America’s Legacy of Recklessness and Covert Biological Crimes
The United States’ decades-long pursuit of biological weapons has remained shrouded in secrecy, deception, and scientific recklessness.
While publicly condemning biowarfare as a threat to global security, the government has simultaneously engineered microbes to be deadlier, more infectious, and capable of insidious long-term damage. This hidden legacy stretches from the covert biological experiments of World War II to Cold War-era human testing and, most disturbingly, to modern genetic manipulations that raise urgent ethical and existential questions. The shocking truth is that biological warfare is not merely a relic of the past. It continues today under the guise of biodefense and pandemic preparedness. Whether in the dark corridors of Fort Detrick, in secretive overseas laboratories, or within controversial gain-of-function studies, the pursuit of enhanced pathogens has placed humanity on the precipice of disaster. The question is not whether a catastrophic outbreak will occur—it is only a matter of when.
The chilling reality is that the very institutions meant to protect public health have blurred the line between defense and offense. Military applications targeting whatever enemy is the flavor of the day are prioritized over ethical responsibility. From the intentional exposure of soldiers and civilians to deadly pathogens in secret experiments to the development of viruses that could be deployed as weapons of geopolitical strategy, America’s bioweapons research has demonstrated a terrifying disregard for the sanctity of human life. The COVID-19 pandemic has further exposed these risks. Questions are revived about laboratory origins, immune suppression, and the potential consequences of unchecked biological experimentation. If history has taught us anything, it is that pathogens, once released, whether by accident or design, cannot be controlled. They evolve, spread and ultimately return to haunt those who created them. The dangers posed by this ongoing research are not hypothetical. They are real, they are imminent, and they demand immediate scrutiny before the next catastrophe unfolds.
Between 1941 and 1969, the US government, in collaboration with the military, intelligence agencies, and select scientific institutions, engaged in widespread research, testing, and even deployment of biological agents, often without the knowledge or the consent of the people they exposed. This research was officially justified as a necessary means of defense. However, it led to experiments on American civilians, military personnel, and foreign populations thereby leaving behind a legacy of ethical violations and even crimes against humanity. This reckless pursuit of pathogenic experimentation ignored the fundamental reality that the release of deadly organisms, whether intentional or accidental, cannot be contained without catastrophic consequences.
Image: Nallin Farm Gate sign at Fort Detrick, Maryland (Public Domain)
At the center of America’s early bioweapons program was Dr. Ira Baldwin, a microbiologist from the University of Wisconsin who was recruited by the War Department in 1942. Baldwin was tasked with building the country’s first dedicated bioweapons research facility at Fort Detrick in Maryland. This institution would later become the center of controversy and scandals for decades to come. Fort Detrick conducted large-scale studies on biological warfare agents such as anthrax, botulinum toxin, tularemia, Q fever and Venezuelan equine encephalitis. Baldwin laid the groundwork for mass production biological techniques to ensure that the US had the capacity to deploy these pathogens during wartime scenarios. His research led to the creation of methods for dispersal, including the contamination of water supplies, aerial spraying, and the use of infected insect vectors. The program rapidly expanded as the Cold War intensified. Contracted scientists and military strategists were eager to develop biological weapons that could cripple entire populations with disease.
One of the most egregious aspects of the government’s program was the extensive open-air testing of biological agents on unsuspecting civilians. The military conducted a series of classified operations designed to simulate biological warfare attacks in urban environments. In 1950, under Operation Sea-Spray, the Navy released a supposedly harmless bacterium Serratia marcescens over the city of San Francisco in order to study how biological agents might spread across a coastal metropolis. Nearly 800,000 residents were unknowingly exposed, which shortly thereafter led to an increase in pneumonia and urinary tract infections. At least one man, Edward Nevin, died as a direct result of exposure, although the government never acknowledged the true cause of death. Other experiments followed. Operation Large Area Coverage conducted between 1957 and 1958 dispersed zinc cadmium sulfide over Missouri, Minnesota, and even parts of Canada to measure the reach of biological aerosols. Residents in these areas had no knowledge that they were being used as test subjects. During Operation Dew in the early 1950s, the military sprayed bacteria-laced aerosols off the coast of South Carolina and Georgia to study the effects of biological agents released into the atmosphere. To this day, the long-term health consequences of these experiments remain largely unknown because the government destroyed many of the records.
