Kategori: Forskning

Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery

Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery
With Chilling Ties to the Chinese Military
by Peter R. Breggin MD and Ginger R. Breggin 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report documents in detail how Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), has been the major force behind a series of research activities and other government actions that enabled the Chinese Communist Party to create lethal SARS coronaviruses, leading to the release of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Fauci continues to cover for the Chinese and for himself, denying the origin of SARS-CoV-2, and delaying and thwarting worldwide attempts to deal rationally with the pandemic.
This report documents with more than 100 linked citations the following activities by Dr. Fauci:
(1) Until stopped by President Trump in mid-April 2020, Fauci funded both individual Chinese researchers and the Wuhan Institute as collaborators with American researchers in creating lethal coronaviruses from harmless bat viruses. This collaboration and direct funding enabled the Chinese Communist Party and its military to make potential bioweapons on their own, including SARS-CoV-2. In April 2020, shortly after our disclosure of these US/Chinese collaborations, President Trump canceled funding for them. However, Fauci has recently unleashed a deluge of new funding that will almost certainly benefit Chinese scientists at universities and research facilities in this country who have close ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

(2) The connection between SARS-CoV-2 and the Fauci-funded American and Chinese collaboration making coronaviruses was initially made in February 2020 in a scientific publication by an American-trained (Northwestern University and Harvard Medical School) Chinese researcher named Botao Xiao and his associate Lei Xiao. Perhaps because it was so cogently written and spot on, the Chinese Communist government forced the researchers to recant.
(3) The Wuhan Institute is a center of China’s biowarfare/biodefense capacity and its director is China’s top military expert in biowarfare, and yet Fauci shared advanced biowarfare-related research with and actually funded the Wuhan Institute and its scientists.
(4) Fauci has funded and continues to fund coronavirus “gain-of-function” research projects which turn benign animal viruses into human pathogens capable of causing pandemics. The stated purpose is to learn to prevent and treat future outbreaks; but research labs are the most common source of outbreaks from dangerous pathogens, including SARS-CoV-2, as well as two earlier accidental escapes by SARS viruses in 2004 from a research facility in Beijing.
(5) In 2014, when blocked by an order from President Barak Obama from funding dangerous “gain-of-function” studies, Fauci outsourced the research to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. He also covertly continued to fund the major gain-of-function collaboration between US and Chinese Wuhan Institute researchers, led by Menachery et al. at the University of North Carolina. Fauci thus made a mockery of President Obama’s attempts to stop the potentially catastrophic research.
(6) In order to outsource dangerous viral research from the US to China during the Obama moratorium, Fauci prematurely approved the Wuhan Institute as a highest level containment facility (known as BSL-4) capable of safely working with lethal viruses.
He did this while knowing the Institute had a very poor safety record and while also knowing that all such facilities in China are overseen by the military as part of its biowarfare program. Thus, Fauci created two grave worldwide threats, the accidental release of a deadly coronavirus and/or its use as a military weapon.
(7) Without fanfare, toward the end of the first year of the Trump administration in 2017, Fauci and NIH canceled President Obama’s moratorium against building viral pathogens in US labs and openly restored gain-of-function research creating lethal viruses. The original moratorium was a direct order by President Obama on White House stationery while its undoing was a decision made within the National Institutes of Health and NIAID, probably without Trump’s knowledge.
(8) From the initial outbreak of the pandemic in China and continuing to this day, Fauci has supported Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the corrupt Director-General of the World Health Association (WHO). Together, they initially minimized the dangers of COVID-19. Fauci and Tedros also delayed worldwide preparations for the pandemic while allowing the Chinese to spread the virus with thousands of international passenger flights.
(9) Standing beside President Trump at a briefing, Fauci publicly undermined the President’s criticism of Director-General Tedros and China. Instead, Fauci reassured the world that Tedros was a trustworthy and “outstanding” man—implying that Tedros’s connections in China were similarly reliable and could be trusted.
(10) We published our blog on April 14, 2020 and our video on April 15, 2020 revealing Fauci’s funding of US/Chinese collaborations that were building deadly coronaviruses and we described how the cooperative efforts enabled the Chinese to engineer coronaviruses. On April 17, President Trump announced his intention to cancel the collaborative funding.

Fauci was critical of the President’s actions and in October 2020 Fauci unleashed a surge of funding for gain-of-function research, supposedly without any Chinese involvement. However, some of the funding potentially involves Chinese researchers in the United States and some goes to the EcoHealth Alliance, which has been Fauci’s main conduit for funding Chinese researchers and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
(11) Fauci holds himself out as the ultimate source of objective scientific information and science-based conclusions. In reality, he works with and empowers globalist pharmaceutical firms and globalist organizations such as WHO and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations. Meanwhile, these globalists gained power and influence as their policies and practices, including the shutdowns, continue to worsen conditions throughout the world.
(12) In a recent scientific publication Fauci has continued to dismiss the very high probability—the near certainty—that SARS-CoV-2 was created by Chinese researchers working with the military and released, accidentally or purposely, from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. By persistently and unequivocally claiming that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from nature untouched by lab manipulations, Fauci continues to protect himself and China, and their relationship, to the endangerment of America and the rest of the world.
(13) Recently, in a new scientific publication, Fauci disclosed and advocated for his political agenda that aims at protecting the world from pathogens in nature by vastly reducing or stopping “human-made” “aggressive” interventions into nature. 2 Fauci’s utopian scheme, which overlaps with the Green New Deal, would permanently suppress and disrupt the activities and lives of the 7.8 billion people on Earth in the vain hope of reducing future pandemics. Thus the American official most responsible for the creation of SARS-CoV-2 in a Chinese lab instead blames its origins on human interventions into the environment and nature, thereby completely exonerating himself while holding humanity responsible.

Simultaneously, he is using the pretext of protecting us from viruses to impose a radical totalitarian agenda upon humanity. Indeed, the largest, most aggressive, and most dangerous human interventions into nature must include Fauci-funded gain-of-function research in which viruses are taken out of nature and engineered into pathogens.
(14) Overall, Fauci has been and continues to be an extraordinarily destructive force in the world. Most damaging to humanity, he enabled China to create SARS-CoV-2 and other deadly viruses for use as biological weapons. At the same time, he developed chilling ties to the Chinese Communist Party and its military, even financing their activities through NIAID and helping them to obtain valuable US patents. Then, in collaboration with China and WHO, he initially hid the origins and dangers of the pandemic, so that it spread more rapidly around the world. Then he became the go-to scientist and management czar for the very pandemic that he helped to create, enormously increasing his power and influence, and the wealth of his institute and his global collaborators, including Bill Gates and the international pharmaceutical industry.
(15) In his rise to power, Fauci has done a great deal of additional damage that we have already documented in earlier reports, for example, by suppressing the most effective, safest, and least expensive medication treatment (hydroxychloroquine in varied combinations), while manipulating his clinical research to promote an ineffective, dangerous, and highly expensive drug (remdesivir). Fauci has also been supporting inflated COVID-19 case counts and reported deaths from the CDC, then using the inflated estimates to justify oppressive public health measures that have no precedent and little or no scientific basis, but add to his influence and power and to the wealth of his globalist associates.

These and additional damaging activities by Anthony Fauci are reviewed in existing blogs and videos on our Coronavirus Resource Center.3 Recently our work was capped by my extensive medical/legal report, COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society. The report was filed in federal court in Ohio on August 31, 2020 as part of a lawsuit and an injunction to stop the emergency measures being imposed on the citizens of that state.4 The lawsuit was brought by attorney Thomas Renz and is becoming a model for similar suits in other states.5,6,7,8
This report focuses on Anthony Fauci as a central figure in a great deal of the world’s suffering under COVID-19.
End of Executive Summary
For detailed documentation, continue to read the entire report.
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 7
What is Your Risk of Death If You Catch COVID-19?
Most people have very unrealistic fears about the risk of dying from COVID-19. This is due in part to the CDC and to Dr. Anthony Fauci who inflate the risk of COVID-19 deaths. We therefore begin by examining the most fundamental issue of all: If you or a loved one are afflicted with SARS-CoV-2, what is your risk of death? It is probably much lower than you think or imagine.
The CDC bases its estimated death rates from COVID-19 on death certificates and this method is accepted as authoritative by Dr. Anthony Fauci and many others. However, the CDC has recently revealed that only 6% of COVID-19 death certificates list the disease as the sole cause of death, while 94% have two or three additional listed causes.9 Furthermore, there is no way to ascertain what the primary cause of death was among the 96% with multiple listed causes of death.
Most people who die while being positive for SARS-CoV-2 are near to or past their average longevity. In addition to being old, the great majority are already ill with heart disease, cancer, or some other chronic illnesses that may in fact have caused them to die. But even using the CDC’s biased data, the risk of death for most people is too small to require them to sacrifice the quality of their lives as the government demands under the threat of catching COVID-19.

Using their exaggerated data, CDC made a “best estimate” for the risk of dying after infection with COVID-19. The CDC reported the following estimates on September 10, 2020:10 Current CDC Best Estimates for Infection Fatality Ratio 0-19 years: 0.00003 (0.003%) or 3 in 100,000 20-49 years: 0.0002 (0.02%) 50-69 years: 0.005 (0.5%) 70+ years: 0.05 (5%) Remember that the overall risk of anyone dying from COVID-19 is infinitely less than these figures indicate. The above inflated numbers reflect the risk of dying after you become infected with SARS-CoV-2.

The Risk for Death in Children with COVID-19 The above CDC data states that the risk of infected children up to age 19 dying from COVID-19 is 0.00003 (0.003%)—or 3 in 100,000. But how many children are actually dying from COVID-19? The CDC makes it very difficult to figure this out. Fortunately, on October 10, 2020 the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association published data submitted from the individual states.11 Based on 42 states reporting, they found that “0%-0.16% of all child COVID-19 cases resulted in death.” Sixteen of the 42 states reported no deaths among children.

The age of the “children” went up to 17, 18, or 19, depending on the state’s criteria, making many of them young adults. The risk of death in children and young adults with COVID-19 is truly small. These risks do not justify drastic lockdown measures imposed on children and young adults. Most tragically, they do not justify keeping children and youngsters out of school. Yet Dr. Fauci and other public health officials continue to act as if there is a grave risk of exposing children and young adults to SARS-CoV-2, when there is not.

The Risk of COVID-19 to the Elderly Is Serious The CDC data listed in the table (above) indicates that at age 50-69 years of age, the risk of dying when infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 0.005 (0.5%) and for 70-plus years old it is 0.05 (5%). People 65 and older account for nearly all the deaths—70% to 94% of them, depending on the state.12 The higher death rate among the elderly is tragic, but it considerably lower than most people imagine. Many elders seem to think that getting COVID-19 is a death sentence, when it certainly is not. A 5% death rate for people 70 and older, many of whom are very ill and near the end of life, does not demand the imposition of extraordinary, disabling shutdowns and other drastic transformations on the entire population, including the children. Our household includes a husband and wife who are 84 and 69 years old, and the wife’s mother who is 94. None of us want to lockdown the nation or the world on account of us. There is a place for older people taking extra precautions and for the government offering special services; but that can be done without vastly impairing the lives of everyone else. We do not need to inflict such enormous harm on the economy and on society, and to spend such huge sums of money, in order to protect our vulnerable older population.

The three epidemiologists from Harvard, Oxford and Stanford who wrote the Great Barrington Declaration13and the thousands of us who have signed it, agree with their statement: “We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.” We agree that the death rates among children are too low to justify measures that deprive them of a normal social life and their schooling.

Having established at the start that the risks associated with COVID-19 do not justify the measures being imposed on America, we can begin with the history of coronavirus epidemics, a history very familiar to Fauci but not to most people.
SARS-CoV-1: The Hidden Epidemic and Earlier Accidental Releases
SARS stands for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. CoV stands for coronavirus, a type of virus that is found in many animals and humans in numerous varieties, usually benign. The “corona” refers to the appearance of a halo under an electron microscope. A few strains of coronavirus have been identified as a cause of mild and more occasionally moderate upper respiratory infections in humans, including many cases of the common cold.14
Until 2002, with the advent of SARS-CoV-1 in southern China, coronaviruses have never been known to be deadly to humans. Many people do not realize that SARS-CoV-1 caused an epidemic that spread around world in 2003. Here is a 2004 official Chinese description of the epidemic: “SARS first emerged in late 2002 in Southern China and spread around the world to infect 8,000 people in nearly 30 countries, causing nearly 800 deaths worldwide in 2003. As the greatest victim of the virus, China suffered 349 deaths in 2003.”15

The overall death rate for SARS-CoV-1 was in the range of 9%-10% and the death rate in people 65 and older was up to 40%-50% or more, both of which are extremely high and more than ten times that of SARS-CoV-2.16 The high death rate of the original SARS-CoV-1 accounts in part for the mistaken dire predictions initially made about SARS-CoV-2 in early 2020. However, both coronaviruses spared children and youth to a remarkable degree. In Hong Kong, where 298 people died from SARS-CoV-1, with a high percentage of death in the elderly, the mortality rate was 0% for children age 0–14 years. Rates for children are also at or near to zero in the US and around the world.

