the ones you will see in articles with people in a suit and an air hose attached behind them, and they're completely enclosed and protected. When China first brought the lab online, it was with the explicit goal of studying coronaviruses. China wanted to set up its own laboratory after the SARS outbreak to study SARS-relevant pathogens so that they could do that on their own territory without having to rely on the international system.

Shi Zhengli, she's one of the world's experts on bat coronaviruses and is based at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The work we do with the Wuhan Institute of Virology is to look for viruses in bats that we think could be the next pandemic. That work and the higher safety protocols have led to suspicion that Shi was working with more dangerous bat coronaviruses, ones that could infect humans. Recent reports have come out that there were concerns being raised by US scientists and diplomats about the level of safety, training, and general protocols there and concern that this was the kind of thing that could lead to leakage.

Two years ago, American officials voiced a variety of concerns about these labs, including the ominous warning that there was a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators. -Without fail, every single BSL-4 lab in the US gets some type of safety violation, some type of, you know, thing that they could do better, and that's the purpose of doing those inspections, is to make sure that biosafety is as tight and secure as it can possibly be. But even in the most safe labs, things go wrong.

That same 2018 State Department cable that described the possible safety issues also warned about the dangerous nature of Shi's research. They wrote, "Researches also showed various SARS-like coronaviruses can interact with ACE2, the human receptor identified for SARS-coronavirus. This find strongly suggests that SARS-like coronaviruses from bats can be transmitted to humans to cause SARS-like diseases." Shi's team reported this in a 2017 paper, but that paper doesn't show these coronavirus samples were effective at infecting humans. And the virus used in that research was not the virus that causes COVID-19. It's the underlying experiment that has raised flags.

Researchers at one point had a live virus that could infect a human cell. Just weeks into the outbreak, researchers from Shi's lab found the virus had a 96% similarity with a bat coronavirus they had previously researched. So they both come from, you know, this same distant relative, same, like, great-great-great virus-grandfather. And though these two viruses have diverged, that 4% change, it's the part that makes all of the difference to us. The part of the virus that binds to the receptor on human cells for the SARS-CoV-2, it's very different than the bat coronavirus, the part that allows the animal virus to infect humans. Otherwise, it's interesting, but it's not going to cause any outbreaks in people. That means this virus and other currently known bat coronaviruses could've picked up the features from just the right intermediary animal, allowing it to be able to jump to humans. And really, what we won’t be able to find out unless we can identify whether there is an intermediate species.

We have to actually see the ancestor of SARS-Co-V-2 to know exactly what type of adaptations it underwent in order to be able to infect humans, the smoking pangolin or the smoking whatever else. Of course, the potential of great-great-great virus-grandfather isn't the only bat coronavirus in Shi's lab. Even Shi was initially concerned that her lab could've caused the outbreak. But since then, she says she's ruled out the possibility. Shi, her team, and the Chinese government have adamantly denied that it could've come from this lab. There's no way this virus came from us. China's been incredibly open and I believe it's because it's a scientific collaboration. And in China, they're really proud of their science. They do good work, especially in virology. The evidence that a lab accident led to the release of the virus that causes COVID-19 is circumstantial, but speculation has heightened because of the actions of Chinese officials.

First, before the Chinese government had even alerted the World Health Organization to the growing epidemic, scientists were told to destroy early samples of the virus, according to the Times. After the Chinese government reported the virus to the WHO, officials quickly pointed to the seafood market as the source of the virus and shut it down. -The Chinese government acknowledged it began in Wuhan and put out this story of the wet market. It was a kind of unusual, specific pinning on the part of the Chinese government, like not their general way of operating. But many of the first-known COVID-19 cases were not traceable to the Huanan Seafood Market. The initial patient did not have any link to the market. 

The Chinese government reported that they had found samples of the coronavirus in the western end of the market that is known to house wildlife, but to confirm that, scientists would need specimens from the animals in the market. As of today, as to my knowledge, and I look for this every single day for many days, China has not divulged any information about what animals they tested from the market when the closed it, and, of course, what the results of any of those tests were. The only way to find an answer to this mystery is with a sample that matches both the virus and matches the first patients, which scientists haven't been able to find. Even if there was a perfect match to the virus in one of these labs, without early patient samples, there's no way to be sure.