Beyond civilian populations, US military personnel were frequently used as unwitting test subjects. One of the most infamous programs was the 19-year long Operation Whitecoat (1954-1973). This covert biological operation targeted Seventh-day Adventist soldiers who objected to combat for religious reasons. These men were told they were participating in experiments that would aid public health; instead, they were intentionally exposed to highly dangerous pathogens such as Q fever, tularemia, and Venezuelan equine encephalitis. Many developed long-term illnesses, and again Washington denied responsibility. Similarly, Project SHAD, conducted between 1962 and 1973, subjected Navy sailors to live biological agents, including Serratia marcescens and Bacillus globigii, in open-sea experiments. Later many of the exposed veterans suffered from a range of unexplained health issues that prompted allegations they had been used as guinea pigs without consent.
But America’s bioweapons program was not confined to its own borders. During the Korean War, allegations surfaced that US troops deployed weaponized organisms against North Korea and China. Both nations accused the US of covert germ warfare by dropping plague-infested fleas and anthrax spores over civilian populations that contaminated food supplies. Although the US dismissed these claims as Communist propaganda, later declassified Soviet intelligence documents provided evidence that American military officials had at least seriously considered such tactics. If true, these actions would constitute violations of the Geneva Protocol’s banning the use of biological and chemical weapons in warfare.
Compounding the moral failures of the US’s bioweapons program was its post-war reliance on former Nazi scientists. Under Operation Paperclip, the US secretly brought in dozens of Nazi scientists to advance its bioweapons program. Among them was an SS officer, Dr. Kurt Blome, who had experimented with plague, typhus, and other deadly pathogens on human subjects in Nazi concentration camps. Rather than facing justice at the Nuremberg Trials, the US recruited Blome and his colleagues to lend their expertise to American biological warfare efforts. This hypocrisy—condemning Nazi atrocities while simultaneously exploiting the perpetrators—exemplifies the extent to which national security concerns were used to justify flagrant violations of human rights.
Another Nazi bioweapons scientist recruited into the US under Operation Paperclip was Erich Traub. Traub’s work may very well represent one of the darkest intersections of biological science with covert military and intelligence operations in the 20th century. Trained as a virologist at the Rockefeller Institute, Traub later worked at the Reich Research Institute for Virus Diseases of Animals. Under the direction of Heinrich Himmler, Traub was deeply involved in Nazi biological experiments to develop viruses and other pathogens as potential weapons. Following the war, he was recruited by the Soviet Union for a brief period before being brought to the United States under Operation Paperclip to work on American defense projects.
.
Kurt Debus, a former V-2 rocket scientist who became a NASA director, sitting between US President John F. Kennedy and US Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1962 at a briefing at Blockhouse 34, Cape Canaveral Missile Test Annex (Public Domain)
.
While working at Fort Detrick, Traub focused on tick-borne diseases. Tularemia, Q fever, and Lyme disease-causing Borrelia burgdorferi were among the pathogens he studied for their ability to spread covertly through tick vectors. The Plum Island biolab facility off the coast of Connecticut became a hub for experiments involving infected ticks. Evidence strongly suggests that Lyme disease may have emerged from this research. Declassified documents indicate that extensive studies on tick-borne pathogens were being conducted on Plum Island under the guise of defensive research including Lyme disease. The concern was not merely the ability to spread disease but to do so in a way that would cripple an enemy’s military or civilian infrastructure while maintaining plausible deniability
In 1936, Traub discovered immune tolerance, also known as immune paralysis or endotoxin tolerance. Experimenting with lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCM) in mice, Traub was able to reactivate the virus that he had engineered to go dormant and then cause an epidemic by rapidly spreading to other mice. This research had profound implications—not just for understanding how diseases spread but also for how vaccines can, under certain conditions, have similar effects. Over time, Traub realized that infected mothers would always give birth to infected offspring, who, despite appearing healthy, were full of virus and capable of spreading it. These mice did not produce antibodies against the virus because their immune systems had been effectively disabled. As they aged, they developed chronic illnesses, neurodegenerative diseases, and cancers. Eventually, Traub managed to increase the cancer rate in these mice to 50 percent simply by using immune tolerance. This was a groundbreaking discovery for future bioweapons research.
Before the advent of recombinant DNA and mRNA technology, researchers used animal passages, the process of repeatedly transferring a virus between different species in order to enhance certain characteristics in a pathogen. This method was particularly useful because it left few traces of artificial manipulation thereby making it nearly impossible to prove that a virus had been engineered. Different animal hosts could be used to program the pathogen with specific pathologic properties. For instance, passage through mice could turn a virus neurotropic in order to target the brain and central nervous system. Other animals could be used to create cardiotropic effects by targeting the heart. Traub mastered these techniques thereby making him one of the most effective bio-weaponeers of his time. His work ultimately became the foundation of a stealth bioweapons program designed to cause long-term, debilitating diseases rather than immediate fatalities.
Today, we see an epidemic of conditions like chronic fatigue syndrome, neurological illnesses, and a surge in cancers. All of these conditions fit within what Adam Finnegan, author of The Sleeper Agent: The Rise of Lyme Disease, Chronic Illness and the Great Imitator Antigens of Biological Warfare, called the “dark triad” of immune tolerance: chronic disease, neurodegenerative disease, and mental illness. Many of these conditions are linked to latent pathogens such as Epstein-Barr virus, human herpesvirus 6, and Lyme disease’s causal agent Borrelia burgdorferi that can remain dormant in the body for years before becoming reactivated due to immunosuppression.
This phenomenon is not limited to naturally occurring infections. Vaccines can also play a role in immune tolerance by containing antigens that suppress the immune system. The SARS-CoV-2 virus and its spike protein, which is a key component of COVID vaccines, fit the same pattern as Traub’s stealth pathogens. The spike protein functions as what researchers call a “great imitator antigen.” This can lead to immune suppression, chronic disease, and long-term health issues. In effect, long COVID is just another manifestation of immune tolerance.
Historical precedents further support these concerns. The Lymerix vaccine, which was developed to prevent Lyme disease, was pulled from the market within two years due to its severe adverse effects on the immune system. Influenza vaccines have been shown to have similar effects, particularly through the use of a synthetic antigen called PAM3-Cis. These vaccines have been documented to burn out the immune system over time and make recipients more susceptible to chronic illnesses.
One of the reasons Traub’s research may have been buried is because it directly contradicts mainstream immunology. In theory, immune tolerance exposes a fundamental flaw in vaccine science. Traub’s discovery that someone could have an active infection without producing antibodies is chilling. Understandably, health officials would want to suppress this research. If this knowledge had been openly discussed in the 1960s, we might have understood chronic disease far better today. Instead, the medical establishment focused solely on measuring antibody responses while ignoring the broader implications of immune tolerance.
This suppression of knowledge has had devastating real-world consequences. Patients suffering from immune tolerance-related conditions often experience debilitating pain, neurological issues, and fatigue, yet their standard blood tests appear normal. Doctors dismiss their symptoms because they do not fit conventional diagnostic criteria. Traub had already observed this phenomenon in his mice. By the time measurable abnormalities appeared in blood tests, the disease had already progressed significantly.
