The Wuhan Cover-Up: Scientists Lied as People Died

Four years later, we know that Anthony Fauci conspired with virologists to deceive the public and label critics as conspiracy theorists.

15 minute read

Dear readers, I am writing today from Canada where I’ve flown to be interviewed for a documentary about the damage the COVID pandemic caused to our society. I had my butt in a chair for an entire day answering questions from producer Vanessa Dylyn and trying to sound clever about how Anthony Fauci and other scientists covered up the possibility of a lab accident in Wuhan, and how the government misled us about the safety and efficacy of the COVID vaccines, lied about the side effects of lockdowns, and did a 180° reversal on government findings that masks do little to stop the spread of viruses.

So much has happened since December 31, 2019, when the World Health Organization was notified of a new pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan, China. The director sent me 6 pages of questions that we went over during the interview, but since most of them concern the cover-up of a possible Wuhan lab accident, I decided to put that down into an article.

Much of what we learned about the Wuhan cover-up leaked out over time, because Anthony Fauci and others in the government have been hiding information from the public and virologists such as Scripps Research’s Kristian Andersen have been lying to a complicit media. We only learned last July, for example, that Andersen didn’t believe the conclusions from the “Proximal Origins” paper he published in Nature Medicine that denigrated the possibility of a Wuhan lab accident.

“Natural selection and accidental release are both plausible scenarios,” Andersen messaged several scientists, before then publishing the “Proximal Origins” paper that concluded a Wuhan lab accident was not plausible. Andersen then trumpeted that paper to reporters.

Instead of going over how this all unfolded over almost four years, I decided to lay out what happened, based on what we now know. It’s been a long, tough journey.

---

A month after the pandemic’s outbreak in Wuhan, China, on New Year’s Eve 2019, a press officer at the National Institutes of Health emailed pandemic talking points to Anthony Fauci, who was leading the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Fauci’s NIAID oversaw a large program on biodefense and research on coronaviruses—the type of virus causing the pandemic, and which scientists abbreviate as “CoV.” The press officer noted that Fauci’s NIAID funded many of the world’s coronavirus experts, including Peter Daszak of the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina, and Ian Lipkin of Columbia University.

“EcoHealth group (Peter Daszak et al) has for years been among the biggest players in coronavirus work, also in collaboration with Ralph Baric, Ian Lipkin and others,” the NIH officer wrote to Fauci on January 27. He then noted that Fauci was funding Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance’s research in China. “NIAID has funded Peter’s group for coronavirus research in China for the past five years.”

That next day, Jeremey Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, emailed Australian virologist Eddie Holmes to call him on his burner phone. The Wellcome Trust is one of the world’s largest funders of virology research and Farrar had bought a burner phone so that nobody could later subpoeana his phone records. “We should use different phones; avoid putting things in emails; and ditch our normal email addresses and phone contacts,” Farrar later admitted.

Fauci had also begun a series of calls and emails with various virologists, including Kristian Andersen of Scripps Research. Emailing Fauci, Andersen explained that he had analyzed the COVID virus genetic sequence and “some of the features (potentially) look engineered.” Andersen added that, while opinions could change, he and other virologists felt the virus was not natural or consistent with “expectations with evolutionary theory.”

Fauci thanked Andersen on February 1 and then joined a conference call later that day that Farrar organized with Eddie Holmes, Kristian Andersen and other virologists.  “Obviously ask everyone to treat in total confidence,” Farrar emailed Fauci.

“The call with Jeremy Farrar (Wellcome Trust) went very well,” Fauci later emailed several government scientists, including Francis Collins who was the director of the NIH. “Francis Collins joined and there were several highly credible scientists (including and in addition to the two that I spoke with last night) on the call with expertise in evolutionary biology.”

Noting that virologists on the call were worried that the COVID virus may have been engineered, Fauci wrote, “They were concerned about the fact that upon viewing the sequences of several isolates of the nCoV, there were mutations in the virus that would be most unusual to have evolved naturally in the bats and that there was suspicion that this mutation was intentionally inserted.”

Fauci added that researchers in Wuhan were conducting dangerous “gain-of-function” studies to make bat coronaviruses more deadly and likely to infect humans. “The suspicion was heightened by the fact that the scientists in Wuhan University are known to have been working on gain-of-function experiments to determine the molecular mechanisms associated with bat viruses adapting to human infection, and the outbreak originated in Wuhan,” Fauci wrote.

These emails show that Fauci and many of the world’s top virologists knew by February 1, 2020, that Fauci was funding EcoHealth Alliance to do coronavirus research in China and that the COVID virus did not seem natural. Some virologists were even suspicious that a gene may have been inserted into the COVID virus—suspicions only heightened because Wuhan scientists were doing gain-of-function research to genetically modify bat coronaviruses. But instead of alerting the public, emails show that Fauci, Farrar, and multiple virologists began plotting to deny these same suspicions by orchestrating the publication of three scientific papers to label the possibility of a lab accident a “conspiracy theory.”

On February 19, EcoHealth Alliance’s Peter Daszak and Wellcome Trust’s Farrar published a statement in The Lancet that claimed a possible Wuhan lab accident was a “conspiracy theory.” The statement did not disclose that Daszak was funding research led by Shi Zhengli at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. A week later, on February 26, virologists working behind the scenes with Ralph Baric and Shi Zhengli published a commentary in Emerging Microbes & Infections that claimed it was a conspiracy theory to speculate that the pandemic started in a Wuhan lab. Three weeks after that, on March 17, Kristian Andersen, Ian Lipkin, and Eddie Holmes published a paper titled “Proximal Origins” in Nature Medicine that concluded a lab accident was not “plausible.”

Virologists and government scientists then widely promoted these three papers in the media during the initial months of the pandemic, silencing debate about NIH funding in Wuhan where a lab accident could have started the COVID outbreak. Science reporters began trumpeting the line that a lab accident in Wuhan was a “conspiracy theory” and social media companies began to censor reports about a Chinese lab accident. To this day, the NIH is being sued by several organizations trying to gain access to public documents they continue to hide.

After silencing the science community and the media, these same virologists then began campaigning inside the intelligence community to shut down any inquiry into a possible Chinese lab accident, later admitting they had briefed officials from the State Department, FBI and the CIA. Fauci and allied virologists continue to cover-up their role in denying the possibility of a Wuhan lab accident causing the pandemic.

“A lot of what you’re seeing as attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science,” Fauci told NBC as his role in orchestrating a Wuhan cover-up first started becoming public. “Because all of the things that I have spoken about, consistently from the very beginning, have been fundamentally based on science.”