Fauci Hid Funding of Gain-of-Function Research at WIV


By Timothy Spearman

Denials by Fauci that the NIH’s sub-grant agency EcoHealth Alliance was not funding gain-of-function research is an obvious lie. Why the need for the sub-grant agency to send the money to WIV if there is nothing to hide? Clearly, there was a need to hide something, if the NIH in its wisdom, selected a sub-grant agency with the intention of sending the money indirectly rather than directly to make it more difficult to ascertain the true source of the funding. In addition, we have the article co-authored by batlady Xie Zhengli and Ralph Baric et al, outlining the gain-of-function research they were conducing at WIV. Just look at the abstract of the paper which outlines the nature of their gain-of-function research so clearly:

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV underscores the threat of cross-species transmission events leading to outbreaks in humans. Here we examine the disease potential of a SARS-like virus, SHC014-CoV, which is currently circulating in Chinese horseshoe bat populations1. Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system2, we generated and characterized a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone. The results indicate that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV. Additionally, in vivo experiments demonstrate replication of the chimeric virus in mouse lung with notable pathogenesis. Evaluation of available SARS-based immune-therapeutic and prophylactic modalities revealed poor efficacy; both monoclonal antibody and vaccine approaches failed to neutralize and protect from infection with CoVs using the novel spike protein. On the basis of these findings, we synthetically re-derived an infectious full-length SHC014 recombinant virus and demonstrate robust viral replication both in vitro and in vivo. Our work suggests a potential risk of SARS-CoV re-emergence from viruses currently circulating in bat populations.[i]

The gain-of-function research is undeniable. As the authors of the paper make explicitly clear, they created a chimera virus, in a laboratory setting, by inserting a zoonotic CoV spike protein from the RsSHC014-CoV sequence, isolated from Chinese horseshoe bats, onto the SARS-CoV mouse-adapted backbone, for the purpose of evaluating the potential of bat coronaviruses to infect humans. This is how the authors of the study put it in their own words:

Although public health measures were able to stop the SARS-CoV outbreak, recent metagenomics studies have identified sequences of closely related SARS-like viruses circulating in Chinese bat populations that may pose a future threat. However, sequence data alone provides minimal insights to identify and prepare for future prepandemic viruses. Therefore, to examine the emergence potential (that is, the potential to infect humans) of circulating bat CoVs, we built a chimeric virus encoding a novel, zoonotic CoV spike protein—from the RsSHC014-CoV sequence that was isolated from Chinese horseshoe bats—in the context of the SARS-CoV mouse-adapted backbone.[ii]

Gain-of-function research can no longer be denied. Fauci is a bold-faced liar. Gain-of-function applications of bat coronaviruses was being conducted at WIV. Sen. Rand Paul was exactly right that Dr. Xie Zhengli and Ralph Baric collaborated with their team on creating a chimeric virus that exactly matches the SARS-CoV-2 virus affecting the human population. The fact that Fauci’s NIH funded this research indirectly through a sub-grant agency proves that efforts were being made to hide the source of funding, which means that those involved knew that what they were funding was nefarious and in breach of international law. This makes all those involved criminals, including and especially, Fauci. The title “doctor” will be dispensed with as much as possible in reference to this man, as well as in the case of Xie, as the word “doctor” comes from the Latin and means “teacher”. What are they teaching us? How to violate every code of human decency and ethics, break most of the Ten Commandments, violate international law, commit genocide and crimes against humanity on an unfathomable scale worldwide? Thanks, but if it’s all the same to you, Fauci and Xie, we’d rather not fall under your tutelage and be taught anything by you.


Looking at what the authors of the study say next makes explicit the fact that, not only did this study involve a Frankenstein-like experiment to create a viral chimera in a lab, but clearly alludes to experimentation to discern its pathogenicity:
The hybrid virus allowed us to evaluate the ability of the novel spike protein to cause disease independently of other necessary adaptive mutations in its natural backbone. Using this approach, we characterized CoV infection mediated by the SHC014 spike protein in primary human airway cells and in vivo, and tested the efficacy of available immune therapeutics against SHC014-CoV. Together, the strategy translates metagenomics data to help predict and prepare for future emergent viruses.[iii]
Just to be clear in vivo gene therapy means that therapy is administered directly to the patient. The targeted cells remain in the body of the patient. With ex vivo gene/cell therapy, the targeted cells are removed from the patient and gene therapy is administered to the cells in vitro before they are returned to the patient’s body. This would suggest that patients were being experimented upon directly as part of the study, and that patients were being infected with a virus with like or identical properties to SARS-CoV-2—whether with or without their knowledge and consent is not known—for the purpose of studying the path and nature of infection, and to experiment with existing medical therapies to ascertain the effectiveness of what the study authors call “available immune therapeutics.”
Certainly, experiments were conducted on mice to see how they reacted to exposure to the dangerous pathogen:

