Navigating the BS: A hard look at the information contained in Plandemic and the background on what you need to know.

Since posting this info on friends FB pages and having it deleted I'm writing this post explaining what people are missing in regards to the viral "Plandemic" video and the controversy surrounding it.

There are myriads of "fact check" articles being proliferated on just about every major mainstream news site in a massive propaganda and smear campaign to justify it's censorship, so this actually proves to be a very good gauge in establishing which sources are apart of the giant global misinformation machine designed to warp your perception of things to further an overall global agenda.

Since there are a myriad of them take your pick on which one you want to go off of but for the sake of this post I'll just take an example from a well circulated one using paragraphical topics on the content, so let’s go through it together.

Here is a link:

https://vitals.lifehacker.com/if-you-found-that-plandemic-video-convincing-read-th-1843339002

I’m going to start by highlighting the certain methods used to influence perspective since these main stream media propaganda pieces are more often than not well written and carefully engineered to inculcate their specially fabricated and twisted narrative.

First and foremost is paying attention to word usage and placement.

An amusing aspect of this is in the fact these articles are often so meticulously written that there are few if any spelling errors versus the common publications of news articles, which are almost always rift with them.

Another thing to pay attention to is in overall format and flow.

Jumbling topics out of order instead of methodically going along in a fluid sequential manner when cross examining or referencing a material can be intentional in order to make the intended audience more easily befuddled and/or confused.

But, back to this specific article.
Let’s begin by looking at the first portion of the opening after the author declares that she is writing the piece to help you navigate the "propaganda" of Plandemic and Judy Mikovitz.

- "She says that the COVID-19 pandemic was somehow created in a lab or is being allowed to spread on purpose (her story shifts a bit)"

Immediately the author is using the specific wording I italicized to create a sense of ambivalence in regards to the information about to be divulged by Judy in order to traduce her (and then blatantly doing so by adding the completely false statement at the end as if to lend credence to her allegation, Judy’s story does not shift at all) doing this via subtle word usage; even literally calling the truths themselves “subtle” in order to further devalue the information to the authors readers.

“There are a few subtle truths here, but nearly all of the actionable advice—whether to wear a mask or accept a vaccine, for example”

With that the author then begins to link topics of contention currently at play yet have no relevance to the information being shared in the video, nor in the proper context in which it was delivered, in an attempt to validate her completely false allegation she just made. This is all actionable wording on a subconscious level with the readers audience.

And I will show how this twist on what is actually being said in the video is derived later on below but lets start with part 1 - in priming the authors audience:

“The larger truths”

This is

A) Intended to set the tone that the data being used and cited is purely speculative opinion.

B) Create a space to sympathize with the reader in order to create the feeling of alignment in ideologies and perspectives. Specifically, to build rapport with the reader, which is step #1 in order to be able to influence the audience.

The ironic part of this section that is meant to help you navigate the apparent deceit and disparity of the data presented is that this is where it ends in regards to representing the “truths".

Never even referencing any of the many facts and truths within the material despite later agreeing with some while chunking the agreements to the information later on in the article.. under falsehoods.

So then next she (the author) immediately pivots back into the agenda and the overall intended narrative by (coincidentally) inferring the same manipulative methodology is being used in the video that I’m breaking down here on her article in her next paragraph-

'Some important background'

But instead of breaking down REAL important background information that I do later on below she then uses a innuendo as to the motive behind the video and Mikki Willis's forthcoming documentary that this excerpt video is taken from.

The reason for this is to further instill speculative suspicion to go hand in hand with the subsequent information and set the stage to bring forth the knowledge that is likely to already be known by those reading this article who are already fairly informed, and if not then let me clarify what she is attempting to elude to in nefarious tones:

As mentioned Judy's recently published book has since become a #1 best seller on Amazon and she is currently actively promoting that book. Due to the history and controversy surrounding Judy, and the concerted effort by government and scientific agencies and officials, finding a publisher willing to assist in it's publication would be rather limited. This is even discussed by Judy in one of her interviews. The partnering with the specific publisher in order to properly bring the book to market is a necessary evil.
Just look at the controversy this documentary is causing.

