How the Wuhan Coronavirus Gained a Function

Reports of a successful vaccine for COVID-19 are all over the news, as embattled Americans wonder why the release was delayed until after the November 3 election. Less evident is curiosity about conditions that made the vaccine necessary, and news on that front has also been delayed. 

“In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic? Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario—however remote—should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?” 

The writer is Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), in “Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward,” published in 2012. The research in question was “gain of function” (GOF), which according to the National Institutes of Health Office of Science Policy has “the potential to enhance the pathogenicity or transmissibility of potential pandemic pathogens (PPPs)” and has thus “raised biosafety and biosecurity concerns.” 

As Fauci knows, it doesn’t get more serious than that. In his 2012 paper, the NIAID boss cited the risks of such research being transferred from a “world-class laboratory” to “another scientist who does not have the same training and facilities and is not subject to the same regulations.”  

Those concerned about GOF risks, Fauci warned, cannot take the scientific community “at our word” and, he added, “nor can we ignore their calls for greater transparency, their concerns about conflicts of interest.” There are also questions whether “these experiments should have been performed in the first place.” Such concerns must be addressed “thoughtfully and respectfully” and the domestic and global risks “must be discussed and understood by multiple stakeholders, including the general public, and all decisions regarding such research must be made in a transparent manner.” 

Fauci, who has helmed the NIAID since 1984, does not identify the multiple stakeholders, but we should note they come before the “general public,” also known as “we the people.” In 2012, the NIAID boss wanted a thoughtful and respectful discussion, with a demand for transparency in “all decisions” regarding gain of function research, which can escape a lab and trigger a pandemic. The people have a right to wonder if Fauci held to those demands in 2020. 

As Talha Birk noted in The Lancet, the National Institutes of Health banned GOF research in 2014 but revived it in 2017 over the objection of many scientists. By that time, the National Institutes of Health and the State Department had approved as a collaborator the Wuhan Institute of Virology. If the people find that puzzling, it would be hard to blame them. 

As a wholly-owned subsidiary of China’s Communist dictatorship, the WIV is not subject to American regulations and is not accountable to the American public. Researchers in the Wuhan lab are unlikely to be better trained than world-class American scientists from Harvard, Stanford, and so forth. 

Despite these concerns, the NIH funded the Wuhan lab. The amount of money is a matter of dispute, but it is clear that the funds were channeled through NIAID and funded research on coronaviruses that originated in bats. The whole process violated the concerns Fauci raised with such urgency in 2012. 

GOF research had not ceased to enhance the transmissibility of a virus and raise biosecurity concerns. The dangerous research had indeed been transferred to another lab, not subject to the same training, and not accountable to the American public. In 2019 and 2020, Fauci’s previous demand for transparency was nowhere in evidence and his concerns for “domestic and global” risks had disappeared. 

As he feared in 2012, there was an outbreak and global pandemic. Fauci led the charge for a lockdown that crushed a booming economy. “It’s inconvenient from a societal standpoint, from an economic standpoint to go through this,” Fauci said in March, “but this is going to be the answer to our problems.” 

The people might consider “inconvenient” a strange description for the rigors they have gone through, and they might wonder who Fauci means by “our.” Is that the general public, or was it a problem of the “multiple stakeholders”?

Democrats deployed the pandemic to order widespread voting by mail. That placed ballots in the care of a government union that endorsed Joe Biden. True to form, most if not all the mail ballots were for Joe Biden, a statistical impossibility. 

There was no requirement for voter identification, no deadline for “harvesting” ballots, concealment of counting procedures, massive voting by illegals plus widespread delays and irregularities. This confirmed the “most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics,” hailed by Joe Biden himself in an October 24 video

On November 2, Biden said he would “hire” Fauci, who plans to stay in his current job “to serve the American public no matter what the administration is.” The NIAID boss expects the vaccine to be available “very likely before the end of this year,” in other words, not until the election has been settled. 

As Luciana Paluzzi told the late, great Sean Connery in “Thunderball,” it’s almost as if it was intended.” In the meantime, the people need answers to Fauci’s “reasonable questions” about a pandemic that could be triggered by an infected scientist. 

Where was the transparency in 2020? What were the processes involved in the decision to fund the Wuhan lab, and what, exactly, went on there? The people have a right to know but Fauci has been evasive. 

Angelo Codevilla, experienced in the oversight of intelligence agencies, easily pegged Fauci as a “deep state fraud” who knows exactly what he is doing. For further reference, see Codevilla’s “The Covid Coup,” and Peter Duesberg’s Inventing the AIDS Virus, a valuable course in virology—Duesberg served as professor of cell biology at UC Berkeley—and a devastating account of Fauci’s blunders and deceptions. 

Anthony Fauci remains at the helm of NIAID after 36 years, in effect a powerful politician who never has to face the voters. In a Biden or Harris administration, Fauci would continue his role as the superspreader of white coat supremacy. Based on the record so far, that does not bode well for the cause of freedom going forward. As Orwell might say, imagine a mask slapped on a face, forever. 

Want news updates?

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.