Conclusion

The balance of scientific evidence strongly suggests the conclusion that the new coronavirus emerged from nature, be it in the Wuhan market or somewhere else. Too many perfect coincidences would've had to take place for it to have escaped from a lab, but the Chinese government has not been willing or able to provide information that would clarify lingering questions about any possible role played by the Wuhan labs. Seems like such a remarkable coincidence that you have an outbreak of a coronavirus in theory from a bat in the same city where there is this high-level BSL-4 laboratory where not only are there foreign concerns about its safety, but there are, like, Chinese articles about the safety protocols not being sufficient. And obviously, there's no smoking gun. It's all circumstantial, but it's pretty remarkable. And it's the kind of thing where it raises questions. That is why intelligence agencies are still exploring the possibility, no matter how remote it may be, and even then, it's unclear when or if we will ever know the origin story of this new virus that is causing so much death and economic turmoil around the globe.

See other useful articles Also: 

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is not a game changer in COVID-19. I'm going to give you an update on hydroxychloroquine and why there's some new evidence coming to light that is suggesting that hydroxychloroquine may not have been the game changer many were hoping for so we all know just a few weeks ago the FDA approved an emergency authorization for the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 patients now hydroxychloroquine was recommended by President Trump and health experts having not only strong reservations about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19 but also the potential cardiac side effects associated with it unlike the FDA the European regulators refused to clear a hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19 infections.

Without more data chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine effectiveness against COVID-19 infections is unsubstantiated and was derived heavily from the research of controversial French researcher Didier Raoult now in his study he concluded that hydroxychloroquine along with azithromycin was effective in treating COVID-19 infections however there were significant problems with his study first the study was not randomized which means researcher bias would affect the results. second the study started with 26 patients but only the data from 20 patients were given of the six patients who had not included in the final data three were admitted to the ICU. one died and two patients left the hospital so by not including these six patients for the results also skewed Dr. Raoult also published a second observational study looking at 80 patients but again any study with few patients and no controls cannot determine if a drug works or not so people have been asking why do we need a clinical trial in research in the middle of a pandemic.

No Thalidomide Tragedy again?

We need treatment options now. I mean why not just get the drug and see what happens we've been using hydroxychloroquine for decades to treat lupus and malaria so what's the worst that can happen here. well history is taught us whenever we make clinical decisions and treatment options without evidence and research disastrous effects occur in the 1950s a German pharmaceutical company introduced a drug called thalidomide to treat pregnancy-related nausea and vomiting the company had no reliable evidence to back up its claims that the drug was safe many babies born to women who took thalidomide developed severe malformations and many died because of these conditions the term flipper baby was a term given to babies whose mothers had taken thalidomide during pregnancy despite being introduced in Europe the drug was never introduced into the United States market because of the diligence of an FDA Revere named Dr. Frances Kelsey Congress went on to pass a drug act in 1962 that revamped and toughened the U.S. drug approval process the strict FDA guidelines we have today are guided by the thalidomide tragedy and also in the back of the mind of physicians scientists and researchers.

So in this article I'm gonna go over some new research and evidence that suggests that hydroxychloroquine may not be the game changer many were hoping and touting it to be in fact the cardiac toxicity associated with hydroxychloroquine that was downplayed by many might be more real than we initially thought now. there are a lot of social media theories and anecdotal reports from other physicians and so-called experts and they might be right in their assessments and their treatments but remember until randomized controlled double blinded studies are done anecdotes are not facts no matter how badly we want to believe in them.

China Study on HCQ

So make sure that you subscribe to this domain so you get those updated COVID-19 articles that I post and that you join in our discussion and the community we have created so in a small study recently reported from China hydroxychloroquine was found COVID-19 patients get rid of the virus in fact hydroxychloroquine was not only found to be ineffective it was also more likely to cause side effects in the study 75 patients were assigned hydroxychloroquine with standard of care treatment and another 75 patients only received standard of care treatment the hydroxychloroquine group received a loading dose of 1200 milligrams daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 milligrams daily for the next two to three weeks even with a high dose of hydroxychloroquine the researchers concluded their study by saying they found no difference in the rate of viral load reduction or symptom alleviation between the group treated with hydroxychloroquine and the one that had not been and if it is true that hydroxychloroquine is ineffective then is it worth risking the cardiac toxicity more specifically ventricular arrhythmias with a QT prolongation from hydroxychloroquine.

See many people have been saying that we've been using hydroxychloroquine for decades to treat malaria lupus and inflammatory arthritis and the cardiac risks are low and the same should apply for COVID-19 infections but the doses we use to treat those diseases are much lower than the protocols clinicians and hospitals are using to treat COVID-19 infections the recommended dose to treat acute malaria with hydroxychloroquine is 800 milligrams then 400 milligrams at 6, 24 and 48 hours and with chloroquine the dose is 600 milligrams then 300 milligrams at 6, 24 and 48 hours the prophylaxis dose of hydroxychloroquine is 400 milligrams and 4 chloroquine is 300 milligrams once per week for two weeks before exposure and continued for four weeks after departure from an endemic area for lupus the maximum recommended dose of hydroxychloroquine is 400 milligrams once a day and for rheumatoid arthritis it is 600 milligrams once per day but we don't have a recommended daily dose for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine and protocols and when to start treatment for COVID-19 infections in Korea a task force is recommending 400 milligrams of hydroxychloroquine every day but in China they're giving up to 1600 milligrams of hydroxychloroquine every day.