To understand the reasons for this book and it's critical release timing (beyond the intent to get the information concerning the corruption and scandal within the medical and scientific communities that is orchestrated by our government out to the people) is to help further the effort in educating the masses (that's you and I here) of what is really at play here. How this virus and the current pandemic was allowed to happen.

Understanding the details surrounding her fall from grace professionally and the irreparable damages caused by the ostracization from her profession, you would know that this is not about recouping the massive amount of money being extorted from her by the federal government or as reparations toward the legal onslaught following her exposing details of a classified government research project and the corruption within the scientific community, which is on public record to be in excess of $15million. 

The REAL IMPORTANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION.

The WPI and it's default ruling is, not so coincidentally, a very obscure topic and often shrouded by conjecture.

Unless of course you happen to review the public court documents of said case and all the details surrounding it and the events that led up to it.

One of the first interesting points is the utilization of the “justice” system in destroying her career and the action of the presiding judge, Brent Adams.

This is when the scandal took on the hallmark MO of a whistle-blower style cover-up when the judge struck all of Mikovitz replies to the plaintiff in the case.

This was something so unusual that even the WPI’s attorney, Anne Hall, publicly commented on the unorthodox nature of the action

The judge himself, who had presided for 22 years, later admitting it was the first time such an action was taken.

Also the apparent issuing of a felony arrest warrant in relation to the alleged breaking and entering of the WPI institute lab on the University of Nevada campus that was later claimed to be perpetrated not by Judy but by a cooperating witness that claimed to be her assistant, Max Pfost.

Pay close attention to the details and timeline of events preceding the alleged investigation by University of Nevada police chief Adam Garcia, and also the details surrounding the break in report filed on November 9th, AFTER the breach of contract charge brought against Mikovitz on the 4th.

It's not my intent nor job to spoon feed you information.
Go find it.
If you want help, I can offer suggestions.
(Like having a simple OS like Ubuntu on a USB with Tor and a VPN on some pos laptop without a HD for accessing the areas where information is plentiful for instance)

The plaintiff in the civil case of course being WPI - The Whittemore Peterson Institute on the University of Nevada campus.

Of which, happened to be headed by Annette Whittemore - the wife of political lobbyist lawyer Harvey Whittemore, who together were major donors to Judge Adams election campaign as well as other political figures.

There are very interesting details surrounding the Whittemore's, these events and Harvey's insipid downfall overshadowing this scandal, and I'm not referring to the details about the CFS diagnosis of Whittemore's daughter.

The research that spawned the controversy is in regards to pathogenic and viral cell samples that were part of a NIAID funded research project being conducted by the DOD which included xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus (XMRV) cells.

XMRV is a retrovirus that can be utilized in xenotropic immunosuppression in virus research, or more specifically to facilitate cross specie infection, somewhat similar to how Ebola was engineered to be an xenotropic virus and of which Judy comments on her own participation in regards to this in the video.

I will come back to this important detail in a minute but let me explain a retrovirus for those who aren't familiar.

A retrovirus is a virus that inserts a copy of its genome into the DNA of a host cell, which then replicates and produces DNA from it’s RNA genome.

Through retroviruses it is possible to permanently change a host cells genome and it’s (your) DNA, giving retroviruses the ability to not only change the host cell DNA but also introduce transgenes and also cause cancers.

Now back to Ebola..

Let’s clear up the most misinterpreted part of the whole video and the reason Judy brings it up and what she actually states her participation was in working with Ebola in 1999.

At 10:10 in the video after Mikki Willis asks her whether she is anti-vax or not and she replies no and explains why she then states:

“..my job is to develop immune therapies, that’s what vaccines are.”

He then asks the next question that leads into the Ebola comment:

“Do you believe this virus was created in a laboratory?” and then the subsequent question as to where.

At 12:02 her response is a 2 part response, starting with her work in 1999 at Fort Detrick’s USAMRIID research facility on an Ebola vaccine:

“My job was to teach Ebola how to infect human cells without killing them.”

She isn't talking about the original research that developed Ebola's genome with the ability to cross from animal to human.

It's indicative in the wording itself, you wouldn't contract the virus if the virus immediately kills the cell it's trying to infect.