During SARS-CoV-1 in 2003, only 8 people in the United States had “laboratory evidence” of the virus, and they had traveled from other infected areas, according to the CDC.17
Because it made people so ill, and because it was less contagious, it was easier to contain than SARS-CoV-2. Most people, including some experts, do not know that in 2004 in China there were two separate contaminations with an unidentified SARS-CoV virus that was described as being obtained from patient samples during the 2003 epidemic. Two workers, on separate occasions, accidentally carried the virus or viruses from the National Institute of Virology in Beijing, infecting people outside the facility.18 The workers became ill, and were easily identified and isolated, limiting the known number of deaths.

A 2004 report from the China Daily describes the leaks from the Beijing lab:19 The small outbreak began in March and the World Health Organization declared it contained in May. … Official investigation shows that it is an accident due to negligence. The cases had been linked to experiments using live and inactive SARS corona virus in the CDC’s virology and diarrhea institutes… [bold added] Given the recognition by the Chinese government and WHO, and the available facts,20 there is no doubt that the limited 2004 outbreak of a SAR-CoV virus originated in a Chinese laboratory as a result of contamination. That the 2004 outbreak was due to experimentation with a SARS-CoV virus raises some serious questions. What kinds of experiments were being conducted? What viruses were involved? Was SARS-CoV-1 in fact created in a Chinese lab and leaked in 2002—or did it really emerge from nature? The original outbreak that began in China in later 2002 is generally considered an emergence from nature; but we do not know with certainty. Clearly, lab experimentation with SARS-CoV viruses is a much more common source of outbreaks than emergence from nature. Given his position in the world of viruses and epidemics, Fauci has known about these two leaks in 2004 and, despite his denials, we shall see that he must know that SARS-CoV-2 was made as a result of a US/China research collaboration which he financed with the purpose of making deadly viruses out of harmless coronaviruses. It was essential to Fauci, the current WHO director-general, and other defenders of China to make believe that SARS-CoV-2 was an unanticipated natural disaster, a kind of “Act of God” in insurance company terms. When the public fully realizes that Fauci, through financing Chinese scientists and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, enabled China to engineer SARS-CoV-2, his credibility will be gone. Furthermore, WHO and China will be held responsible for their multiple deceptions and deadly actions surrounding SARS-CoV-2 and the disease it causes, COVID-19.

Why It is Unsafe to Create Deadly Viruses in Labs
Before looking further into Chinese connections to Fauci’s new funding of American institutions, it is useful to further explore why it is basically and predictably unsafe to do laboratory research involving the creation of new, dangerous viruses. The Wuhan Institute, which in 2015 became China’s first laboratory to achieve the highest level of international bioresearch containment (known as BSL-4), had a well-known record of poor security, 21, 22 making a leak highly probable. We have already documented that there were leaks of an unidentified SARS virus from Chinese labs shortly after what we now can call the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic of 2003. Numerous leaks of other pathogens were reported in December 2019 in China, around the time SARS-CoV-2 was leaked from the Wuhan Institutes.23

Indeed, leaks and other mishaps involving dangerous infectious agents had been occurring at US CDC facilities,24,25,26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 as well as the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, in Fort Detrick, Md., which was temporarily shut down by the CDC.33
The grave risks inevitably associated with making pathogens in labs, even in presumably safer US facilities, was well-known to Anthony Fauci and also to many scientists. It has also been described somewhat piecemeal in the public media. But Fauci and other defenders of dangerous viral research rarely if ever mention the multitude of mishaps that the public needs to know about in assessing Fauci’s plans. Indeed, lab research is the most common source of outbreaks of dangerous pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2. Even excluding sabotage or theft, there is no way to prevent these invisible, difficult-to-detect, organisms from escaping containment by one route or another, such as physical mishaps, human contamination, accidentally sending a dangerous agent to the wrong place, and infinite ways we cannot anticipate in advance. Their “emergence” by accident or design from a lab where humans are creating them is far more likely than a pathogenic virus emerging through the slow, haphazard process of evolution and then finding a human to attach to. In defiance of common sense, a 2017 paper ominously titled, “Jumping species—a mechanism for coronavirus persistence and survival,” Menachery gave his rationalization for doing the dangerous research that we would highlight and that Trump would stop:34

Zoonotic transmission [jumping from an animal to human] of novel viruses represents a significant threat to global public health and is fueled by globalization, the loss of natural habitats, and exposure to new hosts. For coronaviruses (CoVs), broad diversity exists within bat populations and uniquely positions them to seed future emergence events. In this review, we explore the host and viral dynamics that shape these CoV populations for survival, amplification, and possible emergence in novel hosts.

It is astonishing that Menachery, and apparently all those associated with the research, claim to be heading off the rare event of a novel coronavirus jumping to and seriously harming humans, while they themselves intentionally make it happen—creating a “jumper” virus in the lab—while giving it wide distribution to labs around the world from Australia to Switzerland and including China.
The ability of the project to make a pathogen out of the coronavirus in no way indicates that there is even the slightest chance of the same thing happening in nature. After all, it took a multi-million dollar several-year collaborative research effort involving many extraordinary technologies and a large numbers of scientists from two nations to purposely turn this harmless virus into a virulent one. Along the way, the process required many intermediate steps, each step requiring careful reasoning and considerable trial and error, all with a very specific purpose in mind.
How likely is it that, in the natural evolution of bats, one of their viruses would mindlessly and without purpose take a multiple array of steps by chance to become a pathogen with pandemic potential and then find a human to infect? The human lab can accomplish in a relatively short time what it would take millions of years to happen by chance through evolution—if it would ever happen at all. Any increase in the rate of appearance of new pathogens here on Earth is far more likely to be caused by accidental or purposeful release from a lab that is in the process of making ordinary viruses into pathogens.
There is agreement among many scientists that odds of a natural pandemic vs. a manmade one are very small. Concerned scientists have argued in statistical detail that the risk of an epidemic coming out of a lab producing dangerous viruses is high compared to a rare emergence from nature.35 As already noted with multiple citations from 2014-2020, there have been many accidental releases and other accidents involving potentially deadly viruses from laboratories in recent times, including the CDC’s labs. The escape of a manmade virus, intentionally or not, is infinitely more likely than a lone bat virus evolving into a pathogen in nature and then finding a human host.

In nature, a novel virus attacking a human, causing a unique disease, and becoming an epidemic must begin with a rare chance of a genetic variation through biological evolution which is a very slow, hit-and-miss process, usually involving extraordinary periods of time. Then the chance variation among the many millions of bats flying around must have an equally rare chance to meet and to infect a suitable human host, who must then infect at least one other human before dying, etc. These bats live in rural caves hundreds of miles away from Wuhan, adding to the unlikelihood of such an event. All of this makes a jump from nature to humans extremely unlikely compared to the accidental escape of one of the SARS-CoV viruses already stored or being created at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
As this report has already suggested, there is a more frightening risk associated with making viruses that are potentially deadly to humanity—they can fall into the wrong hands and become bioweapons. What Fauci has been doing is doubly catastrophic, first, in the making of deadly viruses and, second, in collaborating with China in mutually creating obvious bioweapons.

How the COVID-19 Outbreak Was Intentionally Inflicted on the World
The Wuhan Institute has been known as “a center of China’s declared biowarfare/biodefense capacity.”36 Its director comes from China’s biological warfare program, as confirmed in a report stating “China ‘appoints its top military bio-warfare expert to take over secretive virus lab in Wuhan’.”37 No one can hold high positions or conduct research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology without being closely involved with and supervised by the military. Although we still do not know if the release of SARS-CoV-2 at Wuhan was originally intentional, we do know that the Chinese Communist Party intentionally halted domestic flights to and from Wuhan, a city of 11 million people, and the surrounding province of Hubei, while intentionally promoting flights from that region to the rest of the world.

The same also happened in other cities, including Shanghai and Beijing—shutdowns of domestic flights while pushing international flights.38,39

The Economic Times summed up the Chinese lockdown: While China continued to protest against international travel bans it successfully quarantined Wuhan and other affected cities. The total domestic lockdown of Hubei province and the flight ban imposed inside China had immediate effect. As per data from Tom Tom traffic index Wuhan had a traffic density of 60% in January while Shanghai and Beijing had nearly 80% density. After the total lockdown the average traffic density fell to below 10% in Wuhan and Shanghai during February and below 5% in Beijing. While implementing a total domestic lockdown in February, China kept assuring the world that the situation was not serious and fully under control.

Air traffic only gradually picked up. The BBC News reported at the end of August that “Air travel has been picking up gradually since the coronavirus grounded the majority of planes in February.”40 China continued in early February to demand that other countries stop banning flights from China or Wuhan, even though they had already implemented a ban on domestic flights and other forms of travel to and from Wuhan!41 In the face of increasing bans on flights to China by other nations, China continued for months afterward to operate and to press for increased flights from China to the world.42 The Chinese locked down Wuhan on January 16, 2020; but through all of January 2020, an estimated 4,000 people flew directly from Wuhan to the United States.43 Nineteen largely filled flights went to San Francisco and New York, with no enhanced screening. Additionally in January, there were over 1,300 direct passenger flights from all of China to the United States, for a total of 381,000 travelers. About one-quarter were Americans returning home. In addition, a large uncounted number of people flew from China to the US through intermediate stops. In sum, China flooded the US and the world with potentially infected people during January 2020 until President Trump stopped all flights from China at the end of January. Meanwhile, Fauci was against curtailing traffic from China, stating it would do little good (see next section). Fauci, Tedros, and China In its nefarious activities at the start of the pandemic in Wuhan, China was backed by World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a patently corrupt totalitarian politician from Ethiopia,44,45,46 who, ironically, has been accused of covering up devastating cholera outbreaks in his own country by The New York Times47 and other sources.48 Tedros, who has had a conflicted relationship with the US, is closely allied to China, which is WHO’s second biggest donor after the US. Meanwhile, Anthony Fauci, like the Director-General of WHO, was against Trump’s ban on air travel. Fauci called the ban “irrelevant” because it could not prevent the virus from eventually spreading worldwide.49 In the same interview during which Fauci resisted any travel bans to and from China, he suggested that the virus might diminish (like the flu) when the weather changed: The wild card here is that this is a brand new virus, this novel coronavirus, and we do not know if it’s going to diminish as the weather gets warm. We can’t count on that. Anthony Fauci has been outspoken in his support of WHO’s Tedros. On March 25, 2020, at a critical moment early in the crisis, while standing beside President Trump at a nationally televised Coronavirus Task Force presentation, Fauci openly and publicly undermined Trump’s concerns about Tedros. The following pithy, revealing excerpt from the official White House transcript50 of the televised discussion demonstrates Fauci’s willingness to undermine the President. Fauci refuses to comment on the lack of transparency from China, a problem that led to China’s covert infliction of the pandemic on the world. Fauci describes how he has known Tedros since Tedros was in Ethiopia—a time during which Tedros was accused of extraordinary corruption and even indifference toward an Ethiopian epidemic in homeland. Fauci gives us a big hint about just how close he is with Tedros, saying he had just gotten off the phone with him a few hours earlier in the day when he was leading a WHO phone call.
“Tedros is really an outstanding person,” Fauci announces. This brief exchange is extraordinarily revealing about Fauci:
PRESIDENT TRUMP: But the fact is that I have heard for years that [WHO] is very much biased toward China, so I don’t know. Doctor, do you want to you — do you want me to get you into this political mess?
DR. FAUCI: No, I don’t want you to do that. But I will. (Laughs.) So, Tedros is really an outstanding person. I’ve known him from the time that he was the Minister of Health of Ethiopia. I mean, obviously, over the years, anyone who says that the WHO has not had problems has not been watching the WHO. But I think, under his leadership, they’ve done very well. He has been all over this. I was on the phone with him a few hours ago leading a WHO call.
QUESTION FROM THE PRESIDENT. Praising China’s transparency, sir?
DR. FAUCI: No. No, I’m not — I’m not talking about China. You asked me about Tedros.
QUESTION FROM THE PRESIDENT. The World Health Organization was praising China for its transparency and leadership on their response to the pandemic.
DR. FAUCI: You know, I can’t comment on that because — I mean, I don’t have any viewpoint into it. I mean, I don’t — I don’t even know what your question is. It is telling—even chilling—that a few hours before the Task Force meeting, Fauci was on the phone with Tedros. The ominous connections among the triad of Tedros’ WHO, China, and Anthony Fauci’s NIAID help to explain how China initially was praised rather than condemned for its handling of the coronavirus.