QT Prolongation due to HCQ in various studies

At Mount Sinai Hospital in New York their COVID-19 protocol is 400 milligrams PO twice a day for two doses then 12 hours later starting 400 milligrams PO once a day times four doses for a total of five days of therapy other hospitals in the US are treating COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine 400 milligrams twice a day for the first day and then 200 milligrams twice a day for four days so the lack of reliable studies and lack of standard protocols has created confusion in even more questions so our higher dose is more effective but cause more side effects than lower doses and now the side effects more theoretical and rare than what we see in real life so some answers could be found in a recent study from NYU School of Medicine where researchers suggested the QT prolongation with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin may not be as low as some have suggested so the study looked at 84 adult patients with COVID-19 who were treated with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin combination and they found that in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and azithryomycin QT prolonged significantly in 11 percent of patients.

QT prolonged greater than 500 milliseconds a known marker for risk of malignant arrhythmia and sudden cardiac death what was interesting was they said our data suggests that baseline QT prolongation is not a reliable predictor of severe QT prolongation in these patients and suggested that QT should be followed repeatedly in patients with COVID-19 infection treated with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin particularly in patients with renal failure a common complication in patients with COVID-19 and in another study from Brazil researchers observed QTc prolongation greater than 500 milliseconds was seen in seventeen point nine percent of patients which is not too dissimilar from what has been reported in patients with COVID-19 using hydroxychloroquine at 11 percent myopathy has also been associated with chloroquine use in our study one patient developed rhabdomyolysis which is attributed to chloroquine and the drug was withdrawn in to patients myocarditis was suspected based on the CK-MB elevation since the first day of hospitalization suggesting myocarditis related to COVID-19 itself in such cases drugs prolonging QTc could lead to severe arrhythmias and in terms of dosages the Chinese study.

I talked about earlier showed no impact of hydroxychloroquine with a dose of 400 milligrams of hydroxychloroquine daily for five days on increasing virus negative conversion rate and alleviation of clinical symptoms in 30 patients with COVID-19 so the preliminary findings from the Brazilian study suggested that higher doses of chloroquine which researchers defined as greater than 1200 milligrams per day was associated with a higher risk for QT prolongation now eleven patients died in both dosage groups and researchers actually had to stop the study after six days citing cardiac rhythm problems in a high dosage group so some of these studies might be suggest that at low doses chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine is ineffective but that at higher doses you have a higher risk for QT prolongation and cardiac toxicity and could these side-effects be potentially potentiated by combining azithromycin a drug known to also cause QT prolongation and do we risk people dying of cardiac toxicity before realizing that hydroxychloroquine is ineffective so hospitals in Sweden have decided this was not a risk worth taking the Swedish guidance stated that considering the very low evidence of any significant effect on COVID-19 and since serious side-effects cannot be ruled out the use of chloroquine outside of clinical trials is not recommended.

In fact, the infectious disease Society of America is also no advising hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin combination only for COVID-19 clinical trials for now so we can speculate and discuss all day long about different treatment options and medications but this is why more research and studies need to be done so that we can make more conclusive decisions.

I'm not saying hydroxychloroquine is ineffective. I'm merely stating that there's nothing conclusive yet from the evidence to say that it is now there many physicians and hospitals who are using hydroxychloroquine and azithryomycin as part of their COVID-19 protocols despite having mixed evidence about its effectiveness and in my opinion this was driven mainly to quell the fear and uncertainty of the general public but the encouraging thing is there are now over 100 clinical trials being conducted to study hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and many of the medications have also shown promise including tocilizumab and remdesivir so my point is hydroxychloroquine and any other medication should still be investigated in the context of a clinical trial.

I know we're in the middle of a pandemic and people at spirit for a treatment option so that they can get on with their lives but treatment should be based on sound medical and scientific evidence and data this what do we have to lose attitude risks us having another thalidomide tragedy so if you have any questions or comments about what I went over in this article send me a message down below in the comment section.

See other Articles: 

The internet is awash with conspiracy theories and fake news targeting Bill Gates even as he pushes for a COVID-19 vaccine.

As the world battles coronavirus and COVID-19 pandemic, thousands of social media users, conspiracy theorists yes, the sort of people who believe the earth is flat and that moon landings never happened are proposing that Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who also happens to be the world’s second-richest person, is behind the creation of coronavirus and COVID-19 pandemic.

What are the conspiracy theories involving Bill Gates?

1. The conspiracy theorists have claimed that Bill Gates has developed a vaccine that would control and even depopulate the world through a microchip. In 2018, a report by Mysterious Times misquoted Gates and said that he had outlined a plan to depopulate the planet. “Make no mistake, when Gates talks about ‘making people healthier,’ what he is really talking about are enforcing the mandatory rollout of his range of experimental vaccinations. The same vaccines that have already caused mass sterilization and death on multiple continents," the website claimed. You can see the truth of it through below link:

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-gates-fauci/false-claim-bill-gates-wants-to-microchip-people-anthony-fauci-wants-people-to-carry-vaccination-certificates-idUSKBN22H2JD

https://www.mythdetector.ge/en/myth/does-bill-gates-promise-us-depopulation-and-  chipping

Even a social media post sharing a doctored photo of Gates Foundation & Real Photo as below:

2. In 2015, Gates had also warned the world of a pandemic in a TED talk. He had said that a pandemic would take place in the next decade and the pandemic could kill over 30 million people in the six months similar to the 1918 pandemic that killed over 50 million people. "The world needs to prepare for pandemics in the same serious way it prepares for war,” he had said.

See below video of TED talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzxC9iWP3Ek

While Gates talking about a pandemic in his TED talk is real for someone who is involved in public health projects it is fairly natural and basic to talk of devastating pandemics, all that talk about the vaccine with micro-chips is bunkum.

Unfortunately, people are linking the talk Gates gave, which is not even a brilliant insight because it is a fairly common knowledge that pandemics from unknown pathogens are the biggest challenges mankind faces, to coronavirus.

Of late this linking has led to multiple posts on Facebook claiming that Gates-funded a research institute and helped in creating the novel coronavirus. A Humans Are Free article claimed that Gates partnered with research institutes to create a "weaponized viral strain designed to sell more useless, deadly vaccines, while at the same time killing off a few thousand, or perhaps a few million, people."

Apart from the crowd that believes that the world is run by shape-shifting lizards, the theories claiming Bill Gates created coronavirus so he can be some sort of mind-controlling mad billionaire are getting an endorsement from some public commentators.

Emerald Robinson, a White House correspondent, posted a series of tweets accusing Gates. She wrote, "The more you study this virus, the more you find the same name: Bill Gates.

He's the 2nd largest funder of WHO. He's building 7 vaccine labs. He basically controls global health policy. What's the plan? Using vaccines to track people."

The theories that Bill Gates is connected to coronavirus, and that he wants to benefit from the pandemic by pushing some vaccines that will track users, have spread through videos on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and through sites like InfoWars.

Gates, meanwhile, has called the claims crazy. In an interview on an interview with a China-based news channel CCTV, he said: "I'd say it's ironic if you take somebody who's doing their best to get the world ready. We are in a crazy situation so there's going to be crazy rumors.”

3. Misleading Facebook post claims Bill Gates wants to introduce 'digital tattoos' to check who has been tested. See the link below to know truth.

https://factcheck.afp.com/holocaust-comparison-misleading-facebook-post-claims-bill-gates-seeks-digital-tattoos

4. Facebook post claims French doctor urged Africans to avoid a "Bill Gates vaccine" but it’s a false claimed and see the reality by below link.

https://factcheck.afp.com/french-doctor-did-not-urge-africans-avoid-bill-gates-vaccine

5. “Event 201” was an exercise organised in October 2019 to simulate what might happen if there was a severe pandemic and Bill Gates was attended that meet so troller claimed that meeting was about Covid19. See the fact by below link:

https://fullfact.org/health/event-201-coronavirus-pandemic/

6. The Italian Government Did Not Seek Bill Gates' Arrest. See the fact by below link.

https://www.republicworld.com/fact-check/viral/fact-check-no-the-italian-government-did-not-seek-bill-gates-arrest.html

7. The 14-part letter states the novel coronavirus pandemic has reminded humans about our equality, inter-connectedness and limited longevity, as well as the importance of health and family; and that the storm will pass but what remains is the fact that the Earth is ill. 

