What Is Denmark And Omicron Telling Us?

I’ll start the day with pretty much a copy and paste job. 

We’ve seen references at various sites of the stats coming out of Denmark. Yesterday LifeSite presented an excellent summary of those numbers. I present here the summary at the beginning of the article. Follow the link for more discussion, but suffice it to say that no informed person can any longer buy into what was always a lie—the supposed pandemic of the uninjected:

More than 90 percent of Omicron cases in Denmark are vaccinated, shocking data reveals

Vaccinated people have also dominated recent cases of other COVID strains in Denmark.

COPENHAGEN, Denmark (LifeSiteNews) – Virtually all Omicron cases in Denmark have been reported in vaccinated people, most of them “fully vaccinated,” new data from the Danish government revealed.

79 percent of Danes infected with Omicron by December 15 were fully jabbed, according to a report released Tuesday by the Statens Serum Institut (SSI), a Danish health ministry that tracks COVID-19 variants. The double-vaccinated accounted for more than 14,000 of 17,767 Omicron infections recorded in Denmark since the country’s first reported case on November 22.

Those with a booster shot made up another 10.6 percent of cases of the new variant, and people with one jab were an additional 1.8 percent. The unvaccinated – around one-fifth of the Danish population – were just 8.5 percent of Omicron infections.

Vaccinated people also dominated cases of other COVID-19 strains. More than three-quarters of Danes who came down with Delta or another variant besides Omicron between November 22 and December 15 had at least one shot, according to the SSI data, and 73 percent were fully jabbed or boosted.

What does this data mean—data that’s being replicated in other countries, as well? El Gato Malo sums it up thusly: there's something antigenic in denmark: boosters show negative vaccine efficacy for cases. Some are even saying that “evidence is strong that Omicron circulates preferentially in the vaccinated.” How could this be?

We presented the Ethical Skeptic’s fascinating theory (h/t Old Frank) on this question recently, and it may be well to paste the gist of it in again:

************

The thesis is that Covid originated in a a Chinese lab and was released—one way or another—as early as March, 2018. This Ur-Covid was a relatively benign form of the virus, and circulated originally throughout East Asia, being mistaken for some generic variant of the flu, all the while imparting a significant degree of immunity. Part of the evidence for this arises from the very high level of antibodies in populations in those areas—this could not have happened if the breakout didn’t occur until January, 2020. Anyway, the Chicoms stayed mum, hoping it would just go away. Instead it took on a much more serious form in late 2019.

I know what you’re thinking: How do he know? This is how:

How do we infer that the Chinese Communist Party both reacted to and concealed the existence of SARS-CoV-2 as far back as March 2018? There is a critical path of query and dependency necessary and sufficient in prosecuting this problem from a deductive perspective. The questions which compose this pathway are exhibited in detail within this article. To summarize in advance, the critical arguments within this article involve nine key avenues of consilient inference:

1. The mismatch in timing of Chinese SARS-CoV-2 B.1 and B.1.617.2 variant global rates of spread

2. The conclusive evidence of both risk and culpability that SARS-CoV-2 was released (not zoonotic) from a Chinese BSL gain-of-function lab (during a U.S. ‘pause’ in such research)

3. The elevated rates of unidentified ‘flu’ in longitude E65-180 nations during 2018/19, matching geographic pathogenic history

4. The observed natural progression of a 35 to 1 Covid prior immunity signal, in longitude E65-180 and across 173 nations (which presided up until Delta variant natural-immunity breakthrough infections)

5. The genetics and mutation history of SARS-CoV-2 itself, which strongly suggest an inception case date in early 2018

6. The 2021 appearance of a pre-October-2019 genetic Jan-2018-LCA highly divergent variant of SARS-CoV-2 (Omicron) in highly immune African populations under low mutagenic pressure

7. The CCP’s social response to an unknown, which resulted in 45-year unprecedented CO2 ppm reductions during 2018/19

8. The CCP’s reactive social disruption patterns exhibited during 2019

9. The CCP’s Nelsonian knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 exhibited in December 2019, along with its concerted efforts to conceal critical information, databases, 8 index-genomes, 174 index and inception case patient samples/profiles, and pertinent lab production logs.