The virus wouldn't survive or be able to replicate.

Wording is even a topic immediately after these statements when speaking about the comments on mortality counts made by White House Covid-19 task force coordinator Dr Deborah Birx -

"When someone dies with Covid-19 we are counting that."

to which Judy remarks

"You don't die with an infection, you die from an infection."

Understanding this in regards to wording AND about her character is crucial since if you bothered to research her professional history you would learn she always upheld and adhered to the strictest moral and ethical values within the scientific community (which is why her research focused on vaccines) even walking away from projects whose ethics were questionable.

(For example look into why she left Upjohn Pharmaceuticals concerning their research project involving bovine growth hormone).

She then adds the additional statement in regards to the viral evolution that she had just elaborated on immediately prior after being asked if the virus was created in a lab concerning not just the accelerated viral evolution but also how viruses are able to jump hosts not of the same specie:

“Ebola couldn’t infect humans cells until we brought it into the laboratories and taught it.”

She would never have worked on a project related to helping Ebola make the jump from animal to human, so to misinterpret the comment is to show ignorance on the topic.
She is commenting on how Ebola was engineered in a similar way as SARS-1 - using xenotropic immunosuppression.

THIS IS WHY SHE EVEN BRINGS EBOLA UP AT ALL.

It’s to nod in the direction you should be looking.
So GO LOOK.

Anyway, back to how Mikovits began tying XMRV to autism and other mysterious disorders. It came to a culmination in her career working for the government after a lab offered XMRV blood tests of patients who took antiretroviral drugs meant for HIV patients.

“Mikovits stepped into an international spotlight in October 2009 when she headed a team that published a study in Science about a possibly groundbreaking discovery related to CFS. Mikovits and colleagues reported that 67% of CFS patients they tested harbored a recently discovered mouse retrovirus dubbed XMRV. Other labs soon reported that they had difficulty confirming the finding, which led the CFS community to split into different camps. WPI staunchly stood by Mikovits's work, even after one of the labs she collaborated with in the Science study retracted its contribution to the paper because contamination had tainted data it supplied.”

This peeled the top off an ongoing classified bioweapon research program being funded by the NIAID which resulted in NIAID immediately moving to silence her and quickly “turn the lights back off”. 

“A multi-center study funded by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases examining the association between XMRV and chronic fatigue soon followed.”

BTW, do we remember who heads the NIAID?

But not to digress too much otherwise this will be mistaken as a conspiracy article so let’s return to the article I'm using about the facts around the video.

After it mentions the book and following the money trail, it then tries to tie in completely unrelated information taken from a remote part of a page linked to the publishing partner’s website in regards to vaccines, cellphone towers, 5G and user comments on herd immunity so-as to disparage and discredit the book itself, even implying it’s being touted by such conspiracy theorist as anti-vaxers and those propagating the other conspiracy theories.

These are completely false statements that isn’t even speculative opinion.

And then – and almost hysterically and tremendously hypocritically, the author tries to recant her own affiliations and financial supporters as to ascertain that she “has no dog in the fight” and that her point of view and perspective (on controversial topics) is unbiased and based on facts, facts that she is now sharing with you.

Then immediately in the next paragraph again distorts comments made by Judy to align with the continuing theme of distorted commentary:

“But Mikovits went on to argue that viruses cause a variety of chronic diseases, including autism, and that they can be found in vaccines.”

No, Judy accurately states in her many papers they are LINKED, not specifically caused by.

“Other elements of her story are exaggerated (or worse) by the storytelling in the video.”

I’m not sure if the author got confused here and was referencing her own article instead of the video, but continues:

 “A scene in Plandemic shows a SWAT team while Mikovits talks about being arrested without a warrant— but the footage is from an unrelated event and a news story at the time states that she turned herself in.”

I am including this part of the article because I want to elaborate on more background details being misstated and the fact that it's now become so petty that tivial matters are being brought in to seemingly add to the ongoing rhetoric of discrediting her character.

It’s a documentary.

A video production.

And we all know not all content in documentaries consist of actual footage of events.

This is an example of why I'm not a fan of Mikki Willis because he likes to sensationalize things.