For example, today many individuals suffering from immune-related conditions are unable to receive compensation because their symptoms do not present themselves in a manner that aligns with conventional medical diagnostic criteria. Instead of inflammation and antibody production, many people are experiencing immune tolerance as their immune systems fail to mount a proper response. Affected individuals are often told, “You’re not sick,” despite clear evidence of chronic conditions. This same problem extends to long COVID patients and adverse mRNA reactions that linger over longer periods of time. These individuals are frequently faced with medical gaslighting. While public health officials acknowledge that long COVID exists, the healthcare system fails to provide the necessary support because standard tests are unable to detect the abnormalities’’ underlying causal conditions.
Investigative journalist John Loftus, a former federal prosecutor and Nazi hunter, was among the first to suggest that Lyme disease was the result of biological weapons research. In his 1982 book The Belarus Secret, Loftus noted that ticks were spreading Lyme disease the year before the government officially acknowledged it. Authorities denied that any experiments to weaponize pathogens had taken place on Plum Island but Loftus’s findings suggested otherwise.
The pursuit of biological weapons was not only unethical but also dangerously reckless. The deliberate exposure of civilians and military personnel to lethal pathogens was a gross violation of medical ethics and human rights, amounting to a systematic disregard for human life in the name of scientific advancement. The reckless pursuit of biological warfare capabilities, particularly through vector-borne diseases such as ticks, fleas, bats, etc., demonstrates a dangerous disregard for the uncontrollable nature of bioweapons. A single miscalculation, an accidental leak, or an unforeseen mutation could lead to catastrophic global consequences. Bioengineered pathogens can mutate and spread beyond targeted areas to infect unintended populations. Government experiments conducted under Traub’s guidance and subsequent government projects highlight a fundamental flaw in biological warfare strategy: the illusion of containment. The integration of Nazi expertise into American defense initiatives blurred the line between wartime necessity and ethical compromise. Bioweapons are inherently unpredictable. Pathogenic agents do not recognize borders. Nor can they be reliably controlled once introduced into an ecosystem. The possibility of a pathogenic escape from a laboratory, such as Plum Island, Fort Detrick or the Wuhan Lab in China poses an existential threat that far outweighs any tactical advantage such exploratory research might provide. The history of bioweapons experimentation serves as a grim warning: when science is wielded without ethical restraint, it ceases to be a tool for progress and becomes an instrument of mass destruction.
Dozens of congressional hearings have failed to uncover the full extent of what has been happening in US-funded laboratories across the globe. There has been obfuscation, stalling and outright denial of the facts. And yet, when we look at gain-of-function research, it seems to be the most likely explanation for the COVID virus and, subsequently, the COVID vaccines.
In a tense exchange before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on March 8, 2022, then Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland made a striking admission that confirmed the existence of US-linked biological research facilities in Ukraine. When questioned by Senator Marco Rubio, she did not deny their existence but instead expressed concern that these facilities could fall into Russian hands.
“Ukraine has biological research facilities, which, in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian forces may be seeking to gain control of,” Nuland stated. “So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach.”
Nuland’s acknowledgment that such labs did exist were in contradiction to earlier dismissals by other officials and the mainstream media that framed such claims as conspiracy theories. According to US government documents released in June 2022, including those related to the Biological Threat Reduction Program under the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the US supported at least 46 biological research facilities in Ukraine. While the US has insisted that these were public health laboratories focused on preventing disease outbreaks, Russia countered with a very different narrative. According to Russian officials, their military captured several Ukrainian biological research sites and recovered a trove of documents and biological samples. One major lab in Mariupol had been under the protection of the Ukrainian Nazi Azov battalion. These findings exposed a secret American-led bioweapons program operating under the guise of public health.
The captured documents highlight a chilling array of research being carried out on highly dangerous pathogens, including anthrax, plague, and tularemia. On the very day the Russian Defense Ministry released their findings that the labs had also been working with coronavirus samples, the World Health Organization advised Ukraine health officials to destroy “high-threat pathogens to prevent any potential spills.” Some of the most alarming allegations claim the American-backed scientists were exploring ways to spread these pathogens through migratory birds, bats and genetic modification. Even more disturbing were the claims that human testing had taken place.
Moscow submitted volumes of documents to the UN Security Council showing that Washington was violating the Biological Weapons Convention. The US’s insistence that these labs were purely for public health echoes an all-too-familiar pattern that has been used for decades to disguise bioweapons development programs. Time and again, from the early days of the US biological weapons program to more recent accusations regarding Pentagon-funded labs in Africa and Asia, the same justification has been invoked: the research is purely defensive and aimed at protecting public health.
Beyond Ukraine, concerns over the global scope of US-funded biological laboratories have been echoed by China. The Chinese Foreign Ministry alleges that the US operates over 300 biolabs worldwide. According to the Chinese reports, many of these facilities are located in strategic locations found in Eastern Europe, Southeast Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. This raises concerns about dual-use research or experimentation that could have both civilian and military applications. China has frequently called on the United Nations to investigate the true purpose of these laboratories, especially in light of allegations that some are involved in gain-of-function studies to enhance pathogenic virulence and transmissibility.
Bulgarian investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva, known for her in-depth research into international arms trafficking and secret military programs, has revealed substantial evidence pointing to Pentagon-funded biolabs operating under the guise of public health and disease prevention. Rather her reports document reckless covert bioweapons research that have contributed to mysterious local disease outbreaks through accidental or deliberate pathogen leaks. Leaked documents reviewed by Gaytandzhieva show that these labs conducted research on deadly pathogens with military applications such as anthrax, tularemia and hemorrhagic fevers. In 2016 and 2017, outbreaks of hepatitis A and cholera near one US supported Ukrainian facility near Kharkiv resulted in several fatalities. Ukrainian local governments raised concerns about the possible accidental lab release.
In neighboring Georgia, there have been suspicious disease outbreaks associated with the Lugar Center in Tbilisi. Documents published by Gaytandzhieva in 2018 show that the biolab, funded by the DTRA and CDC, had been conducting research on highly lethal pathogens, including Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever and anthrax. The records also document lethal human experiments on Georgian citizens, who were reportedly given dangerous biological agents without their informed consent. Additionally, whistleblower leaks accuse the center for being responsible for a mysterious outbreak of drug-resistant tuberculosis in 2013 killing several patients under unexplained circumstances. In 2018 there was an outbreak of antibiotic-resistant anthrax in the Lugar neighborhood. Russian officials have repeatedly accused the US of using the Lugar Center for bioweapons research in violation of the Biological Weapons Convention.
Further east in Kazakhstan, there are multiple Pentagon-funded biolabs including the Central Reference Laboratory in Almaty. Kazakhstan is arguably the most corrupt authoritarian Central Asian nation. Similar to Ukraine, and despite Kazakhstan’s horrible human rights record, the American government has provided extensive support to the regime as a key regional military ally due to its close proximity to Russia and China. In 2016, the US Department of Defense opened the Almaty laboratory to focus on research into anthrax, plague, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever and tularemia. Between 2017-2019 there have been multiple reports of an unknown pneumonia-like illness suspected of originating from the lab. In 2019, there was an outbreak of an unusual tick-borne virus similar to Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever. Despite international concerns over the Kazakh labs biological activities, the US continues to claim the lab is strictly for disease prevention and epidemiological research.
Armenia, another former Soviet republic, has also been the site of US-funded biological laboratories. Gaytandzhieva uncovered that American military-linked researchers were granted access to biological samples from Armenian citizens, which led to speculation that the US might be conducting secretive experiments under the pretext of pandemic preparedness. The Pentagon has also spent millions of dollars upgrading Armenia’s biosafety infrastructure. Consequently, there have been growing fears among Armenian politicians and Russian analysts that the US is using the country as a staging ground for biological surveillance and covert bioweapons research.
