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

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 SARSCoV-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.

(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

(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

(3) The Wuhan Institute is a center of China’s biowarfare/biodefense capacity and itsdirector is China’s top military expert in biowarfare, and yet Fauci shared advanced biowarfarerelated 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 thiswhile 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.

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.

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:

Current CDC Best Estimates for Infection Fatality Ratio
0-19 years: 0.00003 (0.003%) or 3 in 100,000
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 8
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
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
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-todetect, 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

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
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
he 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:
56We 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
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
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
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
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
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
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 SARSCoV-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
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 retiredmilitary 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 SARSCoV-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 SARSCoV 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
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 selfserving 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
73 was listed as an author.
Daszak and his organization is funded not only by Fauci’s NIAID but many other NIHaffiliated organizations, the CDC, the National Science Foundation, and other government
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:
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.
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.

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

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-offunction” 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:

Dependency on Communists, trusting Communists, what could possibly go
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
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
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,
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

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
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 38
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
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
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 39
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
The thrust of the highly technical publication is that China not only created SARSCoV-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
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 40
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.

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
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
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
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 42
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
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 43
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
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 KuoHsiung 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
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 Centersfor 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
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.”
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 cosponsored by the Chinese Academies of Science and U.S. National Academies of
Science, Engineering and Medicine, with cooperation from the Chinese CDC and
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
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
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 FauciSponsored 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:

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 human-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
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.

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 onedimensional 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 Faucifunding 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.

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:
2 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell
182, 1099-1091.
3 Coronavirus Resource Center by Peter R. Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin.
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 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.
6 Ohio Stands Up!
7 Dr. Breggin’s COVID-19 Totalitarianism Legal Report and Resource Center for the Case to Stop Emergency
Declaration in Ohio and Elsewhere.
8Thomas 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. and
Thomas Renz interview by Peter Breggin, 2020, September 2, COVID-19 Totalitarianism, The Dr. Peter Breggin
Hour radio/TV on YouTube,
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.”
10 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2020, Sept. 10, COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios,
11 American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association, 2020, October 10, Children and
COVID-19:State-Level Data Report.
Freed, M. et al., 2020, July 24. KFF Coronavirus Stats (based on CDC data up to July 22, 2020). CDC data at
13 Kulldorff, M., Gupta, S. and Bhattacharya, J. 2020, October 4, Great Barrington Pledge.
14 CDC, 2020, February 13, Common Human Coronaviruses, Centers for Disease Control.
15 Zhang, F., (2004, July 2), Officials punished for SARS virus leak, China Daily.
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.
17 CDC, 2017, December 6, SARS Basics Fact Sheet, Centers for Disease Control.
18Walgate, R., 2004, April 25, SARS escaped Beijing lab twice: Laboratory safety at the Chinese Institute of
Virology under close scrutiny, The Scientist.
19 Zhang, F., (2004, July 2), Officials punished for SARS virus leak, China Daily.
20Walgate, R., 2004, April 27, SARS escaped Beijing lab twice, Genome Biology, 4, spotlight-20040427-03 (2004).
21 Kelly, M. & Cahlan, S., 2020, Was the new coronavirus accidentally released from a Wuhan lab? It’s doubtful.,
Washington Post.
Breggin and Breggin Report, p. 57
22Rogin, J. 2020, April 14, State Department cables warned of safety issues at Wuhan lab studying bat
coronaviruses, Washington Post.
23News, 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
24Young, A., 2017, January 4, CDC keeps secret its mishaps with deadly germs, US Today.
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.
26McNeil Jr., D., 2017, December 19, A Federal Ban on Making Lethal Viruses Is Lifted,
New York Times.
27 Bender, J., 2014, July 14, Here Are 5 Times Infectious Diseases Escaped from Laboratory Containment. Business
28 Martin Furmanski MD Scientist’s Working Group on Chemical and Biologic Weapons Center for Arms Control
and Nonproliferation February 17, 2014.
29 Bender, J. 2014, There are 5 times infectious diseases have escaped from laboratory containment, Business
30 Young, A. 2017, January 4, CDC keeps secret its mishaps with deadly germs, USA Today.
31 Piper, K., 2019, March 20, How deadly pathogens have escaped the lab—over and over again, Vox.
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.
33 Grady, D., 2019, April 5, Deadly Germ Research Is Shut Down at Army Lab Over Safety Concerns, The New
York Times.
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
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;
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.
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,
38Sen, S. , 2020, April 30. How China locked down internally for COVID-19, but pushed foreign travel
The Economic Times.
39Levenson, M., 2020, Jan. 22, Scale of China’s Wuhan Shutdown Is Believed to Be Without Precedent. New
York Times. 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, 2020, August 27, Coronavirus: Flights within China to ‘fully recover’ next month, BBC News.
41 Nebehay, S., 2020, February 3, WHO chief says widespread travel bans not needed to beat China virus, Reuters.
42 Cheng, E. 2020, February 4. China’s aviation authority to allow more foreign flights after the U.S. bans Chinese
carriers, CNBC.
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.

