In a June 2021 interview, whistleblower Dr. Li Meng Yan, a doctor and virologist who used to work at the University of Hong Kong’s School of Public Health, a coronavirus research lab leading, revealed evidence to support her belief that SARS-CoV-2 was not of natural origin and was intentionally created by the Chinese military for use as a biological weapon.first
Yan revealed that, in 2015, Chinese military scientists wrote an article titled “The Unnatural Origin of SARS and New Species of Man-made Viruses Called Universe”. genetic biogas”, which suggests that, based on what is known about SARS-1, coronavirus is a material for creating a new biological weapon that can do more damage than a weapon. traditional biology.
China prepares for ‘biological’ World War III
The document, also obtained by US State Department investigators, suggests that a third world war would be “biological”, with biological weapons being the “core weapon to win”. “.2 Yan says:3
“Americans don’t understand that the government can do these things to destroy the world, and they even victimize their own citizens in the first place… We know that in China, based on on the history of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), many things keep happening… So we’re not surprised. And the Chinese government keeps saying this is a biological weapon, but they insist that it comes from the US.”
Yan calls SARS-CoV-2 a virus of the PLA, or People’s Liberation Army, and claims that it is owned by the Chinese military. China has been searching for an animal-to-human virus for decades, secretly conducting never-before-seen experiments. According to Yan, the Chinese government was conducting testing in Wuhan around the time of the initial COVID-19 outbreak.
She believes that they did not intend to release the virus in Wuhan at the time, but because they lacked proper knowledge of its transmissibility, it became out of control and broke out into an epidemic. .
At that point, with the virus already circulating, they decided to capitalize on the outbreak and “destroy the world, as it happened.” Initially, people were allowed to leave China and travel around the world, bringing the virus with them.
Ideal Conditions for Release of Bioweapons ‘Details’
The document goes into disturbing detail about how best to unleash a biological weapon to inflict maximum carnage. Daily Mail reported:4
“Scientists say such attacks should not be carried out in the middle of a clear day, as intense sunlight can damage pathogens, while rain or snow can affect particles. aerosol. Instead, it should be released at night, or at dawn, dusk, or under cloudy skies, with ‘stable wind direction… so that the aerosol can drift into the target area.’
Meanwhile, the study also notes that such an attack would result in a large number of patients being hospitalized, which then ‘could cause the enemy’s health system to collapse.’
The document’s 18 authors worked at high-risk laboratories, where chemical weapons expert Hamish de Bretton-Gordon said China had successfully thwarted regulatory or policy efforts.5 Among the achievements for biological weapons, according to the document, are “major advances in the delivery of biological agents.”
“For example, the newly found freeze-drying ability of microorganisms makes it possible to store biological agents and aerosolize them during attacks,” the document reads. The Daily Mail reported that UK MP Tom Tugendhat, chairman of the foreign affairs committee, added, “The document raises great concern about the ambitions of some who advise the top leadership of the party. . Even under the tightest control, these weapons are dangerous.”6
Dual-use research is inherently risky
Gain-of-function (GOF) studies refer to studies that have the potential to enhance the pathogenicity of pathogens, including enhancing their pathogenicity or transmissibility.7 GOF is a type of dual-use research, so named because it involves the study of selected agents and poisons that can benefit society or destroy it, depending on whether it is Will it fall into the wrong hands?
The Chinese GOF study at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) has become the focus of concerns that COVID-19 may have originated in a laboratory.
Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, developed the cloned mice used in the WIV GOF study8 and worked closely with Dr Shi Zhengli, director of WIV’s Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases, also known as the ‘bat woman’, on research that used genetic engineering to create a ” new bat-like SARS virus … can jump directly from its bat host to humans. According to Peter Gøtzsche with the Institute for the Freedom of Science:9
“Their work is focused on enhancing the ability of the bat virus to attack humans to ‘test for emergence’. In 2015, they created a new virus by taking the backbone of the SARS virus and replacing its mutant protein with a protein from another bat virus called SHC014-CoV.ten This manufactured virus can infect cells cultured in a laboratory from the human respiratory tract.
They write that the scientific review boards may consider their study too risky to pursue but argue that it has the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks. However, the value of functional studies in preventing the COVID-19 pandemic is negative, as this study most likely created the pandemic.”