If you're familiar with any of his 9/11 content you already know this.

So the only true part of this is that the footage wasn’t of the arrest itself, but she was in fact arrested in absence of a VALID warrant.

Also, after posting the $100,000 bail and being released following the arrest at her home in Ventura, California she did in fact turn herself into authorities in Washoe county, Nevada, where the charges brought by University of Nevada police as previously mentioned, were filed by the Washoe county DA’s office.

The author then tries to comment on the HIV scandal from the 80’s:

“The events she was involved in were well covered in news stories and in science journals at the time; here’s a 1985 article from Science on the dispute over who confirmed the HIV results first. (There is no reason to believe that a publication delay here cost lives, as she claims.)”

If you bother with the link to the 1985 article it actually does more damage to the authors story than help it because she is such an ignorant twat in regards to what and who she is writing about here, and is clear evidence she absolutely has no clue as to the details of either subject.

But since we are here, it’s worth a looksy as it is a dot that connects others should you do your own rabbit holing.

(..and when doing so it would be good to start prior to Fauci’s career at NIAID in ’84.)

She then bungles on into the topic of whether the virus was created in a lab after Judy had already explained it’s evolution of engineering in the video that we've already covered.

You don’t create viruses, especially like these. You modify existing ones and part of that is exponentially speeding up decades, even centuries of viral genome mutation to produce the desired results.

“Scientists have repeatedly debunked the idea that the virus was artificially made. Its genome shows its clear relation to animal viruses, and not to coronavirus samples from the Wuhan lab.”

Just reference previous commentary on this above and if you're a nerdy type that wants to review the data yourself I'll spoon feed you a link I've already posted numerous times (for the lazy ones - skip to ‘conclusions’ toward the end of the paper for the meat and potatoes of the data explained):

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1.full.pdf

Next foozled play is to exonerate Fauci of being connected to any of this after just linking an article that associates him and ignoring the other myriad of instances in which his association is tied in the video, then tries to comment on the matters of funding.

“If there’s any reason to believe something sketchy was going on in the funding allocation, we haven’t seen any evidence for it.”

The evidence is substantial if you’re not a lobotomy patient.

The FDA, CDC, NIAID, HHS and AMA are business apparatuses.

This isn't conjecture, it is facts of matter.

And if you don't understand that or agree with it then all well and good, because it doesn't require either prerequisite, nor does it change the reality.

But just for shit n giggles if you would like to continue to argue to the contrary let’s first talk about the large endowment the NIAID received in 2020 alone, to the tune of just under $6billion:

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/director

Yet that ungodly sum is still chump change in the grander scale of the medical and pharmaceutical cartel arenas.

But, with this giant pile of money it allows Fauci to carry out what he was appointed to do since 1984, and a shadowy part of that is funding the research and development of viruses just like that of Covid-19:

https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741

Also remember, and as mentioned in the article, that Fauci has been the leading authority on HIV/AIDS, which is very relative to the current situation.

If you dove into the material in the link regarding the scientific report it would quickly become apparent why this information is so important.

“The project proposal states: "We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential."

Hrmm that’s odd, because it’s the not-at-all fortuitous and specific inclusion of HIV DNA into the Covid virus that birthed the current variation.

Anyway, I'm not writing a conspiracy report here.

Do your own digging.

Come up with whatever narrative you think is the most likely.

Live happily ever after.

I'm just going to leave you with this before moving on:

https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2020/05/09/us/09reuters-health-coronavirus-usa-fda.html

Realize that these 3 individuals are claiming the same excuse simultaneously from 3 different instances of exposure to 3 different people, just as they are to be questioned before the Senate. Ironic? Coincidence? Interesting whatever it is.

Next topic in this debacle of an article is the intimate relations of the FDA and big pharma.

The commentary here is so asinine and frivolous that it doesn’t need a real response but I'll humor those who might not already have a informed sense of how fucked up our government and the pharmacutical cartel is and I especially love how this section ends as if it's just the way things are and we should accept it for what it is:

“Here’s a truth: The company that makes remdesivir, one of the currently most promising COVID-19 drugs, will almost certainly charge an unreasonable amount per dose just because they can.”

And this made immediately after claiming chloroquine has no evidence proving it’s effectiveness, “just hope”.

There are so many studies and data dating back to the 40’s that support it’s potential that this is just pure ignorance.

I'm not here to spoon feed you.

I'm already giving you most of the main leg work here.

Go. Dig.

It's fun.

But back to remdesivir..

The Fauci backed drug without any clinical trials or supportive history data in regards to covid treatment.

The company that makes Remdesivir is Gilead.

If you’ve heard of Ebola, then you have heard of their handy work but that’s a whole other topic I’m not going to get into here but from my previous elaboration on why Judy brings up Ebola I'm sure you can wonder as to what I mean.

Anyway, the following article points to some important yet difficult to attain data about Gilead and this “wonder” drug and it’s technical ineffectiveness in regards to it being used as a vaccine which is what it’s being likened to:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/health/remdesivir-trial-gilead-premature/index.html

And if you read the fine print in the article from it’s official government sponsor you can glean some of what the since deleted report contained.

That it is little more effective than a placebo.. ie no drug at all.

But it does accelerate recovery to just above a negligible level!

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-clinical-trial-shows-remdesivir-accelerates-recovery-advanced-covid-19

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/09/remdesivir-distribution-plan-coronavirus-245887

“The FDA authorized emergency use of remdesivir this month after a government-sponsored trial found that the drug shortened recovery time for corona virus patients.”

And here is an informative and interesting article in regards to the pricing of remdesivir just as an FYI:

https://www.barrons.com/articles/its-all-in-the-model-when-it-comes-to-pricing-gileads-covid-19-drug-51588980565

“Drug pricing isn’t exactly a science. Consider remdesivir, Gilead Sciences ’ therapeutic recently authorized by the Food and Drug Administration to treat Covid-19. The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, which issues drug-pricing recommendations, said Gilead could charge $4,460 for every treatment course based on one model, and $10 per course based on another.

ICER’s two proposals arise from divergent theories of drug pricing. The $10 figure comes from a “cost-recovery pricing” model, which is based on production costs. ICER wrote down R&D costs to zero, in part because remdesivir was developed in a hepatitis C program that generated other profitable drugs. The $4,460 arose from a “cost-effectiveness” model, using results from a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases trial of remdesivir.”

“Jefferies analyst Michael J. Yee wrote that by extrapolating from ICER’s numbers, he could see $1 billion of remdesivir sales this year.”

So just some quick knapkin math for you if we take the max pricing recommendation.. $1billion/$4460= just 224,215 treatments

And since we are talking about money, it would be informative to look into the contractor doling out the alleged “donation” of 1.5million treatments, AmerisourceBergen.

“Previously the administration had sent a total of 35,360 vials straight to a handpicked list of hospitals, via its contractor AmerisourceBergen.”

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/amerisourcebergen-profit-and-revenue-rise-above-expectations-but-cuts-full-year-outlook-2020-05-07

Anyway, enough about all that, moving on to the next flub topic of the article and one of the most important to pay attention to since this is what is being used as an excuse for censorship –

Does wearing a mask make you susceptible to the virus?

And with the heinous first couple sentences the author then accurately states that this is the reason Facebook is using to justify censoring the video, which makes this topic that much more important to understand.

Because when you do, you realize Facebook not only has no grounds to censor it, they are blatantly and actively involved in manipulating and censoring the content we see and share here on an alarming scale.

Just as much as any mainstream media outlet.

“The video says that masks “activate” the virus.”

And once again, not what was said.

PAY ATTENTION TO THE INFORMATION YOU ARE BEING GIVEN AND IT'S WORDING!

And don't just listen to it, UNDERSTAND IT.

So once again the author showcases her penchant of not understanding what is being explained so allow me..

We ALL have active viruses, bacteria and germs in our system.

Our immune system is constantly regulating these.

There is a peak threshold that we cross when our immune system can become overwhelmed resulting in a symptomatic flare up of viral or bacterial action, thus entering into a state of sickness until our immune system can regain balance and we no longer express symptoms.

Masks CAN make you susceptible to CONTRACTING the Covid-19 virus.