The author ended the letter by concluding that the pandemic is not a disaster, but a "great corrector". Gates Foundation urges netizens to stop sharing fake 'Bill Gates coronavirus letter'

See the below link for reality.

https://factcheck.afp.com/gates-foundation-urges-netizens-stop-sharing-fake-bill-gates-coronavirus-letter

8. A video showing protesters chanting “arrest Bill Gates” has been shared thousands of times on Instagram and Facebook, with claims that Americans want the billionaire arrested for producing a new vaccine for the novel coronavirus. This is misleading; no vaccine exists yet for COVID-19, while the demonstration in question was organised for other reasons. See the link below for fact:

https://factcheck.afp.com/video-shows-protest-against-lockdowns-us-search-vaccine-continues

9. The other conspiracy theory that is doing the rounds on the internet is the 5G conspiracy theory. As per claims, which too have been repeated by many people who are expected to know better, the newly-installed 5G networks are helping the virus spread. It has been speculated that the 5G towers are emitting radiation that is letting the virus propagate easily and affect more and more people. Some people have taken the claims so seriously that they have vandalized 5G towers in the UK, breaking them and setting them on fire.

This claim too is fake and bogus. There is no link between 5G technology and novel coronavirus. The virus is contagious and spreads from one human to another. 5G technology has absolutely no role to play here.

Exploiting the crisis

A number of accusations, including posts claiming that the FBI arrested Gates for biological terrorism or that he supports a Western plot to poison Africans, share a common thread.

They accuse the tycoon of exploiting the crisis, whether it is to "control people" or make money from selling vaccines.

It is not the first time Gates has found himself at the mercy of conspiracy theorists. When Zika virus broke out in 2015 in Brazil, he was one of several powerful Western figures blamed for the disease. Other rumours claim that he is secretly a lizard, an old favourite among online trolls.

 "He hasn't become conspiracists' favourite target, he has been (their favourite target) for a long time," Sylvain Delouvée, a social psychology researcher at France's University of Rennes, told AFP.

Predicted the pandemic

The recent explosion in false claims could be explained as a coping mechanism during the global crisis, Smith said. "People are constantly looking for information to make sense out of this reality, and having these conspiracies offers a convenient way of having power over your situation," he said.

The pandemic has also provided fertile breeding ground for attacks on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, particularly by anti-vaccine campaigners whose influential online presence was already brewing years before the virus emerged.

 The charity's humanitarian work in Africa, where misinformation about Gates is particularly present, and financial support of the World Health Organization -- it is the agency's second-largest donor -- have fed rumours of dark secrets and ploys for power.

Several widely shared posts point to photographs of Gates attending a "coronavirus conference" in 2015. Conclusion? He predicted the pandemic.

In reality, he was meeting with a research institute that had filed for a patent to potentially be used for a vaccine against a different type of coronavirus that affects animals.

Like many scientists, Gates had already warned of an imminent pandemic years before the novel coronavirus outbreak.

Conspiracies creeping into mainstream

Gates has also come under attack from celebrities. Conservative US television host Laura Ingraham claimed in a tweet that Gates was developing "tracking" mechanisms.

She was referring to a widely misinterpreted Reddit post by the billionaire about "digital certificates" to show who has recovered, been tested or -- eventually -- vaccinated.

Robert Kennedy Jr, the anti-Trump, anti-vaccine nephew of the former American president John F Kennedy, has accused the philanthropist of dictating global health policies. "We are his guinea pigs," he wrote in an Instagram post attacking the entrepreneur.

Meanwhile, French "Chocolate" actress Juliette Binoche sparked controversy when she blasted Gates on Instagram and called for the rejection of "a microchip implant for all".

Debunking misinformation is "not about saying that everyone is a good guy", said Delouvee at France's University of Rennes, pointing to privacy concerns around the race to build coronavirus tracking apps and governments' use of medical data.

The Gates Foundation has come under fire in publications such as The Lancet medical journal, which accused it of a lack of transparency over its financial investments.

Yahoo and YouGov's May survey didn't find that everyone believed these conspiracy theories though. Forty-five percent of independents, 52% of Democrats and 63% of people who say they voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 said they don't believe the conspiracy theory about Gates and vaccines.

A survey from Yahoo News and YouGov finds that the conspiracy theory is popular among Fox News viewers, Republicans and Trump voters.

Another claim circulating on social media is that Gates owns the “patent” for the SARS-CoV2, a virus that wasn’t even discovered until January 2020. The theory goes that this entire pandemic thing is just to create a need for a vaccine from which Gates will subsequently profit. This includes a variety of posts on Facebook that are now labeled by Facebook as “false information, checked by independent fact-checkers.” These posts claim that The Pirbright Institute, which is based in Surrey, England, and has received funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, owns the patent for this new coronavirus that’s causing the current pandemic.

Please share your views about Bill Gates?????