Did you pick up on #6? Ominous Omicron is part of his proof. Other eminent scientists have jumped all over this feature of Ominous Omicron—it’s highly mutated and highly divergent, and seemed to pop up in Africa for no virological reason. It was “under low mutagenic pressure” and appears to be outside the known evolutionary trajectory of Covid as we know it. The Ethical Skeptic’s explanation is that Ominous Omicron is a sort of throwback to Ur-Covid, which means that it probably originated in China.

**************

Knowledgeable writers are discussing Ominous Omicron, trying to make sense of its “evolutionary trajectory”—and also trying to account for the pattern of Covid infections that we’re seeing in multiple countries. Most of them are presenting theories on why Omicron has to be a lab creation. One such article is by eugyppius. It’s dense but readable, and brief, so I’ll paste it in, sans graph:

Omicron is Not Normal

Everything suggests this variant was leaked from a laboratory engaged in gain-of-function research.

Omicron is not normal. No immediate progenitors are known; its closest relatives are viruses last seen in early- to mid-2020. The orthodox explanation for this awkward fact, is that it has spent the last 18 months lurking “in a geography with poor genomic surveillance … or … in a chronically infected individual.” The simpler explanation is that it leaked from a laboratory.

As el gato malo and others have indicated, evidence is strong that Omicron circulates preferentially in the vaccinated. In all likelihood, it is the result of gain-of-function research, in which SARS-2 was passaged repeatedly through convalescent or vaccinated plasma, in the hopes of helping the virus evade acquired immunity. The purpose of this research would be to anticipate future immune-escape variants that vaccines might target.

Omicron carries a series of highly unlikely and suspicious mutations in its spike protein. It is hard to imagine that these mutations can have arisen via natural processes, because all but one of them are nonsynonymous – that is, they code for different amino acid sequences. Starkly mutated variants favoured by natural selection should have a great many meaningless synonymous mutations as well.

Omicron’s ancestors may have spent a significant amount of time adapting to mouse cells, before re-entering human hosts. Omicron appears selected to replicate primarily in the bronchial tract. Deeper in the human lung, it functions far less efficiently than Delta or the first strains from Wuhan. This is probably why it causes mostly mild illness, and it is reminiscent of techniques used to make live attenuated influenza vaccines safer for use in humans. Such vaccines are cold-adapted, that is, selected to circulate primarily in the cooler upper respiratory tract rather than in the warmer, more vulnerable lungs.

The balance of the evidence is that Omicron leaked from a lab engaged in SARS-2 vaccine research. There are many possibilities: It might represent a live, attenuated virus vaccine used informally among researchers, that mutated back to virulence and escaped; it might have been released accidentally; it could even be an attempt to develop a self-spreading vaccine to immunise animals or third world populations.

Igor Chudov presented similar speculation—quoting fairly mainstream sources—even earlier:

However, the omicron variant appears to have derived directly from the original SARS-CoV-2 virus, one that has not been observed in the wild in months. — Washington Times

In other words, while scientists can tell that this variant evolved from a strain that was circulating in mid-2020, in the intervening months there's been no trace of all the intermediate versions that scientists would have expected to find as it morphed into its current form. — NPR

Chudov comes down on the side of this being another lab release. He also has some updates to his original article that explain some of the evidence in simple terms. For example, here is the beginning of a long twitter thread, from which you can see a strong argument for a lab origin of Omicron—unless you are convinced by the Ethical Skeptic’s arguments. The rest of the long thread can be read in unrolled form here. It points out, among many technical details, that Bill Gates was funding research at a lab in Durban, SA, “where omicron was first detected in one of the patients.”

valentin bruttel @VBruttel

@ydeigin So to sum this up: 1) SARS2 Omicron genome looks like it was "separated/frozen" between June 2020 and late summer 2021 - This has never before been seen in nature, only in lab leaked pandemics

en.wikipedia.org1977 Russian flu - Wikipedia

Do you get the feeling that we’re not being told the whole story? That more is known about Omicron than we’ve been told? Me too.