Dr. Mike Yeadon: "What is Gain of Function Research?"
"As a discipline, GOF does not exist...It’s another kind of fraud, containing some real things, the cause of which are attributed to non-existent viruses."
One-time or recurring donations can be made through Ko-Fi:
By Dr. Michael Yeadon August 15, 2024
I received a question through the channel’s messaging capabilities. I will be honest & tell that I can’t read many of the several hundred messages I get daily. Some catch my eye and if my reply is substantial & potentially used, I occasionally post the exchange here. I take names out of the message if it was sent in confidence. I hope this is useful to someone.
Question: “If virus don’t exist, what is gain of function research? This is not a challenge to the idea. You might find the book “Food is Your Best Medicine” by Henry G Bieler MD. It provides a possible explanation for the cause of some illness.”
My reply: I’m familiar with attempts to edit function of genes by systematically varying one of the base pairs in each position in the gene.
A now classified technique is called an “alanine scan”. Different amino acids have side chains that vary by size, charge & lipophilicity. The smallest, simplest and uncharged residue or side chain is alanine, a mere methyl (-CH3) group.
Much of the function of a protein turns on the properties of the side chains of the amino acids in the protein of polypeptide sequence. Systemically swapping each out for an alanine, followed by checking specific functions of the protein, called an alanine scan, can be very informative about what the overall function of the gene product is.
It’s far from easy, trying to deduce the function, or the point, of the gene.
The way we classify the results of each experiment in that alanine scan is to note no changes in function, a loss of function (if it no longer does what the original or native gene) or - and here’s where I think this all comes from - a gain of function (if it does the same thing the native form did, but more potently, ie at lower concentrations, or if it now has a function that wasn’t there originally).
I think the terms we used in this molecule biology technique, coupled with biochemistry techniques, which were N (neutral), LOF (loss of function) or GOF (gain of function) are the origin of the fictional technique called Gain Of Function research.
In other words, the scary-sounding “Gain Of Function” term has been “weaponised”, to use the modern slang.
As a discipline, GOF does not exist. It’s a possible result (GOF) from use of an exploratory technique.
I expect if you searched Google Scholar for “alanine scan” & “gain of function”, you’ll find papers utilising what I’ve described very badly.
I further expect if there are papers purely on “Gain of Function” that they’ll either be recent, like the last 15-20 years or less, or we’ll find that the author of a review or a research paper is still mixed up today with the fraud on humanity.
There’s no scientific evidence for acute respiratory illnesses being infectious in nature and especially not contagious. Review of a large trove of published research, attempting to demonstrate transmission of symptoms, aka contagion, all report failure. There is no scientific study in which a so-called “respiratory virus” can be detected or truly isolated. The obvious explanation is that the entire field is lies. The illnesses are real. The attribution to “virus” is scientifically unsupported logically.
I must add PCR fraud here, because the misuse of this powerful technique (invented after I’d qualified) has been the core means whereby the authorities can get their “pandemic”. However all they have is false positives. You’ll never see an absolutely fundamental aspect of any analogous diagnostic procedure & thars the “operational false positive rate”. Low OFPRs can generate very satisfactory numbers of fake “cases”, if enough tests are run daily.
In the case of the fake “covid19” “pandemic”, the radical changes in medical practices in hospitals, care homes and the community rather predictably led to large numbers of deaths. This is called “Iatrogenic” deaths or “death by doctor”.
There’s the “pandemic”.
Pandemics are immunologically implausible and I think impossible.
A key factor for this to work & sneak past people’s logical minds is the ease with the perpetrators are able to scare people.
Another is the prevalence of common or garden illnesses that can be deliberately misclassified as the scary new “pandemic disease”.
This is because these diseases are real. Flu & colds are real. If you can misattribute the cause of the person’s illness, and modify medical procedures such that they’re killed by medical staff (I suspect often they’re completely unaware of what was happening), stir in some PCR based testing fraud and bingo, a “pandemic”.
The potency of this psychological operation pivots exquisitely on near universal belief that many illnesses are caused by submicroscopic infectious pathogens called viruses. This is certainly untrue.
Gain of Function is merely part of maintaining the PsyOp of scary, contagious, disease-causing diseases. It’s another kind of fraud, containing some real things, the cause of which are attributed to non-existent viruses.
A bit of a ramble, apologies.
I’m going to post in on the Telegram, as others may find it thought provoking. I’ll delete your name, to avoid any embarrassment.
Best wishes,
Mike
Related articles:
Well written, clear, unambiguous, and interesting.
This is the sort of essay that is easily received if someone is willing to read and consider it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Dr. Yeadon.