Furthermore, as the Daily Mail reported, dual-use research can be used for good or evil, depending on the motive. Peter Jennings, executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, explains:11
“There is no clear distinction in terms of research capability because whether it is used offensively or defensively is not a decision these scientists will make. If you are ostensibly building skills to protect your troops from a biological attack, you are also giving your troops the ability to use these weapons offensively. You cannot separate the two.”
Chinese military involved in Coronavirus research?
Chinese dissident Lianchao Han, who previously worked for the Chinese government, raised concerns that military researchers and coronavirus experts may be working closely with the Chinese government. biodefense activities. For example, Cao Wu-Chun, a senior military officer and government adviser on bioterrorism, worked with Shi on virus detection projects.twelfth
“A comment was made on social media after Colonel Cao published an article about the deadly bite, saying that he and Professor Shi ‘can always find a virus that has never been found before. found in humans’, adding: ‘I suspect this is another virus- so-called ‘scientific research’ done in the lab,'” Daily Mail reported.13
WIV researchers conducted experiments involving the bat coronavirus RaTG13 – thought to be the closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2, with a 96.2% similarity – at least in 2016. In 2012, six miners working in a copper mine with bats were known. was infected with the bat coronavirus and developed COVID-19-like symptoms. RaTG13 was sampled from the mine where the miners were infected.14
“Then it surfaced her [Shi] changed its name from another virus identified in an earlier paper, thus obscuring its connection to three miners who died of a strange respiratory illness they caught while cleaning up. Bat droppings”, according to the Daily Mail.15 In another twist, however, Yan said that the Chinese government had asked Shi to “remove the virus that masquerades as RaTG13 as the ancestor of SARS-CoV-2” as part of a disinformation campaign aimed at misleading the true origin of the virus. According to Yan:16
“They said that Batwoman Shi Zhengli took RaTG13 from a copper mine in Yunnan and, after slight modification, inserted the furin cleavage site to turn it into the Sars-CoV-2 virus. I have actually demonstrated in my reports that this is not true.
Yunnan is in the west, but the virus really came from the east, Zhoushan. It’s just a way of diverting attention away from the role of the Chinese military. It was the People’s Liberation Army that found the Zhoushan ZC45 and ZXC21 bat viruses in 2017 in eastern China, and it was these viruses that came closest to Sars-CoV-2.
US warns of foreign threats to biomedical research
Dr. Francis Collins, Director of the US National Institutes of Health, sent out alerts to 10,000 academic institutions warning of foreign threats to US biomedical research in 2018. Since During the COVID-19 pandemic, the relationship between China is more closely monitored. , including Wuhan, and US academia, especially when the idea that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a biological weapons laboratory in Wuhan, China, gained traction.
Galveston National Laboratory, affiliated with the University of Texas, is a Level 4 laboratory that specializes in the study of very dangerous pathogens. It has been investigated, as it has about 24 contracts with Chinese universities and technology companies, along with ties to the WIV and exchanges between national security scientists and research sharing. .17
Former Harvard chemistry dean, PhD, nanoscience expert Charles Lieber, was also arrested in early 2020 by federal agencies on suspicion of illegal dealings with China.18 In December 2021, he was found guilty of making false statements and lying to federal investigators in an attempt to conceal his participation in the China Thousand Talents Program.19
The Thousand Talents Program (TTP), created by the Chinese Communist Party in 2008, was supposed to be a method to create an innovative society, but raised red flags for posing a threat to US technology efforts.
“[O]Over the years, the program, which has an estimated 7,000 participants, has become extremely controversial, creating deep concern within the US government about Chinese IP theft,” the Center said. Strategic and International Studies explained.20
The Justice Department also has an ongoing campaign to identify and block so-called “non-traditional collaborators” – known as the China Initiative – that began in November 2018. Most cases jobs involving scientists in academic or high-tech disciplines, with varying degrees of charge.
Andrew Lelling, a former US attorney for the district of Massachusetts, describes US researchers accepting assistance from Chinese researchers while also receiving federal funding as a “dangerous game” that can be easy easily counterproductive.21
Furthermore, while research into offensive biological warfare was concluded in the United States in 1969, and the United States and China adopted a treaty banning the development of biological weapons, loopholes remained. Specifically, defensive biological weapons research is still allowed, which means that the United States and other countries are allowed to produce and research poisons that can be used by the enemy.22
The Daily Mail quoted David Asher, who led the state ministry’s investigation into the origins of COVID-19, as explaining: “The Chinese have made it clear that they see biotechnology as an important part of the future. future of hybrid warfare. The big question is whether their work in these areas is offensive or defensive.”23