We shall see that in his most recent scientific publication, Fauci continues to wholly exonerate the Chinese Communist Party and the Wuhan Institute of Virology of any possible wrongdoing. He continues to promote the discredited claim51 that the coronavirus infection originated in a Wuhan wet market, where in fact no bats are sold, and none can be found for hundreds of miles. 52, 53, 54 Meanwhile, simultaneously and coincidentally, the Wuhan Institute of Virology was making deadly coronaviruses in close proximity to this supposed “leap from nature,” as this report will demonstrate.
While unleashing the virus on the world, China’s government, the Communist Party, also intentionally withheld the existence of the internal epidemic, then claimed the virus came from the wet food market, while initially denying it could be transmitted by humans.55 However, on February 20, 2020, two Chinese researchers published a study proposing that the novel coronavirus was manmade, probably in a Chinese laboratory:56 We noted two laboratories conducting research on bat coronavirus in Wuhan, one of which was only 280 meters from the seafood market. We briefly examined the histories of the laboratories and proposed that the coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory.
Other experts confirmed the probability that SARS-CoV-2 originated from the Wuhan Institute,57 where the Chinese were known to be engineering SARS-like bat coronaviruses into virulent human pathogens, similar to SARS-CoV-2.

Trump Stops Fauci’s Funding of the US/Chinese Collaboration
For many years Anthony Fauci was funding collaborative research with China on how to engineer benign bat CoV viruses into highly infectious viruses, like SARS-CoV-2. As this report documents, that funding definitely contributed to China’s ability to turn benign bat coronaviruses into deadly viruses similar to or the same as SARS-CoV-2. Fauci continued to fund the deadly US collaboration with the Chinese until mid-April 2020.
In March or early April 2020 we discovered published scientific papers from 2015 and 2016 describing the collaborative research and we were astounded by it. How could we be helping China down a path that inevitably would lead to their ability to make bioweapons out of coronaviruses? The thought was so preposterous that we double checked the authenticity of the papers.
On April 14 we published our first report about the US/China collaboration, followed the next day by a video that almost overnight had 40,000 downloads.58 We immediately sent the report and the video to the media and to people as close to the President as we could get.59 On April 17, a Newsmax reporter asked Trump about collaboration with China at a press conference. The President described how he was aware of the project, and replied “We will end that grant very quickly.”60 In less than 48 hours President Trump went over Fauci’s head and stopped the funding.61
The funding that was canceled went far beyond the collaborative US/China research led by Menachery et al. (2015 and 2016) on creating viruses able to infect humans. It included a broad range of viral research being conducted with Chinese scientists and the Wuhan Institute.62,63 In the media, the canceled activities were collectively referred to as “the project” or “the grant” and identified as being funded by Fauci’s NIAID through the EcoHealth Alliance. We have not found any information about how many similar projects may still exist. It appears that some of the funds came directly from NIAID, without going through EcoHealth Alliance, because NIAID is identified as a source of funding in various published papers and EcoHealth Alliance in others.

In the meanwhile, Trump’s order to stop the research has focused on collaboration with China, which reportedly has been stopped. But the President’s order apparently has not addressed funding of gain-of-function research done here in the United States and in collaboration with countries other than China.
Meanwhile, Fauci has sought ways to get around the President’s ban on collaborating with China and continued to fund potentially deadly gain-of-function research (see next section).
Fauci Awards Huge Grants for Dangerous International and Collaborative Viral Research On August 29, 2020, Maria Godoy from NPR wrote a reported aptly titled, “Group Whose NIH Grant For Virus Research Was Revoked Just Got a New Grant.” Her report summarized: The National Institutes of Health has awarded a grant worth $7.5 million over five years to EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S.-based nonprofit that hunts emerging viruses. The award comes months after NIH revoked an earlier grant to EcoHealth, a move scientists widely decried as the politically motivated quashing of research vital to preventing the next coronavirus pandemic. EcoHealth Alliance is one of 11 institutions and research teams receiving grants from NIH, announced this week, to establish the Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Diseases. The global network will monitor pathogens that emerge in wildlife and study how and where they go on to infect humans.

Peter Daszak, President of EcoHealth Alliance, told NPR that none of the new money was going to China. Daszak also claimed that China’s research into viruses has been stopped by Trump’s withdrawal of funds from it, an outcome that seems extremely unlikely. While we believe that Fauci and the US enabled China to accelerate its efforts, we have no illusions that the Chinese Communists cannot proceed without us.
A recently escaped Chinese scientist says that China now has the world’s largest stockpile of coronaviruses suited for biowarfare and has no technical problems in turning benign ones into virulent ones;64 and an informed former US military officer takes the scientist’s warning seriously.65
Most concerning, Daszak describes how his Fauci funding will be used for the controversial gain-of-function research originally stopped by President Obama and quietly reinstated by NIH and Fauci. Daszak told NPR: “The next step in that research is to sequence the whole genome of those viruses and say, could they bind to human cells? Does this look like a virus that could potentially emerge?”
How do researchers determine if a virus found in nature can become a pathogen, i.e., “bind to human cells”? They laboratory engineer it into a pathogen and use their success to claim it could also emerge naturally from nature—a conclusion which makes no sense (see ahead). This is the research that we shall see was canceled by President Obama and then reinstated by Fauci in President Trump’s first term, without his involvement or knowledge, and then stopped by the President in April 2020. But President Trump only stopped the collaboration with China, not the so-called “gain-of-function” research itself that led to the creation of SARS-CoV-2.

Here is the process of engineering a harmless virus into a pathogen. First, the genome of the virus is mapped. Then an attempt is made to see if the virus has the potential to invade human cells. This cannot be determined by simply eyeballing the virus. This can only be done—and was done in the research with China canceled by President Trump—by physically modifying the coronavirus in the lab to enable it to gain entry to human lung cells in a lab preparation. This demonstration is one of the major steps in making the harmless virus into a SARS-CoV capable of producing a Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome in humans.
If the virus can be engineered to successfully attack cells in human lung cell preparations, it is given to a mouse or other small animal to see if will attack the lungs of a living mammal. When it does cause SARS in the mice, as it did in the studies that Trump canceled, the researchers have reached near certainty that they have created a SARS-CoV, a virus that is potentially harmful or deadly to humans.
Put simply, Fauci, along with his partners around the world, have done an end run around President Trump and his predecessor President Obama, to continue research aimed at creating pandemic viruses—while probably finding a backdoor to working with China.

Fauci Funds Close Connections to China in the US
Almost a week after the PRN article announcing Fauci’s massive new funding of viral research, on September 6, 2020 Col. Lawrence Sellin (Ret.) of the Citizen’s Commission on National Security warned about the overall NIAID grant, totaling $82 million, which includes many institutions in addition to EcoHealth Alliance. Sellin cited virology research at University of Texas that specifically involves multiple Chinese-connected researchers.66 As a retired military officer concerned with security, this did not seem like a good idea to Col. Sellin.

The grant, which was officially announced by NIAID on August 27, 2020,67 will indeed fund Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance, Inc. for its Emerging Infectious Diseases-South East Asia Research Collaboration Hub. Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance has been Fauci’s main source of collaboration with the Chinese, which President Trump canceled. This new grant strongly suggests that Fauci is continuing to fund collaboration with China on viral research, if only through other nations that depend on the Communist giant or, as we will now see, through Chinese already working in American universities and laboratories. We agree with Col. Sellin who believes that these new grants require investigation and will present some of our initial new discoveries about them.
American/Chinese Collaborative Research that Led to the Engineering of SARS-CoV-2
The decade of research that ultimately led directly to the laboratory creation of SARS-CoV-2 was highlighted in two scientific papers with lead researchers from the University of North Carolina, along with two Chinese virologists from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The senior author of the two papers was Vineet D. Menachery, PhD (Menachery et al., 201568 and Menachery et al. 201669).
The title of the 2015 paper indicates that they were working with SARS-CoV viruses: “A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence.” The phrase, “shows potential for human emergence” was highly misleading and promotional. The article describes how they created a SARS-CoV virus capable of infecting humans.
This American/Chinese collaboration published its initial results in 2015 and 2016 when it described putting a protein “spike” on an innocuous bat coronavirus that turned it into SARS-CoV pathogen able to attach to and invade cells lining the human lung. The new SARS-CoV was deadly to mice, especially older or physically compromised animals, and was remarkably harmless to younger animals. It was shown to attack human lung tissue in the lab. The virus seemed immune to current treatments and a successful vaccine could not be made. With so many similar clinical features, this chimerical virus presaged the engineering of SARS-CoV-2.
In both the 2015 and the 2016 papers, the first listed source of funds was Fauci’s NIAID. In the first one, the Chinese government is also listed as funding the project. This work was a testimonial to globalism without regard for the safety of the United States—or even that of the world.

Chinese Involvement in the Collaborations
The collaboration with the Chinese was intimate and critical. The two Chinese authors were researchers Xing-Yi Ge and Zhengli-Li Shi. In the 2015 paper, both identified themselves as from the “Key Laboratory of Special Pathogens and Biosafety, Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China.” The acknowledgements describe how the Chinese researchers as members of the team worked actively with the virus in their own Wuhan Institute laboratory.
Although no Chinese authors are listed on the 2016 publication, the Acknowledgements thank “Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology” who provided, among other things, materials to make the “spike protein” used to enable the virus to infect human cells. This is the same Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi who was a coauthor of the 2015 paper. Her continued involvement confirms the ongoing close relationship between the American and Chinese researchers. She is director of the specific Wuhan Institute lab that extracts viruses from bats and makes them pathogenic for humans. After COVID-19 broke out of China, she would be featured admiringly in the American scientific media as the “bat lady,” accompanied by her self-serving denials that SARS-CoV-2 had escaped from her facility.70
The other Chinese author of the 2015 paper, Xing-Yi Ge, is also a very important researcher in China’s virology programs. Ge was the lead author among about 20 researchers in 2013, most of them directly involved with the Wuhan Institute, who published a seminal article in the research chain leading up to SARS-CoV-2.71 Titled “Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor,” it studied the capacity of the coronavirus to be engineered into a pathogen that could be made to connect to the ACE2 human receptor. It too was funded in part by the Chinese and by Fauci’s NIAID and, in this case, multiple other U.S. agencies.72 Peter Daszak, who heads EcoHealth Alliance, the organization that was separately funneling money from Fauci’s institute to Chinese gain-of-function research,73 was listed as an author.
Daszak and his organization is funded not only by Fauci’s NIAID but many other NIH-affiliated organizations, the CDC, the National Science Foundation, and other government agencies.74 Its list of partners and consultants spans the world including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations; and many great universities in the US, England, and China. Multiple countries and international agencies are involved and the word “global” is used 14 times in the few descriptive pages of this nonprofit.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology: Origins and American Funding According to the April 27, 2020 Newsweek:75 In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million. … The NIH research consisted of two parts. The first part began in 2014 and involved surveillance of bat coronaviruses, and had a budget of $3.7 million [from Fauci’s NIAID]. The program funded Shi Zheng-Li, a virologist at the Wuhan lab, and other researchers to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses in the wild. This part of the project was completed in 2019. A second phase of the project, beginning that year, included additional surveillance work but also gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit research group, under the direction of President Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. NIH canceled the project just this past Friday, April 24th, Politico reported. Daszak did not immediately respond to Newsweek requests for comment. Peter Daszak and his EcoHealth Alliance, as we noted above, were also well-known conduits for additional money from Fauci’s NIH Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases.76 Newsweek also commented, “SARS-CoV-2 , the virus now causing a global pandemic, is believed to have originated in bats. U.S. intelligence, after originally asserting that the coronavirus had occurred naturally, conceded last month that the pandemic may have originated in a leak from the Wuhan lab.” Newsweek would never make the connection, but the inexorable process was apparent—Fauci funding ultimately led directly to the making of SARS-CoV-2.
The research connections between the US and China are deep and complex, including Fauci’s NIAID funding for gain-of-function studies going to U.S. projects that influenced China, to U.S./Chinese collaborations, to Chinese researchers in their own projects, and to the Wuhan Institute itself.