The reckless and covert nature of America’s overseas bioweapons operations poses a grave threat not only to Russia and its host countries but to humanity as a whole. The Pentagon’s biological laboratories reveal a dangerous pattern of unchecked experimentation with deadly pathogens linked to mysterious disease outbreaks, biosecurity failures, and lethal human experimentation. The presence of Washington’s biolabs in four former Soviet republics likely has nothing to do with public health but is instead part of a broader geopolitical strategy. Russia, having witnessed the expansion of NATO military infrastructure along its borders, has grown increasingly alarmed that these biolabs serve as another belligerent policy of Western containment efforts, potentially giving the US and its allies the ability to unleash biological threats capable of destabilizing Russia’s government and harming its population.
The HIV/AIDS epidemic also raises questions about the role of stealth bioweapons research. A single retrovirus should not be capable of causing 30 distinct disease conditions yet that is precisely what was observed with AIDS. Researchers who questioned the official narrative were silenced, despite evidence suggesting that other pathogens—such as human herpesvirus 6—were playing a major role. Some researchers even believed that chronic fatigue syndrome was, in fact, a milder form of AIDS caused by immune suppression rather than a direct HIV infection.
There is a particular pattern here. From Lyme disease to AIDS to COVID-19, there is a recurring theme of pathogens being engineered to cause immune suppression rather than immediate death. The goal is not mass fatalities but rather a slow, insidious degradation of natural health. And yet, despite overwhelming evidence, governments and health organizations continue to deny any wrongdoing.
The reality is that these experiments have had lasting and devastating consequences on public health. The idea that pathogens are being engineered not just for warfare but as tools of control should alarm everyone. The question is, how much longer will people accept the official narrative before demanding accountability?
In a now-infamous interview, Maurice Hilleman, one of the most prominent vaccinologists of the 20th century, who worked for Merck and developed many vaccines, made startling revelations. In the conversation, Hilleman casually admitted to discovering Simian Virus 40 (SV40) in polio vaccine batches. He suspected it may contribute to cancer. The virus was traced back to monkey tissue medium used in vaccine production that harbored numerous other diseases. Hilleman alerted Albert Sabin, the developer of the oral polio vaccine, to the contamination. However, Sabin dismissed the warning as an effort to discredit his work. This contamination, however, had serious implications. The discussion even touched upon the possibility that these vaccines inadvertently introduced diseases such as AIDS into the population. Furthermore, contaminated vaccines were distributed globally, including to the Soviet Union, potentially contributing to neurological and paralytic diseases without clear attribution.
Meanwhile, the U.S. government has paid out over $4 billion in reparations to individuals who successfully proved vaccine-related injuries, including cases of autism. However, these payouts only scratch the surface.
This legacy of the US’s covert bioweapons research and experiments directly relates to a particularly contentious issue: the laboratory origins of the SARS-2-CoV virus and the mRNA vaccines’ role in exacerbating immune dysfunction. Data suggests that 90 percent of long COVID cases occur in vaccinated individuals rather than the unvaccinated. This challenges the mainstream narrative. The most severe disease and highest mortality rates appear among those who received multiple vaccine doses.
Unlike traditional vaccines, mRNA vaccines instruct the body’s own cells to manufacture spike proteins. Medical experts are now arguing this strategy is more dangerous than exposure to the virus itself. We were told these spike proteins would degrade quickly; however, data shows that they persist for many months or even years. This persistence has been linked to rising rates of cardiovascular diseases, autoimmune conditions, cancer, neurological disorders, and other chronic diseases. Despite warnings from a growing number of independent scientists, the public continues to be reassured that these vaccines are both safe and effective.
The origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which caused the COVID-19 pandemic, have been subject to intense debate. While the initial official narratives suggested a natural zoonotic spillover from bats via an intermediate animal host at the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan, China, evidence continues to mount in the scientific literature and in testimonial hearings that the virus emerged from laboratory-based gain-of-function (GoF) research. Specifically, the Covid-19 virus was developed through US-funded experiments, particularly those conducted by Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina in collaboration with EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Congressional investigations, scientific analyses, and whistleblower testimonies have further highlighted significant inconsistencies in the natural origin theory and that only GoF research can realistically explain the virus’s genetic characteristics.
At the time the World Health Organization proclaimed the global pandemic in March 2020, Nobel Prize-winning virologist Luc Montagnier, renowned for his discovery of HIV, conducted an analysis of the SARS-CoV-2 genome. Montagnier concluded that the virus was artificially engineered. In a controversial interview in April 2020, he claimed that the SARS-2 genome contained unusual insertions resembling sequences from HIV and other viruses. Montagnier also identified possible fragments of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (Mad Cow Disease) and chronic fatigue virus. Montagnier’s analysis conducted alongside biomathematician Jean-Claude Perez proved that the presence of these genetic fragments indicated laboratory manipulation. Although Montagnier’s findings were widely dismissed by medical establishment, until his death in 2022, Montagnier maintained that the pandemic was the result of laboratory engineering rather than natural evolution. These genetic inserts, if validated, would confirm the SARS-2 virus is a manipulated bioweapon designed to degrade the immune system over time.
Several published studies confirm that SARS-like coronaviruses were manipulated in laboratory settings prior to the pandemic. In 2015, Baric and Wuhan’s Dr. Shi Zhengli co-authored a paper describing the engineering of a chimeric SARS-like virus by inserting spike proteins from a bat coronavirus into a human-adapted backbone in order to demonstrate the potential for human infection. This research was partially funded by grants from Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and facilitated through EcoHealth Alliance.
The most notable genetic feature is that the SARS-2 virus contains a furin cleavage site, which is otherwise absent in other known SARS-related coronaviruses. This site dramatically increases the virus’s ability to infect human cells and therefore calls the entire natural origin hypothesis into question. Additionally, EcoHealth Alliance proposed a 2018 research project to introduce a furin cleavage site into bat coronaviruses—an eerily prescient experiment given that SARS-CoV-2 emerged with precisely this genetic modification. Other researchers observed that the virus appears pre-adapted to human transmission and lacks any clear evolutionary intermediates. This was unheard of for any novel zoonotic pathogen.
During Congressional hearings, whistleblowers and intelligence reports have confirmed that federal agencies were aware of safety concerns at the Wuhan laboratory as early as 2018. Reports from the US State Department indicated that Wuhan researchers were hospitalized with COVID-like symptoms in November 2019, almost two months before the officially reported outbreak.
The likely engineering of the Covid-19 virus fits within the broader historical pattern of US programs to virally enhance and weaponize pathogens. As we have seen the US military and intelligence agencies have been involved in bioweapons research since the Second World War era. The suppression of early concerns, conflicts of interest among researchers, and the government’s historical involvement in pathogen enhancement suggest a broader pattern of secrecy and obfuscation. The Biological Weapons Convention formally prohibits such work. But American research into defensive applications continues and often blurs the lines between public health and military interest.
The legacy of U.S. biological weapons research is a humanitarian and ethical failure of staggering proportions. These programs represent a profound betrayal of the fundamental principles of medical ethics. The government has repeatedly justified its actions under the banner of national security, yet the consequences have been anything but protective. Soldiers, civilians and entire populations have suffered without any acknowledgment or accountability. These experiments have not only violated international law; they have systematically undermined the public’s trust in science and medicine. Worse still, those responsible for these programs remain shielded by layers of federal protection, while whistleblowers, independent scientists and victims are silenced and ridiculed.
At what point does the pursuit of knowledge become indistinguishable from the pursuit of destruction? When do we, as a society, recognize that the engineering of deadly pathogens is not a safeguard but a time bomb waiting to detonate? The moral cost of this research is incalculable. If history is any indication, future generations may look back in horror at the hubris of those who believed they could control nature for strategic gain and economic profit. It is not enough to simply acknowledge these dangers. There must be an end to the reckless scientific experimentation that threatens not only our survival but the very fabric of what it means to be human.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.
Dr. Gary Null is host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including his recent Last Call to Tomorrow.
They are regular contributors to Global Research.
Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.
No comments:
Post a Comment