44 OPride Staff, 2017, May 11, he case against WHO director-general candidate Tedros, OPride.

The case against WHO director-general candidate Tedros Adhanom

45 Ghitis, F., 2017, October 25. Another week, another scandal at the United Nations, Washington Post.
46 Chakraborty, B. 2020, March 25, WHO chief’s questionable past comes into focus following coronavirus
response, Fox News.
47 McNeil Jr., D., 2017, May 13, Candidate to Lead the W.H.O. Accused of Covering Up Epidemics, New York

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.
49Higgins-Dunn, N. 2020, February 26,2020. Travel restrictions ‘irrelevant’ if coronavirus becomes a pandemic,
top US health official says, CNBC.
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.
51 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell
182, 1099-1091.
52 Areddy, J., 2020, updated May 26, China Rules Out Animal Market and Lab as Coronavirus Origin
The Wallstreet Journal.
53 Cohen, J. Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally. 2020, January 26, Science
St. Cavish, C., 2020, March 11. Commentary: No, China’s fresh food markets did not cause coronavirus, Los
Angeles Times.
55 Page, J. et. al., 2020, March 6, Missteps, The Wallstreet Journal.
56 Xiao, B. and Xiao, L., 2020, February, 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.
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 and
on Dr. Breggin’s YouTube Channel. Find both at:
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 and
on Dr. Breggin’s YouTube Channel. Find both at:
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.
61Breggin, P. and Breggin, G. 2020, May 1, A report and a video, Trump Cancels Funding of US/China Research
Making Epidemic Viruses. On Find both
62 Aizenman, N., 2020, April 29, Why the U.S. Government Stopped Funding A Research Project on Bats and
Coronaviruses, NPR.
63Williams, S., 2020, April 28, NIH Cancels Funding for Bat Coronavirus Research Project. The Scientist.
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.
65 Sellin, L., 2020, August 4, Refugee Hong Kong Virologist Links COVID-19 to Chinese Military Laboratory,
laboratory /
66Sellin, L. , 2020, September 6, Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s Military? CCNS.

Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s Military?

67 NIH News Release, 2020, August 27, NIH establishes Centers for Research in 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
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. Also obtainable at
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.”
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.
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.
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.
74 EcoHealth Alliance Partners. Undated, retrieved October 2, 2020 from


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.
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.
77 Press Release, 2010, Global Health Leaders Launch Decade of Vaccines Collaboration. Bill and Melinda Gates
78 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell
182, 1099-1091.
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.
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
81Branswell, H., 2015, November 9. SARS-like virus in bats shows potential to infect humans, study finds,
82Butler, 2015, April 12, engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research, Nature.
83 NIH Director, 2017, December 19, NIH Lifts Funding Pause on Gain-of-Function Research, Office of the Director of NIH.; also, Schnirring,
L. 2017, December 19. Feds lift gain-of-function research pause, offer guidance, CIDRAP News.
83Akst, J., 2015, Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate, The Scientist.
84 Schnirring, L. 2017, December 19. Feds lift gain-of-function research pause, offer guidance, CIDRAP News.
85McNeil Jr., D., 2017, December 19, A Federal Ban on Making Lethal Viruses Is Lifted,
New York Times.
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, Vol 18
February 2018, pp. 148-9.
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.
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.
91Akst, J., 2015, Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate, The Scientist.
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, Find at:
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.
94 Bowen, E. 2020, July 10. Chinese virologist in hiding after accusing Beijing of coronavirus cover-up, New York
95 Carlson, T., 2020, September 19, TV appearance on Tucker Carlson of Li-Meng Yan, Fox News Channel.

96 Yan, Li-Meng Yan ; Kang, Shu; Guan, Jie; Hu, Shanchang. (2020, September 14). Unusual Features of the SARSCoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation
of Its Probable Synthetic Route. Prepublication. To confirm
the date it was put up and to follow the progress of the paper through publication, go to here:
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).
98 Naveira, P., 2020, August 4, Li-Meng Yan: Coronavirus was developed in Chinese military lab, AS English.
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. “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.”
101 Sellin, L., Blogs on CCNS.
102 Sellin, L., 2020, August 4, Refugee Hong Kong Virologist Links COVID-19 to Chinese Military Laboratory,
laboratory /
103Jones, K., 2020, August 1, [C-19 Disclosure] Who, When, Where, What, How, Why (from Dr. Li Meng Yan),
Aug 1, 2020. This is a very valuable
resource that in great detail discusses the engineering of SARS-CoV-2 by the Chinese Communist Party and its
104 Sellin, L., 2020, October 1, Is the COVID-19 Pandemic a Case of Vaccine Research Gone Wrong? CCNS.

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.
106 Sellin, L. , 2020, September 6, Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s Military? CCNS.

Did Fauci’s NIH Institute Financially Assist China’s 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.
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.
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.
110 Botao Xiao Biography, through 2017, School of Biology and Biological Engineering, South China University of
111 Xiao, B. and Xiao, L., 2020, February, The possible origins of 2019-nCoV coronavirus, Research Gate. [removed
from the website]
Originsof2019-NCoV-XiaoB112 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.
113 Areddy, J. 2020, March 5, Coronavirus epidemic draws scrutiny to labs handling deadly pathogens. Wall Street
114 Morens, D. and Fauci, A. (2020, September 3). Emerging Pandemic Diseases: How We Got to COVID-19. Cell
182, 1099-1091.
115 Tucker, J.A. interview, 2020, October 21, Remarkable New Insights On COVID-19, The Dr. Peter Breggin
Hour, radio/TV at
116 Tucker, J. A., 2020, October 1, Lockdowns: The New Totalitarianism, American Institute for Economic Research

Toon meer

Related Articles

Geef een reactie

Het e-mailadres wordt niet gepubliceerd. Vereiste velden zijn gemarkeerd met *

Bekijk ook
Back to top button