Fauci and NIAID Were Central to the Chain of Activities that Led to SARS-CoV-2
Our focus is on the role of NIH and particularly Fauci and his NIH Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in helping to bring about this chain of events leading to the pandemic. This is a series of events requiring enormous manpower and funding, and the overcoming of political obstacles, in which Americans collaborated with and financially supported Chinese researchers and the Wuhan Institute of Virology under the watchful eye of Fauci, culminating in China’s ability to engineer SARS-CoV-2 from bat viruses.
Efforts to enhance the virulence of viruses are euphemistically called “gain-of-function” studies—perhaps to hide their deadliness. Fauci is a strong advocate of vaccines and he works closely with Bill Gates and his foundation where he is on Gates’ elite international vaccine board called the Leadership Council.77
It is telling that Fauci was so key to enabling the Chinese to make SARS-CoV-2 and then became the international management czar for the worldwide affliction that he helped to create—and now he wants to lead us down the road of worldwide public health totalitarianism to save us from “human-made” environmental destruction that allegedly encourages the emergence of pathogens from nature.78

In 2014 the US Government Stops Fauci’s Gain-of-Function Research
There were key moments when Fauci could have turned back and stopped funding our collaborative research with Chinese researchers and the military-controlled79 Wuhan Institute.
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 30
Instead he was temporarily stopped by a Presidential decree. In 2014, President Obama declared a moratorium on research exactly like that being conducted by Menachery et al. in collaboration with China on “gain-of-function” research. At that time, the Menachery studies, which were actively moving along, should have come to a halt. Here is the opening of the October 17, 2014 declaration from the “White House: President Barack Obama”:80
Doing Diligence to Assess the Risks and Benefits of Life Sciences
Gain-of-Function Research

Summary:
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Department of Health and Human Services today announced that the U.S. Government is launching a deliberative process to assess the potential risks and benefits associated with a subset of life sciences research known as “gain-of-function” studies.
Following recent biosafety incidents at Federal research facilities, the U.S. Government has taken a number of steps to promote and enhance the Nation’s biosafety and biosecurity, including immediate and longer term measures to review activities specifically related to the storage and handling of infectious agents. …
Because the deliberative process launching today will aim to address key questions about the risks and benefits of gain-of-function studies, during the period of deliberation, the U.S. Government will institute a pause on funding for any new studies that include certain gain-of-function experiments involving influenza, SARS, and MERS viruses. Specifically, the funding pause will apply to gain-of-function research projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to
influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.
That description exactly fits the collaborative studies between U.S. researchers and Chinese scientists from the Wuhan Institute who were only months away from publishing a scientific paper on the creation of a gain-of-function virus by engineering a bat virus to make it virulent and able to infect humans. No other research has surfaced which so perfectly fits what President Obama was trying to stop—but Fauci would avoid stopping it!

The Obama government’s description of the moratorium continues:
During this pause, the U.S. Government will not fund any new projects involving these experiments and encourages those currently conducting this type of work – whether federally funded or not – to voluntarily pause their research while risks and benefits are being reassessed.
This White House order could not be clearer. During the time when the government was investigating the risks of “gain-of-function” research, it would not start funding any new projects and it asked all on-going projects to “voluntarily pause their research while the risks and benefits are being assessed.”

Menachery et al. Struggle to Keep their Research Alive
In their 2015 publication, Menachery et al. acknowledged the existence of the moratorium on gain-of-function studies, but expressed the belief that it did not necessarily cover them because they did not initially anticipate that they could have succeeded in creating a virulent virus! However, a November 9, 2015 interview,81 given while Menachery’s study was on the way to publication, indicates he had been stopped, temporarily at least:
He [Menachery]and his co-authors noted they had to stop some of their work because of US government policies. The US has a moratorium on so-called gain-of-function research, which includes some research that enhances the ability of a pathogen such as a virus to infect people or spread among them.
There is in fact no evidence that they slowed down their research because they published their results shortly thereafter in December 2015 and again in 2016 without indicating any interference with it.
By the end of 2015 NIH granted an exception to the dangerous Menachery study, allowing it to continue. According to Nature: 82 The latest study was already under way before the US moratorium began, and the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) allowed it to proceed while it was under review by the agency, says Ralph Baric, an infectious-disease researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and a co-author of the study. The NIH eventually concluded that the work was not so risky as to fall under the moratorium, he says. (bold added).
In short, the National Institutes of Health decided that Fauci’s pet project—the epitome of a gain-of-function study—was not really dangerous enough to be stopped under President Obama’s edict. The result was a continuation of the research leading to SARS-CoV-2.

NIH Strikes Back
December 19, 2017, under the Trump Administration, NIH announced that it was lifting the ban set by President Obama on gain-of-function research, while adding new restrictions to the research.83,84 Unlike Obama’s ban which came from the White House on the President’s official stationery, there is no indication that Trump was involved in the lengthy analysis that predated him. The New York Times commented, “There has been a long, fierce debate about projects — known as “gain of function” research — intended to make pathogens more deadly or more transmissible.”85 Fauci simply did an end run on the dissent, ignoring it, and quietly lifting the ban.
In the various establishment analyses we have read about the controversy surrounding gain-of-function research, including one in Lancet in early 2018,86 there is no hint that any of the studies involved funding China. Even more striking, no mention is made of the most important gain-of-function studies of all, the American/Chinese collaboration by Menachery, published in 2015 and 2016. A New York Times article on the same subject,87 mistakenly claimed that under Obama’s ban, all research was halted, including that on SARS, when in fact the SARS research by Menachery et al. rushed ahead to publication during that time. It then mentions exceptions that were allowed to proceed, but none are SARS-related. It’s as if an invisible curtain had been placed over this extremely dangerous research that eventually helped the Chinese capacity to engineer SARS-CoV-2.
The Times article does warn against publishing dangerous information, comparing it to the risk of publishing atomic secrets. But it fails to mention we were actually collaborating with China, creating a much greater risk than merely publishing information about the research. It is no exaggeration to say that collaborating with China on building virulent, epidemic viruses was at least as dangerous as collaborating with them or the Russians on building atomic weapons.
Meanwhile, the research of Menachery et al. seems to have been unaffected by all of these political machinations. We believe this demonstrates the determination of NIH, and especially Fauci’s NIH Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease, to maintain their “gain-of-function” research despite all opposition and all reason.

Ignoring the Elephant in the Room

The elephant in the room is that the U.S. funded and supported China’s efforts to build up its capacity for biological warfare. We could find no mention or discussion of this threat on the part of the Obama or Trump administration or anyone else in a position of responsibility or authority, or in the major media.
A number of less-than-major media described Fauci as outsourcing his gain-of-function ambitions to China during the controversy over banning it in the U.S. The Asia Times88published an analysis with this disturbing headline, “Why US outsourced bat virus research to Wuhan,” followed by the subhead, “US-funded $3.7 million project approved by Trump’s Covid-19 guru Dr. Anthony Fauci in 2015 after US ban imposed on ‘monster-germ’ research.”
In April 2020, as COVID-19 spread, the British newspaper Daily Mail Online quoted a US lawmaker’s outrage over directly funding the Wuhan Institute:89 US Congressman Matt Gaetz said: “I’m disgusted to learn that for years the US government has been funding dangerous and cruel animal experiments at the Wuhan Institute, which may have contributed to the global spread of coronavirus, and research at other labs in China that have virtually no oversight from US authorities.”
An analysis90 published in May 2020 by M. Dowling in the Independent Sentinel, again described Fauci as outsourcing gain-of-function research to China. It helped break ground as we had done a month earlier, by pointing to the danger of giving biological weapons to China:

TRUSTING MAOISTS
Dependency on Communists, trusting Communists, what could possibly go wrong? President Trump’s administration is investigating the $3.7 million in tax dollars that went to the Wuhan lab and Matt Gaetz called for an immediate end to NIH funding of Chinese research. Whether anything will come of it is questionable. The ban on GOF [Gain-of-Function] research in the USA has been lifted. Maybe the USA shouldn’t do it either. When mankind plays with nature, it usually doesn’t go well. Unfortunately, our press doesn’t investigate or even ask pertinent questions. Some reporters are just too stupid or biased to bother. Imagine if President Trump said our CDC is incompetent so I will pay Russia to do our GOF research?
When the original research paper was published in 2015, it did not go unnoticed. The dangers inherent in creating new human coronavirus pathogens in the Menachery research were discussed in a commentary by Jef Akst in The Scientist on November 16, 2015, along with NIH’s decision to allow the research to continue.91 Unfortunately, as so often continues to happen, the danger of the Chinese collaboration went unmentioned! Instead, there is an addendum added to the original report trying to dismiss any such association or concern:
Update (March 11, 2020): On social media and news outlets, a theory has circulated that the coronavirus at the root of the COVID-19 outbreak originated in a research lab. Scientists say there is no evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus escaped from a lab.

Notice that in the update, the Wuhan Institute is not even mentioned, and instead the article refers to “escaped from a lab.” Reports from Nature, The Scientist, and Scientific American among many others, confirm that the progressive media and the scientific community were desperately trying to avoid throwing suspicion on the Chinese Communists for any role in COVID-19, including avoiding any mention that the US government was collaborating with the Wuhan Institute in turning routine bat viruses into pathogens deadly to humans, directly helping the Chinese Communist Party develop bioweapons.
Here we see the influence of globalism. People knew each other, people made money from each other, science trumped national security—any kind of funded collaborative research with China was almost untouchable and beyond criticism.
If asked, some of the individual scientists would probably have said that “science” is pure and should be shared among competing and even hostile nations for the sake of science and peace. But that innocence is not what rules globalism. The prevailing attitude among globalists seems to be: Never put America first, put our global friends and interests ahead of everything.
Of all the technologies we have given to China, how to make highly infectious and lethal viruses from bat viruses may be the most dangerous. Yet, there was a nearly total blackout on US funding for China building biological weapons displayed by the media, science commentators, and politicians. This confirmed the pervasiveness of the globalist viewpoint that has no special interest in protecting American interests or seemingly even in America’s survival, and perhaps not even in the world’s survival, while fortunes are being made and power is being accrued.
Globalists, when using science to justify totalitarian control, talk about “science” as if it were a universal spirit or god. Since science is a creation of human beings, it is neither perfect nor pure, but always depends on the human source with all the biases and corruptions and, yes, idealism that humans live by. 92 Meanwhile, we must make sure that Donald Trump’s April 2020 halt of funding for Menachery’s research remains in place and becomes expanded to all gain-of function research, much as President Obama’s declaration originally set out to do. Fauci and his NIH Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease will do everything they can to get around it. And we must recognize the danger that China now poses as a nation well-armed with the resources to produce innumerable kinds of SARS-CoV pandemics.
Escaped Chinese Scientist Confirms the Worst On April 28, 2020, Li-Meng Yan (MD, PhD), an experienced Chinese virologist at the Hong Kong School of Public Health, escaped to the United States.93,94 Dr. Yan explained to the media that she left China in order to tell the world about China’s coverup about the real source of the deadly pandemic, the Wuhan Institute. She has remained in hiding since, while talking to newspapers and appearing on Tucker Carlson on the Fox News Channel on September 15, 2020.95 She told Tucker, “This virus, COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 virus, actually is not from nature. It is a manmade virus created in the lab.”
On September 14 ,2020 Dr. Yan and three colleagues put online a prepublication version of their new paper, confirming that SARS-CoV-2 is a manmade product of Chinese laboratories.96
To describe China’s background in developing the spike protein, Yan et al. explained that this method has been “repeatedly” used in laboratories to create “human-infecting” coronaviruses of non-human origin. To document their observation, the authors cite four research publications. Two of the four citations are to the 2015 and 2016 Menachery papers that involved collaborations with Chinese researchers. A third paper is also American in origin and does not involve Chinese researchers; but like the first two, it too is supported by Fauci’s Institute.97 This array of three papers shows the direct connection between Fauci-funding and China’s ability to build SARS-CoV-2. The fourth paper involved neither US researchers nor US funding.
Yan et al. also cite the 2015 Menachery paper to show that the Wuhan Institute of Virology has been working on studies to make these “human-infecting viruses.” This directly links the Chinese success in gain-of-function research to their collaboration with the U.S. project funded by Fauci.
Yan et al. then go on to make that chilling observation that the Wuhan Institute now possesses “the world’s largest collection of coronaviruses.” They follow this with another chilling observation that there is no longer any “technical barrier” to the Chinese turning these viruses into infectious ones through “engineering” a virus to give it “gain-of-function,” that is, the ability to infect humans.
This means that the Chinese now have the unlimited ability to keep manufacturing pandemic viruses. This should not be a surprise given their collaboration with the US, plus their own independent publications, and the inevitable desire of the Communist Party of China to create and stockpile biological weapons.
Finally, Yan and her colleagues link the engineering history of SARS-CoV-2 directly to China’s military. Here is one of seven references to the military’s involvement in developments leading to SARS-CoV-2:
The genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 is suspiciously similar to that of a bat coronavirus discovered by military laboratories in the Third Military Medical University (Chongqing, China) and the Research Institute for Medicine of Nanjing Command (Nanjing, China).
Yan and her colleagues took great risks in putting their scientific paper online, linking SARS-CoV-2 to the Chinese military. In her personal interviews, many in August 2020, she has been very direct in blaming the Chinese Communist Party and its military. The headline of one interview makes Yan’s view unmistakably clear: 98
Li-Meng Yan: Coronavirus was developed in Chinese military lab:
The Chinese virologist, who claims she fled to the U.S. after receiving threats due to her research, has accused the Chinese military of creating Covid-19

In the first week of October 2020, Dr. Yan reported to several media that her mother had been imprisoned in China in retaliation for her criticism of the Communist government. On October 8, 2020, Dr. Yan and her colleagues put online a second prepublication article.99 The thrust of the highly technical publication is that China not only created SARS-CoV-2, it prepared the way by creating fake viruses as supposed natural precursors. According to Yan et al., from this and other manipulations of science and scientific publications, the Chinese demonstrate their intention to purposely release the virus as a bioweapon against humanity. As we go to publication, and having reviewed some of the critiques of the article, we do not feel able to conclude from the article whether China intentionally released the virus as a bioweapon (see Col. Sellin’s observations in the next section).

