This is a protein that binds to the same receptors as a particular snake venom because of homology (the reactive site has protein similarity). It was almost certainly by design. What it is not is a "venom" it's a "virus." Not that the distinction here is all that important, but "anti-venom" has nothing to do with it specifically. Anti-venom is a specific monoclonal antibody that binds to a specific protein region. Monoclonal antibodies are very specific. In the case of SARS, you can have many different monoclonal antibodies that will work (binds to different parts of the SARS-CoV-2 virion). If the particular one for the snake venom also works on SARS that's great (though I'd be surprised if it works very well since the similar region is not large).
There are also many other treatments that can be used on a virus though, not just monoclonal antibodies. Things like HCQ, Ivermectin, etc. are likely even better than monoclonal antibodies (not to downplay its effectiveness).
Of course, it's just a protein. It is only effective as a toxin if it is injected into the bloodstream though. That is the definition of "venom": an injected toxin.
I mean, it's theoretically possible such a protein could have a partial effect if swallowed in large enough quantities, but the stomach will break it down, so it will probably have no effect at all, especially in small quantities like a "poisoned water supply."
Could it cross the blood brain barrier though, say by shoving a giant swab all the way down ones nose, or by injecting a "vaccine" incorrectly and getting into the blood stream? We were told it wasn't a leaky vaccine, however this has been proved absolutely incorrect.
I'm just thinking out loud here. It was one of my first questions, "I thought venom had to be direct into the blood stream" and not just via a third party, ie water.
This is not snake venom...
This is a protein that binds to the same receptors as a particular snake venom because of homology (the reactive site has protein similarity). It was almost certainly by design. What it is not is a "venom" it's a "virus." Not that the distinction here is all that important, but "anti-venom" has nothing to do with it specifically. Anti-venom is a specific monoclonal antibody that binds to a specific protein region. Monoclonal antibodies are very specific. In the case of SARS, you can have many different monoclonal antibodies that will work (binds to different parts of the SARS-CoV-2 virion). If the particular one for the snake venom also works on SARS that's great (though I'd be surprised if it works very well since the similar region is not large).
There are also many other treatments that can be used on a virus though, not just monoclonal antibodies. Things like HCQ, Ivermectin, etc. are likely even better than monoclonal antibodies (not to downplay its effectiveness).
But they can and do make synthetic snake venom correct?
Of course, it's just a protein. It is only effective as a toxin if it is injected into the bloodstream though. That is the definition of "venom": an injected toxin.
I mean, it's theoretically possible such a protein could have a partial effect if swallowed in large enough quantities, but the stomach will break it down, so it will probably have no effect at all, especially in small quantities like a "poisoned water supply."
Could it cross the blood brain barrier though, say by shoving a giant swab all the way down ones nose, or by injecting a "vaccine" incorrectly and getting into the blood stream? We were told it wasn't a leaky vaccine, however this has been proved absolutely incorrect.
I'm just thinking out loud here. It was one of my first questions, "I thought venom had to be direct into the blood stream" and not just via a third party, ie water.