How?

2 reasons.

1 ) Because it becomes a petri dish for viruses and bacteria you might come into contact with via your hands and then touching your mask and also the reuse of ineffective masks (which is nearly all masks, especially reusable ones.. you know, the most common).

2 ) By collecting germ, viral and bacterial cells in your respiratory tract it can proliferate “your own virus” which is what is said in the video.

NOT ACTIVATE THE COVID-19 VIRUS.

Your own existing collection of virus(es) can then cross the threshold resulting in a weakened immune system and produce sickness thus making you more SUSCEPTIBLE to Covid-19.

Does staying inside weaken your immune system?

Again, not understanding what is being said.

Your immune system is in a constant state of adaptation to the bacteria and viruses you come into contact with DAILY.

Just as the bacteria and viruses are to THEIR environments.

If you isolate yourself you are no longer staying current to the external environmental adaptations.

Just like your antivirus software on your computer.

If you don’t update your software and you venture out into the world you’re susceptible to adapted organisms that the rest of society has already adapted to and your immune response can more easily be overwhelmed when dealing with a multitude of new microbial and viral genomes of the various adaptations from the myriad of people you come into contact with on a daily basis.

Does the flu vaccine make you more susceptible to Covid-19?

Oh look at that, we now use the proper word susceptible and then follow it up with a very tongue in cheek answer consistent with someone who hasn’t a fucking clue as to what they are talking about or the science behind it.

And once again, if you understood the subject being discussed then the answer is clearly yes.
It can increase your chances.
Judy explains perfectly but if you need it explained further then that will require you to actually inform yourself on the science surrounding microbiology.

Are Covid-19 death counts inflated?

We already know the answer to this (yes) and it is covered above as well as in the video, and again of which if you bother doing your own digging you will be able to confirm.

Do hospitals get more money if they diagnose a patient with COVID-19 or put them on a ventilator?

Oh shit! The author finally told the truth! Then fucks it all up in regards to the correct information and again showcases her ignorance.

Does this conspiracy theory even hold together?

Well, we aren’t talking about a conspiracy theory here first of all.

We are simply discussing the information we KNOW.

Unlike the author, who obviously hasn’t the slightest comprehension of anything factual.

We also aren’t talking about clandestine operations spanning multiple governments and corporations. 

We are talking about the manipulation of them by a central global deep state agency/entity that spans all industries especially the scientific, medical and financial.

If conspiracy like information IS your thing however, topical bread crumbs of thought for rabbit holing, news article links are irrelevant but supplied for reference to topic being suggested.

They used the excuse of limited test kits for the stringent guidelines but then the test kits we get turn out to already have Covid contamination:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/cdcs-failed-coronavirus-tests-were-tainted-with-coronavirus-feds-confirm/

But also  remember when Trump upended the CDC prior to outbreak by removing the pandemic response team in China and firing key officials in the CDC?

https://www.kff.org/news-summary/reuters-examines-changes-to-cdc-nsc-epidemiology-pandemic-response-staff-under-trump-administration/

Other top intelligence officials also have recently left the administration, after Trump picked US Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell to replace Maguire as acting director of national intelligence. Russ Travers, who was head of the National Counterterrorism Center, was fired last month by Grenell in a move that was seen as a removal of someone not perceived as loyal enough.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/03/politics/trump-fires-inspector-general-michael-atkinson/index.html

So simultaneously to only testing most probable patients the CDC also changes its rhetoric to facilitate classifying a broader range of deaths under the new code allowing healthcare workers to list Covid for cause of death WITHOUT HAVING TO TEST FOR IT. Just as long as there is reason to believe it was Covid related.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf

So only those that have the highest likelihood of testing positive are tested until we have more test kits, which are already contaminated with the virus to show a positive in order to boost the rhetoric of how bad it is thus justifying a “lockdown”.

Logic and reason would dictate not testing those who are almost sure to test positive as they are going to be treated as having Covid anyway and instead testing those who are suspected of having it to identify questionable cases so that they can be confirmed and properly treated/quarantined, not sent home to possibly infect others.

Then here is some intersting info in regards to remdesivir:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/05/remdesivir-cats/611341/