Col. Lawrence Selling (Ret) Evaluates the work of Dr. Yan
The Citizens Commission on National Security (CCNS) is an organization primarily organized and run by high-ranking military officers including many generals and well-known conservatives, including Lt. General Thomas McInerney (Ret.) and Former Congressman and Army Lieutenant Colonel Allen West (Ret.). Its stated purpose is to “Strengthen America’s National Security.” As noted earlier, one of its members, Col. Lawrence Sellin (Ret.),100 has been writing detailed analyses of many of the issues addressed in this and in our earlier report, and his writings on COVID-19 are a valuable resource.101
On August 4, 2020 Sellin evaluated the publication by Yan et al. (above) after the senior author escaped from China, citing an August review of her interviews titled: 102

Refugee Hong Kong Virologist Links COVID-19
to Chinese Military Laboratory

Sellin provides a good summary of a central portion of Yan’s argument: SARS-CoV-2 has signs of serial passaging and the direct genetic insertion of novel amino acids sequences for which no natural evolutionary pathway has been identified. Although SARS-CoV-2 appears to have the “backbone” of bat coronaviruses, its spike protein, which is responsible for binding to the human cell and its membrane fusion-driven entry, has sections that do not appear in any closely-related bat coronaviruses. SARS-CoV-2’s receptor binding domain, the specific element that binds to the human cell, has a ten times greater binding affinity than the first SARS virus that caused the 2002-2003 pandemic. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 appears to be “pre-adapted” for human infection and has not undergone a similar natural mutation process within the human population that was observed during the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak. Those observations plus the inexplicable genetic distance between SARS-CoV-2 and any of its potential bat predecessors suggest an accelerated evolutionary process obtained by laboratory-based serial passaging through genetically-engineered mouse models containing humanized receptors previously developed by China.
Perhaps most important, Sellin cites a summary of interviews given by Dr. Yan, including live quotes from the doctor, that provides a very valuable resource worth reviewing in depth.103 Sellin summarizes Yan’s detailed disclosures: Li-Meng Yan, a Chinese virologist who says she fled the country after receiving threats due to her concerns about the origins of COVID-19 and accuses the Chinese Communist Party of a cover-up, claims that the novel coronavirus originated in a military laboratory overseen by the People’s Liberation Army.
An October 1, 2020, following the same line of reasoning, Sellin examined the question, “Is the COVID-19 Pandemic a Case of Vaccine Research Gone Wrong?”104 In this report, he looks at the intricacies of the engineering involved in creating SARS-CoV-2, turning the bat virus into one highly infectious in human beings, and suggests the virus was attenuated by Chinese research at the Wuhan Institute: In an attempt to dominate global vaccine research and development, China may have hurriedly and recklessly applied genetic engineering techniques, creating and leaking a highly infectious and deadly coronavirus causing a worldwide pandemic.
On October 8, 2020, Sellin addressed the second prepublication by Yan and her colleagues.105 He introduced his article with the following reasonable observation: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Chinese Communist Party supported by some Western scientists and a politically-motivated media have desperately tried to convince the world that the COVID-19 virus originated as a bat beta-coronavirus which underwent a natural mutation process and was then acquired by humans after exposure to infected animals. Undoubtedly, such subterfuge is meant to protect certain vested interests, including the potentially devastating political and economic consequences for China, global corporate and private investment in China and a negative effect on scientific collaboration and research funding of major Western research laboratories. After reviewing the article by Yan et al., Sellin concludes, “Dr. Yan’s second scientific article adds one more nail in the coffin of China’s false theory that the COVID-19 pandemic was naturally-occurring.” He does not address whether or not Yan et al. prove that the Chinese military necessarily released the virus as a bioweapon against the world and humanity. We do not wholly reject the possibility that China intentionally released SARS-CoV-2; but we are certain that the Communists arranged to make COVID-19 much more damaging to the world than it needed to be. They did this, among other ways, by withholding information about its existence and its origin in their own labs, by delaying the truth that it was highly infectious, and by shutting down most internal travel in China while flooding the world with airplane travelers who potentially carried the virus. Now we hear from Yan et al. with some confirmation by Col. Sellin that China also created fake viruses in a failed attempt to show that SARS-CoV-2 evolved in nature, thereby delaying a scientific and political understanding of the nature and origin of the virus. The great weight of evidence demonstrates that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered by researchers under the watchful eyes of the Chinese Communist Party and its military. Furthermore, the weight of evidence is that Fauci’s moral, political and financial help enabled the Chinese to develop SARS-CoV-2, ultimately unleashing COVID-19. The recipients of Fauci’s NIAID support and funding include Chinese collaborating with American researchers, individual Chinese researchers, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese universities, multiple business intermediaries and, in too many cases, individuals closely related to the Chinese armed forces. The next few sections are deeply disturbing in respect to Fauci and his Chinese connections.
Fauci and NIAID’S Relationships with the Chinese Military On September 6, 2020, Col. Sellin published a blog titled “Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s Military?”106 Sellin drew upon his military intelligence background to make observations on Fauci’s funding of the Chinese military. With his permission, here is the entire text of his blog, with the links included: Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s Military? by Col. Lawrence Sellin (Ret.) September 6, 2020 A disturbing pattern of cooperation between Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID and the Chinese military raises questions about technology transfer and the origins of the current COVID-19 pandemic. U.S. patent number 8933106 entitled “2-(4-substituted phenylamino) polysubstituted pyridine compounds as inhibitors of non-nucleoside HIV reverse transcriptase, preparation methods and uses thereof” is assigned to the Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Academy of Military Medical Sciences of China’s People’s Liberation Army. One of the inventors of that patent, Shibo Jiang, is a graduate of the First and Fourth Medical University of the People’s Liberation Army, Xi’an, China. He is a long-time collaborator with institutions associated with the Chinese military and, since 1997, a recipient of U.S. government research grants from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci. In one of the two scientific references used to support the above-mentioned patent “Discovery of diarylpyridine derivatives as novel non-nucleoside HIV-1 reverse transcriptase inhibitors,” Shibo Jiang is listed as a co-author, along with the four other inventors on the patent. In the Acknowledgments section of that scientific publication, which supports the patent application, three separate NIAID grants are cited, two of which, AI46221 and AI33066, were awarded to co-inventors on the patent, Shibo Jiang and Kuo-Hsiung Lee, respectively. Shibo Jiang and Kuo-Hsiung Lee are co-inventors on another U.S. patent, 8309602, also assigned to the Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Academy of Military Medical Sciences of China’s People’s Liberation Army. Although no scientific publications are listed in the 8309602 patent, you can compare the chemical compounds with those in “Diarylaniline Derivatives as a Distinct Class of HIV-1 Nonnucleoside Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors,” which has as co-authors all the co-inventors of the patent. That research was also supported by three separate NIAID grants, two of which, AI46221 and AI33066, were awarded to co-inventors on the patent, Shibo Jiang and Kuo-Hsiung Lee, respectively. NIAID funding of China’s military research programs does not appear to be restricted to those two patents.

Since 2004, Shibo Jiang has had scientific collaboration with Yusen Zhou, who was a professor at the State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity, Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology, Academy of Military Medical Sciences in Beijing. It is unclear whether Yusen Zhou also received his education at one of China’s military medical universities, but his early scientific work was associated with the Department of Infectious Disease, 81st Hospital of the People’s Liberation Army, Nanjing Military Command and the Fourth Medical University of People’s Liberation Army, Xi’an, Shibo Jiang’s alma mater. Shibo Jiang and Yusen Zhou are listed as co-inventors on at least eight U.S. patents, the references supporting those patents, for example, 9889194, was research funded by NIAID. Until his recent death, Yusen Zhou’s collaboration with Shibo Jiang continued into the COVID-19 pandemic, publishing a July 30, 2020 Science article together with institutions associated with China’s military. In a 2014 article, Shibo Jiang was working with the Institute of Biotechnology, Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Beijing. In 2017, he conducted research with the Translational Medicine Center, People’s Liberation Army Hospital No. 454 and the Department of Epidemiology, Medicinal Research Institute, Nanjing Military Command. Between 2012 and 2020, Shibo Jiang has published twelve scientific articles with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and eleven articles between 2013 and 2020 with the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Galveston Texas.

The UTMB has been designated one of the ten Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Diseases newly funded by a NIAID grant totaling $82 million. UTMB has at least two permanent faculty members trained at China’s Military Medical Universities, has had connections to or former employees from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Yusen Zhou’s State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity, Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology, Academy of Military Medical Sciences in Beijing, as well as other Chinese institutions. Another new center is the EcoHealth Alliance, a long-time collaborator with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which has been awarded $7.5 million. Given the history described above and before any new funding is allocated, an investigation and auditing of previous NIAID grants should be undertaken to determine exactly how much U.S. taxpayer money has benefitted China’s military. We Follow Up on Sellin’s Concerns about University of Texas and China After reading the report by Col. Sellin, we began our own search into the connections between China and the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Galveston. We quickly landed on an April 15, 2020 UTMB press release with the arresting title, “The Galveston National Lab and Wuhan Institute of Virology.”107 It was a bit of a shock to see such a proud headline pairing of the American lab with its Chinese equivalent. Here is are excerpts: April 16, 2020 — The Galveston National Laboratory, located on the campus of the University of Texas Medical Branch, is one of two university-based maximum containment (BSL-4) laboratories in the U.S. focused on the study of highly infectious diseases and the development of medical countermeasures. … The lab is part of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Biodefense Laboratory Network… Through our Biosafety Training Center, UTMB has provided laboratory safety and security training for scientists and operations personnel in more than 45 countries, including China. The relationship with Wuhan Institute of Virology and the GNL dates back to 2013 and has been facilitated through an ongoing dialogue co-sponsored by the Chinese Academies of Science and U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, with cooperation from the Chinese CDC and others. In recent years, we have provided training to scientists, biosafety and engineering professionals, including many from China. [bold is in the original]
For many years, the federal government has expressed a growing concern about the infiltration of American scientific programs by the Chinese students and scientists. It turns out that the Galveston National Lab at UTMB, the source of new funding by Fauci, has been an object of special concern because of its many ties to China. For example, a detailed Fox News report108 headlines, “Prominent university bio lab urged to reveal extent of relationship with Wuhan lab at center of coronavirus outbreak.”
As Fauci pumps money into research programs in America such as the Galveston National Lab and lesser programs, how hard will it be determine where that money ends up and how much information related to our national security will continue to flow to China?
Here is an excerpt from an April 24, 2020 letter from the General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Education insisting on more information from UTMB and its Galveston National Lab about its complex ties to China and its Wuhan Institute of Virology:109

Between June 6, 2014, and June 3, 2019, UT reported approximately twenty-four contracts with various Chinese state-owned universities and ten contracts with Huawei Technologies, all purportedly worth a reported total of $12,987,896. It is not clear, however, whether UT has in fact reported all gifts from or contracts with or relating to the Wuhan MCL, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and/or all other foreign sources, including agents and instrumentalities of the government of the Peoples’ Republic of China. Therefore, to verify UT’s compliance with Section 117, the Department requests that your Institution produce the following records…(underline added)
The letter from the General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Education to the University of Texas also demands information about almost two dozen specific Chinese businesses, universities and other entities. The list concludes with this ominous demand for information about the University, its Galveston National Lab—and its relationship to the Communist Party of China:
The Communist Party of China, its agents, employees, representatives, and instrumentalities (including but not limited to the agents, employees, representatives, and instrumentalities of entities such as the Communist Party of China’s Central Committee, Central Office, and Politburo Standing Committee; the General Office of the Central Military Commission; the Chinese Ministry of Education; the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology; the People’s Liberation Army; the Chinese Ministry of State Security; the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology; the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Chinese Ministry of National Defense; the Central Bank of the People’s Republic of China; and any People’s Republic of China province, autonomous region, or municipality).
Sellin was right to focus on new Fauci funding for the Galveston National Lab with its multiple and probably inextricable and at times obscure ties to China. If Fauci does not wish to lose his much-valued and carefully cultivated relationship with the Chinese Communist Party, then he may have picked the right place in America to award funding for viral research.
At this time, it is probably impossible to fund virus-related research at American universities and facilities while guaranteeing that the Chinese government will not be gaining information relevant to our national security and even to humanity’s survival.
Chinese Researchers, Now Suppressed, Identified the COVID-19 Outbreak with the Fauci-Sponsored Research Botao Xiao and Lei Xiao are Chinese scientists with numerous scientific publications. Botao Xiao110 received his Ph.D. from Northwestern University in 2011. He then became a postdoctoral Research Fellow at Harvard Medical School from 2011 to 2013. From 2017 to the present, he has been professor at the highly ranked South China University of Technology. Botao Xiao’s research was partly supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation of China. Lei Xiao is a published researcher at the Hubei University of Technology in Wuhan. In skeptical discussions of their important paper implicating the Wuhan Institute of Virology as the source of SARS-Cov-2 and ultimately leading back to Fauci, we have never seen any emphasis on their very significant credentials. In a publication on February 6, 2020 published on ResearchGate,111 Xiao and Xiao made the connections that we have been laboriously documenting between China’s capacity to create SARS-CoV-2 and research funded by Anthony Fauci and his Institute. The Chinese authors, one of whom lives in Wuhan, begin by rejecting the idea that the virus came from a bat at the city’s food market: “The probability was very low for the bats to fly [more than 900 kilometers] to the market. According to municipal reports and the testimonies of 31 residents and 28 visitors, the bat was never a food source in the city, and no bat was traded in the market.” With citations to the literature, Xiao and Xiao go to document that the Wuhan Institute was working with Chinese horseshoe bats as a source of coronaviruses that can cause severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV). They observed that the Wuhan “principle investigator,” Xing-Yi Ge,112 had already succeeded in making a SARS-CoV virus with “the potential for human emergence.” They concluded, “A direct speculation was that SARS-CoV or its derivative might leak from the laboratory.”
Xing-Yi Ge, whose work focused on making deadly viruses from bats, was cited by them as doing his original work in the Menachery et al. study. Thus, without intending to, Xiao and Xiao linked the new pandemic to the main “gain-of-function” project funded by Fauci as an American/Chinese collaboration. In other words, Fauci funding of the work of Xing-Yi Ge, who was a coauthor of the American/Chinese collaborative research by Menachery et al., probably led to Ge creating SARS-Cov-2 in the Wuhan lab from which it escaped.
Xiao and Xiao punctuate their conclusions, stating, “the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan” and they urge greater safety measures.
Xiao and Xiao also say, “In summary, somebody was entangled with the evolution of 2019-nCoV coronavirus.” The America “somebody” who was most “entangled” in the evolution of what turned out to SARS-CoV-2 was Anthony Fauci, the man who covertly continued to fund this research even after President Obama put a moratorium on it, the man who then overturned Obama’s moratorium on deadly virus research during President Trump’s first year in the presidency, the man who in October 2020 began more massive funding of this dangerous research in the United States at a university facility with multiple ties to the Chinese, the man who continues to lie by saying unequivocally the virus came out of nature without human engineering, and the man who now blames the epidemic on human progress interfering with nature rather than on himself for his direct, persistent and grandiose support and funding of the projects that led to the Chinese creating at and releasing SARS-CoV-2. Fearing that Xiao had been “disappeared” by the Chinese Communist Party, we searched the news and have found nothing about him since he reportedly sent a brief email to the Wall Street Journal113 on February 26, 2020 saying he had withdrawn his paper because it was “not supported by direct proofs.” No one should believe that his remarks were voluntary and we can only hope that he and his coauthor, brave and honorable scientists, are alive and well.

Fauci’s Self-Serving Misdirection and Grandiose Political Ambitions

In a recent “scientific” article in Cell authored with one of his assistants, Fauci lied, claiming without reservation or qualification that COVID-19 emerged from nature on its own and not from laboratory tinkering.114 Then he did more than ignore his own role in funding the engineering of coronaviruses with China, he blamed us—you and me, humanity—for causing the virus by disrupting nature:

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 is a deadly addition to the long list of microbial threats to the human species. It forces us to adapt, react, and reconsider the nature of our relationship to the natural world. Emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases are epiphenomena of human existence and our interactions with each other, and with nature. As human societies grow in size and complexity, we create an endless variety of opportunities for genetically unstable infectious agents to emerge into the unfilled ecologic niches we continue to create. There is nothing new about this situation, except that we now live in a human-dominated world in which our increasingly extreme alterations of the environment induce increasingly extreme backlashes from nature.
Science will surely bring us many life-saving drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics; however, there is no reason to think that these alone can overcome the threat of ever more frequent and deadly emergences of infectious diseases. Evidence suggests that SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 are only the latest examples of a deadly barrage of coming coronavirus and other emergences. The COVID-19 pandemic is yet another reminder, added to the rapidly growing archive of historical reminders, that in a hu-man-dominated world, in which our human activities represent aggressive, damaging, and unbalanced interactions with nature, we will increasingly provoke new disease emergences. We remain at risk for the foreseeable future. COVID-19 is among the most vivid wake-up calls in over a century. It should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature, even as we plan for nature’s inevitable, and always unexpected, surprises.
Fauci declares that COVID-19 is the result of the “human-dominated” world in which we live and he promotes an extreme progressive ideology that massive changes must be made in how we relate to nature. He wants a vast progressive political program to evaluate and change human activity on a global basis:

Disease emergence reflects dynamic balances and imbalances, within complex globally distributed ecosystems comprising humans, animals, pathogens, and the environment. Understanding these variables is a necessary step in controlling future devastating disease emergences.
Fauci blames humanity, this “human-dominated” environment, for causing COVID-19, when he is precisely the single man who contributed most to development of lethal, potentially epidemic coronaviruses. He is also among the men to most benefit from the catastrophe through the growth of his Institute and his close relationships to Bill Gates and the pharmaceutical industry.
Fauci’s stated position may be one of the most colossal misdirections in history—the American most responsible for enabling the Chinese Communists to engineer SARS-CoV-2 in their Wuhan Institute is blaming COVID-19 on humanity’s indiscretions in nature instead of his own nefarious activities in funding Chinese and American laboratories. Working with China, Fauci himself has funded and promoted taking viruses out of nature and engineering them to become pandemic viruses; but now he wants us to take his advice on transforming widespread human activity in nature to make us less disruptive!
Fauci is the Great Disruptor, whose work enabled China to unleash COVID-19 on the world. He is also among the great benefactors of the epidemic that he helped create, vastly increasing his influence and power, and the wealth of the institute he directs.
Now Fauci is announcing himself as radical totalitarian with his new political vision:
Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces, to water and sewer systems, to recreational and gatherings venues. In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases. Chief among them are reducing crowding at home, work, and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming. Equally important are ending global poverty, improving sanitation and hygiene, and reducing unsafe exposure to animals, so that humans and potential human pathogens have limited opportunities for contact. … Since we cannot return to ancient times, can we at least use lessons from those times to bend modernity in a safer direction? These are questions to be answered by all societies and their leaders, philosophers, builders, and thinkers and those involved in appreciating and influencing the environmental determinants of human health.
In Fauci’s world, concerns such as democracy, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, or liberty as a primary political principle, simply do not exist. Indeed, something even more basic, the importance of love and human relationship, seems beyond his concern or understanding. Jeffrey A. Tucker of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) finds Fauci’s vision as dangerous and appalling as we do.115 In a report titled, “Lockdown: The New Totalitarianism,” he characterizes Fauci’s philosophy and the lockdowns very eloquently:116 This is sheer fanaticism, a kind of insanity wrought by a wild vision of a one-dimensional world in which the whole of life is organized around disease avoidance. And there is an additional presumption here that our bodies (via the immune system) have not evolved alongside viruses for a million years. No recognition of that reality. Instead the sole goal is to make “social distancing” the national credo. Let us speak more plainly: what this really means is forced human separation. It means the dismantlement of markets, cities, in-person sports events, and the end of your right to move around freely. … The lockdowns are looking less like a gigantic error and more like the unfolding of a fanatical political ideology and policy experiment that attacks core postulates of civilization at their very root. It’s time we take it seriously and combat it with the same fervor with which a free people resisted all the other evil ideologies that sought to strip humanity of dignity and replace freedom with the terrifying dreams of intellectuals and their government sock puppets.

Time for Us to Act
President Trump and the US Congress, as well as the American people, need to know that Anthony Fauci—working in the service of global interests other than the United States—funded research that eventually unleashed COVID-19 upon the world. In addition, this same Fauci-funding has enabled China to possess the largest store of coronaviruses in the world, along with the technology to continue turning them into human-infecting agents. Meanwhile, despite its obvious dangers, Fauci continues to fund gain-of-function research that creates deadly viruses which can leak from labs or be released as biological weapons. It is time to fire Fauci, to investigate this entire disaster, and to consider what needs to be done to protect the US and the world from future lab-generated pandemic disasters, whether accidental or intentional.

ENDNOTES
1 Although I have written this report in its entirety and take full responsibility for it, I am deeply grateful for the contributions of my coauthor, Ginger Breggin. I could not have written this report without her daily research efforts and insights, including lengthy conversations, both for months before it was written and during the writing, as well as her editing, making it a truly joint effort. We are both grateful for critique of the report in early stages generously provided by Meryl Nass, MD. My interview of Meryl on The Dr. Peter Breggin Hour radio/TV can be found here: https://outlook.live.com/mail/0/inbox
2 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell 182, 1099-1091. https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2931012-6
3 Coronavirus Resource Center by Peter R. Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin. https://breggin.com/coronavirus-resource-center/
4 My August 30, 2020 report, COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society, submitted as a medical expert report for the injunction in federal court to stop the continuation of the emergency edict in Ohio. Our report and further information about the lawsuit are available at https://breggin.com/coronavirus/NEW-COVID-19-LEGAL-REPORT.pdf It is a comprehensive political and scientific document, 134 pages with hundreds of linked references. 5Special to Richland Source, 2020, September 2. Ohio Stands Up! files lawsuit to remove DeWine’s COVID-19 emergency order. Richland Source.https://www.richlandsource.com/news/ohio-stands-up-files-lawsuit-to-remove-dewines-covid-19-emergency-order/article_2da0891a-ec56-11ea-8eff-0fc7814ecd5e.html
6 Ohio Stands Up! https://www.ohiostandsup.org/
7 Dr. Breggin’s COVID-19 Totalitarianism Legal Report and Resource Center for the Case to Stop Emergency Declaration in Ohio and Elsewhere. https://breggin.com/dr-breggins-covid-19-totalitarianism-legal-report/

8 Thomas Renz interview by Peter Breggin, 2020, September 30, COVID-19 Lawsuit Update with Attorney Tom Renz on The Dr. Peter Breggin Hour, radio/TV on YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIaVZfYv0mI and Thomas Renz interview by Peter Breggin, 2020, September 2, COVID-19 Totalitarianism, The Dr. Peter Breggin Hour radio/TV on YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B671X_0OKIc

9 National Center for Health Statistics. 2020, October 10, Weekly Updates by select demographic and geographic characteristics: Provisional death counts for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), CDC, Under “Comorbidities.” https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

10 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2020, Sept. 10, COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios, CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
11 American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association, 2020, October 10, Children and COVID-19:State-Level Data Report. https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/children-and-covid-19-state-level-data-report/
12 Freed, M. et al., 2020, July 24. KFF Coronavirus Stats (based on CDC data up to July 22, 2020). https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/what-share-of-people-who-have-died-of-covid-19-are-65-and-older-and-how-does-it-vary-by-state/ CDC data at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/older-adults.html

13 Kulldorff, M., Gupta, S. and Bhattacharya, J. 2020, October 4, Great Barrington Pledge. https://gbdeclaration.org/
14 CDC, 2020, February 13, Common Human Coronaviruses, Centers for Disease Control. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/general-information.html

15 Zhang, F., (2004, July 2), Officials punished for SARS virus leak, China Daily. https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-07/02/content_344755.htm

16 Sørensen, M. D.; Sørensen, B.; Gonzalez-Dosal, R.; Melchjorsen, C. J.; Weibel, J.; Wang, J.; Jun, C. W.; Huanming, Y.; Kristensen, P. (May 2006). Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS): development of diagnostics and antivirals. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1067 (1): 500– 505.
https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1196/annals.1354.072

17 CDC, 2017, December 6, SARS Basics Fact Sheet, Centers for Disease Control. https://www.cdc.gov/sars/about/fs-sars.html

18 Walgate, R., 2004, April 25, SARS escaped Beijing lab twice: Laboratory safety at the Chinese Institute of Virology under close scrutiny, The Scientist.
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-beijing-lab-twice-50137

19 Zhang, F., (2004, July 2), Officials punished for SARS virus leak, China Daily. https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-07/02/content_344755.htm

20 Walgate, R., 2004, April 27, SARS escaped Beijing lab twice, Genome Biology, 4, spotlight-20040427-03 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-spotlight-20040427-03 https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/gb-spotlight-20040427-03
21 Kelly, M. & Cahlan, S., 2020, Was the new coronavirus accidentally released from a Wuhan lab? It’s doubtful., Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/01/was-new-coronavirus-accidentally-released-wuhan-lab-its-doubtful/
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 57
22 Rogin, J. 2020, April 14, State Department cables warned of safety issues at Wuhan lab studying bat coronaviruses, Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/state-department-cables-warned-safety-issues-wuhan-lab-studying-bat-coronaviruses/
23 News, 2019, December 17, Chinese institutes investigate pathogen outbreaks in lab workers, Nature. Students and staff at two research institutes have tested positive to the Brucella bacterium, which can lead to serious complications.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03863-z

24 Young, A., 2017, January 4, CDC keeps secret its mishaps with deadly germs, US Today.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/04/cdc-secret-lab-incidents-select-agents/95972126/

25 Marin, D., 2014, July 11, CDC Botched Handling of Deadly Flu Virus: The third recent mistake in handling of pathogens is a “wake-up call,” says Centers for Disease Control head, Scientific America. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cdc-botched-handling-of-deadly-flu-virus/

26 McNeil Jr., D., 2017, December 19, A Federal Ban on Making Lethal Viruses Is Lifted,
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/health/lethal-viruses-nih.html?_r=0
27 Bender, J., 2014, July 14, Here Are 5 Times Infectious Diseases Escaped from Laboratory Containment. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/5-terrifying-times-pandemics-e
28 Martin Furmanski MD Scientist’s Working Group on Chemical and Biologic Weapons Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation February 17, 2014. https://armscontrolcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Escaped-Viruses-final-2-17-14-copy.pdf
29 Bender, J. 2014, There are 5 times infectious diseases have escaped from laboratory containment, Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/5-terrifying-times-pandemics-escaped-from-laboratories-2014-7

30 Young, A. 2017, January 4, CDC keeps secret its mishaps with deadly germs, USA Today. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/04/cdc-secret-lab-incidents-select-agents/95972126/

31 Piper, K., 2019, March 20, How deadly pathogens have escaped the lab—over and over again, Vox. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/3/20/18260669/deadly-pathogens-escape-lab-smallpox-bird-flu
32 Husseini, S.,2020, May 5, The Long History of Accidental Laboratory Releases of Potential Pandemic Pathogens Is Being Ignored In the COVID-19 Media Coverage. Independent Science News. https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/the-long-history-of-accidental-laboratory-releases-of-potential-pandemic-pathogens/

33 Grady, D., 2019, April 5, Deadly Germ Research Is Shut Down at Army Lab Over Safety Concerns, The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/05/health/germs-fort-detrick-biohazard.html

34 Vineet D Menachery, Rachel L Graham, and Ralph S Baric. Jumping species—a mechanism for coronavirus persistence and survival Curr Opin Virol. 2017 Apr; 23: 1–7.Published online 2017 Mar 31. doi: 10.1016/j.coviro.2017.01.002 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5474123/
35Klotz, L. and Sylvester, E. The Consequences of a Lab Escape of a Potential Pandemic Pathogen
Front Public Health. 2014; 2: 116. Published online 2014 Aug 11. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2014.00116
PMCID: PMC4128296PMID: 25157347; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4128296/
36 Husseini, S.,2020, May 5, The Long History of Accidental Laboratory Releases of Potential Pandemic Pathogens Is Being Ignored In the COVID-19 Media Coverage, Independent Science News. https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/the-long-history-of-accidental-laboratory-releases-of-potential-pandemic-pathogens/

37 Thomson, B., 2020, China ‘appoints its top military bio-warfare expert to take over secretive virus lab in Wuhan’, sparking conspiracy theories that coronavirus outbreak is linked to Beijing’s army. Daily Mail. A small-print note states it was published February 2020, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8003713/China-appoints-military-bio-weapon-expert-secretive-virus-lab-Wuhan.html

38 Sen, S. , 2020, April 30. How China locked down internally for COVID-19, but pushed foreign travel
The Economic Times. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/blogs/Whathappensif/how-china-locked-down-internally-for-covid-19-but-pushed-foreign-travel/

39 Levenson, M., 2020, Jan. 22, Scale of China’s Wuhan Shutdown Is Believed to Be Without Precedent. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/world/asia/coronavirus-quarantines-history.html. January 23, 2020 is often cited in the press as the day of the shutdown of Wuhan, but the actual date, as indicated in this article, was the Thursday before the news came out, or January 16, 2020.
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 58
40 BBC.com., 2020, August 27, Coronavirus: Flights within China to ‘fully recover’ next month, BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53927980
41 Nebehay, S., 2020, February 3, WHO chief says widespread travel bans not needed to beat China virus, Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who-idUSKBN1ZX1H3

42 Cheng, E. 2020, February 4. China’s aviation authority to allow more foreign flights after the U.S. bans Chinese carriers, CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/04/china-to-allow-more-foreign-flights-after-us-bans-chinese-carriers.html

43 Source of all data: Eder, S. et al., published April 4, 2020 and Updated April 15, 2020; 430,000 People Have Traveled from China to U.S. Since Coronavirus Surfaced, New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/us/coronavirus-china-travel-restrictions.html

44 OPride Staff, 2017, May 11, he case against WHO director-general candidate Tedros, OPride. https://www.opride.com/2017/05/11/case-director-general-candidate-tedros-adhanom/
45 Ghitis, F., 2017, October 25. Another week, another scandal at the United Nations, Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2017/10/25/another-week-another-scandal-at-the-united-nations/

46 Chakraborty, B. 2020, March 25, WHO chief’s questionable past comes into focus following coronavirus response, Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/world/who-chief-tedros-questionable-past-coronavirus

47 McNeil Jr., D., 2017, May 13, Candidate to Lead the W.H.O. Accused of Covering Up Epidemics, New York Times.

48 Ross, C., 2020, March 24, “Fully Complicit” in the terrible suffering: Health professionals accused him of covering up the previous epidemic to shield two African regimes. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/fully-complicit-terrible-suffering-tedros-adhanom-ghebreyesus-blamed-2017-cholera
49Higgins-Dunn, N. 2020, February 26,2020. Travel restrictions ‘irrelevant’ if coronavirus becomes a pandemic, top US health official says, CNBC.https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/26/fauci-travel-restrictions-irrelevant-if-coronavirus-becomes-a-pandemic.html

50 White House Briefing, 2020, March 25. Remarks by President Trump, Vice President Pence, and Members of the Coronavirus Task Force in Press Briefing. The White House.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-briefing-11/
51 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell 182, 1099-1091. https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2931012-6
52 Areddy, J., 2020, updated May 26, China Rules Out Animal Market and Lab as Coronavirus Origin
The Wallstreet Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-rules-out-animal-market-and-lab-as-coronavirus-origin-11590517508

53 Cohen, J. Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally. 2020, January 26, Science Magazine. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market-may-not-be-source-novel-virus-spreading-globally

54 St. Cavish, C., 2020, March 11. Commentary: No, China’s fresh food markets did not cause coronavirus, Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2020-03-11/coronavirus-china-wet-markets
55 Page, J. et. al., 2020, March 6, Missteps, The Wallstreet Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-it-all-started-chinas-early-coronavirus-missteps-11583508932
56 Xiao, B. and Xiao, L., 2020, February, The possible origins of 2019-nCoV coronavirus. https://web.archive.org/web/20200214144447/https:/www.researchgate.net/publication/339070128_The_possible origins_of_2019-nCoV_coronavirus

57 Mishra, A. and Mondal, D. 2020, April 25. Corona leaked likely from Wuhan Institute of Virology: Experts, Sunday Guardian Live. https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/corona-leaked-likely-wuhan-institute-virology-experts
58 Breggin, P. and Breggin, G. Written report and video, April 14 & 15, 2020, 2015 Scientific Paper Proves US & Chinese Scientists Collaborated to Create Coronavirus that Can Infect Humans. Published on http://www.breggin.com and on Dr. Breggin’s YouTube Channel. Find both at: https://breggin.com/us-chinese-scientists-collaborate-on-coronavirus/
59 Breggin, P. and Breggin, G. Written report and video, April 14 & 15, 2020, 2015 Scientific Paper Proves US & Chinese Scientists Collaborated to Create Coronavirus that Can Infect Humans. Published on http://www.breggin.com and on Dr. Breggin’s YouTube Channel. Find both at: https://breggin.com/us-chinese-scientists-collaborate-on-coronavirus/
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 59
60 Owermohle, S., 2020, April 27, 07:02 PM EDT, Trump cuts U.S. research on bat-human virus transmission over China ties, Politico. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/27/trump-cuts-research-bat-human-virus-china-213076
61 Breggin, P. and Breggin, G. 2020, May 1, A report and a video, Trump Cancels Funding of US/China Research Making Epidemic Viruses. On http://www.breggin.com. Find both https://breggin.com/trump-cancels-funding-of-us-china-research-making-epidemic-viruses/

62 Aizenman, N., 2020, April 29, Why the U.S. Government Stopped Funding A Research Project on Bats and Coronaviruses, NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/29/847948272/why-the-u-s-government-stopped-funding-a-research-project-on-bats-and-coronaviru

63 Williams, S., 2020, April 28, NIH Cancels Funding for Bat Coronavirus Research Project. The Scientist.
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/nih-cancels-funding-for-bat-coronavirus-research-project-67486

64 Chakraborty, B. & Diaz, A., 2020, July 10, EXCLUSIVE: Chinese virologist accuses Beijing of coronavirus cover-up, flees Hong Kong: ‘I know how they treat whistleblowers’. Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinese-virologist-coronavirus-cover-up-flee-hong-kong-whistleblower
65 Sellin, L., 2020, August 4, Refugee Hong Kong Virologist Links COVID-19 to Chinese Military Laboratory, CCNS. https://ccnationalsecurity.org/refugee-hong-kong-virologist-links-covid-19-to-chinese-military-laboratory laboratory /
66 Sellin, L. , 2020, September 6, Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s Military? CCNS. https://ccnationalsecurity.org/did-faucis-nih-institute-financially-assist-chinas-military/

67 NIH News Release, 2020, August 27, NIH establishes Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Diseases. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-establishes-centers-research-emerging-infectious-diseases
68 Vineet D Menachery, Boyd L Yount Jr, Kari Debbink1, Sudhakar Agnihothram, Lisa E Gralinski, Jessica A Plante, Rachel L Graham, Trevor Scobey, Xing-Yi Ge, Eric F Donaldson, Scott H Randell, Antonio Lanzavecchia, Wayne A Marasco, Zhengli-Li Shi & Ralph S Baric. A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence. Nature Medicine, 21 (12), 1508-1514. December 2015. With follow-up letter included: https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985 https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.3985
69 Vineet D Menachery 1, Boyd L Yount Jr 1, Amy C Sims 1, Kari Debbink 2, Sudhakar S Agnihothram 3, Lisa E Gralinski 1, Rachel L Graham 1, Trevor Scobey 1, Jessica A Plante 1, Scott R Royal 1, Jesica Swanstrom 1, Timothy P Sheahan 1, Raymond J Pickles 4, Davide Corti 5, Scott H Randell 6, Antonio Lanzavecchia 7, Wayne A Marasco 8, Ralph S Baric 9. (2016) SARS-like WIVl-CoV poised for human emergence. Proc Natl Acad Sci US A 113, 3048-53 (2016). Note that the original novel virus is now called WIV1-CoV. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26976607/ Also obtainable at https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/113/11/3048.full.pdf
70 Qiu, J., 2020, June 1, How China’s ‘Bat Woman’ Hunted Down Viruses from SARS to the New Coronavirus, Scientific American. A comment attached to the article defends China: “Editor’s Note (4/24/20): This article was originally published online on March 11. It has been updated for inclusion in the June 2020 issue of Scientific American and to address rumors that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from Shi Zhengli’s lab in China.” https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-chinas-bat-woman-hunted-down-viruses-from-sars-to-the-new-coronavirus1/
71 Xing-Yi Ge, Jia-Lu Li1 , Xing-Lou Yang, Aleksei A. Chmura , Guangjian Zhu , Jonathan H. Epstein , Jonna K. Mazet, Ben Hu , Wei Zhang , Cheng Peng , Yu-Ji Zhang , Chu-Ming Luo , Bing Tan , Ning Wang , Yan Zhu , Gary Crameri , Shu-Yi Zhang , Lin-Fa Wang, Peter Daszak & Zheng-Li Shi. Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature, 503 (28), November 2013, pp. 535 ff. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12711
72 Xing-Yi Ge, Jia-Lu Li1 , Xing-Lou Yang, Aleksei A. Chmura , Guangjian Zhu , Jonathan H. Epstein , Jonna K. Mazet, Ben Hu , Wei Zhang , Cheng Peng , Yu-Ji Zhang , Chu-Ming Luo , Bing Tan , Ning Wang , Yan Zhu , Gary Crameri , Shu-Yi Zhang , Lin-Fa Wang, Peter Daszak & Zheng-Li Shi. Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature, 503 (28), November 2013, pp. 535 ff. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12711

73 Subbaraman, N., 2020, August 21, ‘Heinous!’: Coronavirus researcher shut down for Wuhan-lab link slams new funding restrictions: Peter Daszak, president of the research organization EcoHealth Alliance, describes how he has been caught in political cross-hairs over his partnership with a virology lab in China, Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02473-4
74 EcoHealth Alliance Partners. Undated, retrieved October 2, 2020 from https://www.ecohealthalliance.org/partners
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 60
75 Guterl, F., 2020, April 27. Dr. Fauci Backed Controversial Wuhan Lab with U.S. Dollars for Risky Coronavirus Research, Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741

76 Subbaraman, N., 2020, August 21, ‘Heinous!’: Coronavirus researcher shut down for Wuhan-lab link slams new funding restrictions: Peter Daszak, president of the research organization EcoHealth Alliance, describes how he has been caught in political cross-hairs over his partnership with a virology lab in China, Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02473-4
77 Press Release, 2010, Global Health Leaders Launch Decade of Vaccines Collaboration. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2010/12/Global-Health-Leaders-Launch-Decade-of-Vaccines-Collaboration
78 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell 182, 1099-1091. https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2931012-6

79 Thomson, B., 2020, China ‘appoints its top military bio-warfare expert to take over secretive virus lab in Wuhan’, sparking conspiracy theories that coronavirus outbreak is linked to Beijing’s army. Daily Mail. A small-print note states: “PUBLISHED: 06:39 EDT, 14 February 2020 | UPDATED: 13:41 EDT, 14 February 2020,” which is when we first found out about it—long before the new article tries to indicate with its fresh headline. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8003713/China-appoints-military-bio-weapon-expert-secretive-virus-lab-Wuhan.html
80 Obama, Barack, 2014, October 17, From the White House, Doing Diligence to Assess the Risks and Benefits of Life Sciences Gain-of-Function Research https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-diligence-assess-risks-and-benefits-life-sciences-gain-function-research

81 Branswell, H., 2015, November 9. SARS-like virus in bats shows potential to infect humans, study finds, STAT.https://www.statnews.com/2015/11/09/sars-like-virus-bats-shows-potential-infect-humans-study-finds/

82 Butler, 2015, April 12, engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research, Nature.
https://www.nature.com/news/engineered-bat-virus-stirs-debate-over-risky-research-1.18787

83 NIH Director, 2017, December 19, NIH Lifts Funding Pause on Gain-of-Function Research, Office of the Director of NIH. https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/nih-lifts-funding-pause-gain-function-research; also, Schnirring, L. 2017, December 19. Feds lift gain-of-function research pause, offer guidance, CIDRAP News. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2017/12/feds-lift-gain-function-research-pause-offer-guidance. 83Akst, J., 2015, Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate, The Scientist. https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/lab-made-coronavirus-triggers-debate-34502

84 Schnirring, L. 2017, December 19. Feds lift gain-of-function research pause, offer guidance, CIDRAP News. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2017/12/feds-lift-gain-function-research-pause-offer-guidance

85 McNeil Jr., D., 2017, December 19, A Federal Ban on Making Lethal Viruses Is Lifted,
New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/health/lethal-viruses-nih.html?_r=0
86 Burki, T. Ban on gain-of-function studies ends. The US moratorium on gain-of-function experiments has been rescinded, but scientists are split over the benefits—and risks—of such studies, http://www.thelancet.com/infection Vol 18 February 2018, pp. 148-9. https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S1473-3099%2818%2930006-9
87 McNeil Jr., D., 2017, December 19, A Federal Ban on Making Lethal Viruses Is Lifted, New York Times.

88 Lin, C. 2020, April 22. Why US outsourced bat virus research to Wuhan US-funded $3.7 million project approved by Trump’s Covid-19 guru Dr Anthony Fauci in 2015 after US ban imposed on ‘monster-germ’ research, Asia Times. https://asiatimes.com/2020/04/why-us-outsourced-bat-virus-research-to-wuhan/

89 Owen, G. 2020, April 11, Wuhan lab was performing coronavirus experiments on bats from the caves where the disease is believed to have originated – with a £3m grant, Daily Mail Online. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8211257/Wuhan-lab-performing-experiments-bats-coronavirus-caves.html
90 https://www.independentsentinel.com/report-fauci-funded-gof-research-in-wuhan-due-to-incompetence-at-cdc/
91 Akst, J., 2015, Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate, The Scientist. https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/lab-made-coronavirus-triggers-debate-34502
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 61
92 For a more detailed analysis of the corruption of COVID-19 science, see Breggin, P. and Breggin, G., 2020, August 3, Why COVID-19 Clinical Trials Cannot Be Trusted: The “Gold Standard” for Science Is Gold for the Drug Companies, http://www.breggin.com. Find at: https://breggin.com/why-covid-19-clinical-trials-cannot-be-trusted/

93 Chakraborty, B. & Diaz, A., 2020, July 10, EXCLUSIVE: Chinese virologist accuses Beijing of coronavirus cover-up, flees Hong Kong: ‘I know how they treat whistleblowers’. Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinese-virologist-coronavirus-cover-up-flee-hong-kong-whistleblower

94 Bowen, E. 2020, July 10. Chinese virologist in hiding after accusing Beijing of coronavirus cover-up, New York Post. https://nypost.com/2020/07/10/chinese-virologist-flees-after-accusing-beijing-of-covid-19-cover-up/
95 Carlson, T., 2020, September 19, TV appearance on Tucker Carlson of Li-Meng Yan, Fox News Channel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFlqXPl_hZQ
96 Yan, Li-Meng Yan ; Kang, Shu; Guan, Jie; Hu, Shanchang. (2020, September 14). Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route. Prepublication. http://breggin.com/coronavirus/The_Yan_Report.pdf. To confirm the date it was put up and to follow the progress of the paper through publication, go to here: https://zenodo.org/record/4028830#.X2R2T5NKiuV
97 Becker, M.M. et al. Synthetic recombinant bat SARS-like coronavirus is infectious in cultured cells and in mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105, 19944-9 (2008). https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C33&q=Becker%2C+M.M.+et+al.+Synthetic+recombinant+bat+SARS-like+coronavirus+is+infectious+in+cultured+cells+and+in+mice.+Proc+Natl+Acad+Sci+U+S+A+105%2C+19944-9+%282008%29.&btnG=
98 Naveira, P., 2020, August 4, Li-Meng Yan: Coronavirus was developed in Chinese military lab, AS English. https://en.as.com/en/2020/08/03/latest_news/1596459547_022260.html
99 Yan, Li-Meng; Kang, Shu; Guan, Jie; Hu, Shanchang. 2020, October 8, SARS-CoV-2 Is an Unrestricted Bioweapon: A Truth Revealed through Uncovering a Large-Scale, Organized Scientific Fraud. Prepublication. https://zenodo.org/record/4073131#.X4OpJOaSk2x “You can cite all versions by using the DOI 10.5281/zenodo.4073130. This DOI represents all versions, and will always resolve to the latest one.”

100 Sellin, L. (undated) Brief bio on the CCNS website states, “ Lawrence Sellin is a retired U.S. Army Reserve colonel with branch qualifications and assignments in Special Forces, Infantry, Chemical and Medical Services. He served in Afghanistan and Iraq and participated in a humanitarian mission to West Africa. Sellin holds a Master’s Degree in Strategic Studies from the U.S. Army War College and received training in Arabic, Kurdish and French from the Defense Language Institute. He had a distinguished civilian career in medical research and international business after completing a Ph.D. in physiology. Sellin retired from IBM, where he was a manager and subject matter expert in telecommunications and command and control systems. He is the author of numerous national security articles.” https://ccnationalsecurity.org/team/col-lawrence-sellin-ret/
101 Sellin, L., Blogs on CCNS. https://ccnationalsecurity.org/?s=sellin+blogs
102 Sellin, L., 2020, August 4, Refugee Hong Kong Virologist Links COVID-19 to Chinese Military Laboratory, CCNS. https://ccnationalsecurity.org/refugee-hong-kong-virologist-links-covid-19-to-chinese-military-laboratory laboratory /
103 Jones, K., 2020, August 1, [C-19 Disclosure] Who, When, Where, What, How, Why (from Dr. Li Meng Yan), Aug 1, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6lNtUBiqAw&feature=youtu.be. This is a very valuable resource that in great detail discusses the engineering of SARS-CoV-2 by the Chinese Communist Party and its militaryhttps://en.as.com/en/2020/08/03/latest_news/1596459547_022260.html
104 Sellin, L., 2020, October 1, Is the COVID-19 Pandemic a Case of Vaccine Research Gone Wrong? CCNS. https://ccnationalsecurity.org/is-the-covid-19-pandemic-a-case-of-vaccine-research-gone-wrong/

105 Sellin, L., 2020, October 9. Dr. Li-Meng Yan reveals China’s fake science and the COVID-19 cover-up, WION. https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/dr-li-meng-yan-reveals-chinas-fake-science-and-the-covid-19-cover-up-333982
106 Sellin, L. , 2020, September 6, Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s Military? CCNS. https://ccnationalsecurity.org/did-faucis-nih-institute-financially-assist-chinas-military/ Permission to reproduce this blog in its entirely was kindly given by the author, Col. Lawrence Sellin.

107 In the News, 2020, April 16. The Galveston National Lab and Wuhan Institute of Virology, Galveston National Laboratory, University of Texas Medical Branch.
https://www.utmb.edu/gnl/news/2020/04/16/the-galveston-national-lab-and-wuhan-institute-of-virology
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 62
108 Lynch, D. and McKay, H., 2020, May 1, Prominent university bio lab urged to reveal extent of relationship with Wuhan lab at center of coronavirus outbreak. https://www.foxnews.com/us/university-texas-biolab-wuhan-connection
109 Rubinstein, R., Principal Deputy General Counsel, 2020, April 24, Letter to James B. Milliken, Chancellor the University of Texas System: Notice of 20 U.S.C. § 1011f Investigation and Record Request/University of Texas System from U.S. Department of Education. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/leg/ut-apr24-2020.pdf
110 Botao Xiao Biography, through 2017, School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of Technology. http://www2.scut.edu.cn/biology_en/2017/0614/c5951a169022/page.htm
111 Xiao, B. and Xiao, L., 2020, February, The possible origins of 2019-nCoV coronavirus, Research Gate. [removed from the website] https://chanworld.org/wp-content/uploads/wpforo/default_attachments/1581810860-447056518-Originsof2019-NCoV-XiaoB-
112 Ge XY, Li JL, Yang XL, et al. Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature 2013; 503(7477): 535-8. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12711?fbclid=IwAR1oxB4btiYVmSzncbfTPLtCEORxqfdJygsxayF7cklj3my1pUF1vC-PUnU
113 Areddy, J. 2020, March 5, Coronavirus epidemic draws scrutiny to labs handling deadly pathogens. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-epidemic-draws-scrutiny-to-labs-handling-deadly-pathogens-11583349777
114 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell 182, 1099-1091. https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2820%2931012-6
115 Tucker, J.A. interview, 2020, October 21, Remarkable New Insights On COVID-19, The Dr. Peter Breggin Hour, radio/TV at https://www.youtube.com/user/PeterBreggin
116 Tucker, J. A., 2020, October 1, Lockdowns: The New Totalitarianism, American Institute for Economic Research (AIER). https://www.aier.org/article/lockdown-the-new-totalitarianism/