To evaluate the role of the SHC014 spike in mediating infection in vivo, they infected 10-week-old mice with plaque-forming properties of either SARS-MA15 or SHC014-MA15. Animals infected with SARS-MA15 experienced rapid weight loss and lethality; in contrast, SHC014-MA15 infection produced substantial weight loss (10%) but no lethality in mice. Examination of viral replication revealed nearly equivalent viral titers—the lowest concentration of a virus that still infects cells—from the lungs of mice infected with SARS-MA15 or SHC014-MA15. Whereas lungs from the SARS-MA15–infected mice showed substantial staining in both the terminal bronchioles and the lung parenchyma, those of SHC014-MA15–infected mice showed reduced airway antigen staining; in contrast, no deficit in antigen staining was observed in the parenchyma or in the overall histology scoring, suggesting differential infection of lung tissue for SHC014-MA15. They then analyzed infection in more susceptible, aged (12-month-old) animals. SARS-MA15–infected animals rapidly lost weight and succumbed to infection. SHC014-MA15 infection induced robust and sustained weight loss, but had minimal lethality. Together, the data indicate that viruses with the SHC014 spike are capable of inducing weight loss in mice in the context of a virulent CoV backbone.[iv]

This experimentation on juvenile and geriatric mice must have been done with a purpose. When the UN and affiliated world government bodies are constantly emphasizing the fact that the global population is too high and must be reduced and that we have exceeded the planet’s carrying capacity, it is self-evident that seniors, the superannuated, the elderly, whatever you wish to call them, are unwanted. Therefore, the effect of the virus on geriatric mice must have been done for the described purpose of testing lethality rates for certain strains of the virus on older mice to study how it might affect a similar population of humans.


The scientists noted that some of the SARS-CoV strains were unable to bind to the human ACE2, the receptor for SARS-CoV. The authors further claim that the SHC014 spike protein was unable to bind to human ACE2, but noted that similar changes in related SARS-CoV strains did allow for ACE2 binding, “suggesting that additional functional testing was required for verification.” They then admit to synthesizing the SHC014 spike with “the replication-competent, mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone” in order “to maximize the opportunity for pathogenesis and vaccine studies in mice.”[v] This is exactly what gain-of-function research consists of in a nutshell, so there is no chance of denying it took place or that WIV was not conducting gain-of-function research. Claims by Fauci that the funding was not for that purpose is simply a lie. No amount of obfuscation or denials by slippery characters like Fauci can absolve them of their complicity in the criminal operation. Fauci cannot wash the blood from his hands no matter how many times he shouts, “Out damn spot!” There is no longer any chance of denying gain-of-function research was being conducted at WIV.


Another objection and reply to objection that should be made in the course of defending this claim is that any allegation of xenophobic conspiracy theory being made against this information can be discounted by simply examining the list of authors involved in this study that had to be privy to whatever lab testing was being conducted at WIV: Vineet D. Menachery, Boyd L Yount Jr., Kari Debbink, 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. With the exception of Xing-Yi Ge and Zhengli-Li Xie, all the other scientists involved in the study are from the West, probably sent directly from lab facilities owned and operated by the NIH.
In fact, despite his Indian name and background, Vineet D Menachery did his Ph.D. at Washington University in Saint Louis. He is currently working in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at the University of Texas Medical Branch. His current research is focused on: “Utilizing severe coronavirus infections, the Menachery Lab seeks to define virus-host interactions that dictate disease outcomes taking advantage of three cutting edge platforms: 1) reverse genetic systems for virus generation, 2) a refined systems biology approach, and 3) diverse model systems for infection.”[vi] The University of Texas is also home to Professor Eric Plianka, the “ecologist” who told a meeting of the Texas Academy of Science that a human population reduction was necessary in order to save the planet.[vii]
Amazingly, it turns out that Vaneet D. Manachery and Sudhakar Agnihothram have the same picture posted in association with their identities when doing a profile search on Google:


In fact, Sudhakar Agnihothram has no picture posted of himself on Facebook and on other profiles. Why is that? And why would the same picture be posted for both men on Google? What is the cause of this mix up? Is Sudhakar Agnihothram an alter identity of Vaneet D. Menachery? Is Vaneet D. Manachery a government agent employing two identities? Looking at the various research studies undertaken by Sudhakar Agnihothram and Vaneet D. Menachary, it looks like they are undertaking exactly the same kind of research. It is remarkable to note how they both just happen to have their fingers on the pulse of all the latest respiratory diseases that have affected the world since the beginning of the millennium.


[i] Vineet D Menachery, Boyd L Yount Jr, Kari Debbink, 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,” https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985#Ack1
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
[iv] Ibid.
[v] Ibid.
[vi] utmb Health, https://microbiology.utmb.edu/faculty/vineet-d-menachery-phd
[vii] Ronald Baley, “To Save the Planet, Kill 90 Percent of People Off, Says UT Ecologist,” April 3, 2006, https://reason.com/2006/04/03/to-save-the-planet-kill-90-per/


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *