Featured Image
Dr. Anthony Fauci on Capitol Hill, May 26, 2021Sarah Silbiger-Pool / Getty Images

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 16, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Three leading American health czars have ties to the Chinese laboratory where COVID-19 may have begun.  

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Dr. Peter Daszak, CEO of the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance, and Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have come under increasing scrutiny thanks their support of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (VIR).  

In addition, all three have been promoting the expensive Remdesivir drug while discouraging the use of the relatively inexpensive Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.  

Dr. Anthony Fauci has led NIAID since 1984, and he administers a budget of $6.1 billion. Between 2014 and 2019, Fauci distributed $826,277 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology through Daszak and his  EcoHealth Alliance.   

Fauci's emails, recently released, show the two directors’ shared sympathies for the WIV. In an email dated April 18, 2020, Daszak thanked Fauci for publicly contradicting the theory that COVID-19 was “a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”  

“As the Pl of the ROl grant publicly targeted by Fox News reporters at the Presidential press briefing last night, I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators, for publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for covid-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Daszak wrote.  

“From my perspective, your comments are brave, and coming from your trusted voice, will help dispel the myths being spun around the virus’ origins,” he continued.   

“Once this pandemic’s over I look forward thanking you in person and let you know how important your comments are to us all.” 

Fauci response was “Many thanks for your kind note.” 

In a February 19, 2020 statement in medical journal The Lancet, Daszak joined other authors in dismissing the possibility that the COVID-19 coronavirus had a human origin. He was also a member of the WHO team sent to China to investigate the origin of the virus. 

Collins, who as Director of the NIH is essentially Fauci's superior, also has ties to the WIV. One of the published Fauci emails revealed that the NIH gave a $3.7 million grant to the EcoHealth Alliance for research of the coronavirus in bats, of which $600,000 was channelled to the Wuhan lab.  

Meanwhile,  EcoHealth funded the research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology that developed the ‘use of Remdesivir’ to treat coronaviruses. In protesting the NIH decision to cut its coronavirus research funding, EcoHealth reported that “genetic sequences of two bat coronaviruses that we discovered with this grant have been used as lab tools to test the breakthrough antiviral drug Remdesivir.” 

Remdesivir was first developed by Gilead Sciences, an American pharmaceutical company which funded, in part, both the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel and the research promoting Remdesivir.  

Fauci personally promoted the use of Remdesivir in the treatment of COVID-19. In a presentation to the White House on April 29, 2020, he stated that Remdesivir “has a clear cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recover [from the coronavirus].”  

Collins has also promoted the use of Remdesivir. He instituted the Treatment Guidelines for COVID-19, which recommends the drug at three of the five stages of the disease. The NIH promotes the Remdesivir as an early intervention treatment, for those requiring supplemental oxygen, and for those whose symptoms are accelerating, but not yet severe enough to be admitted into ICU. 

One course of treatment of Remdesivir costs over $ 3100 US, which is good news for patent-holder Gilead Sciences. Reuters reported in February 2020 that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had applied to patent the use of the drug for use as a COVID-19 medicine. According to the news agency, Gilead said that it was working with China to test the drug in a small number of COVID-19 patients. 

However, not everyone is a Remdesivir fan. In November 2020, the World Health Organization issued a conditional recommendation against using the drug, stating, “The evidence suggested no important effect on mortality, need for mechanical ventilation, time to clinical improvement, and other patient-important outcomes.”  

To date, this has not been retracted or amended. 

If Remdesivir’s star falls, could Ivermectin’s rise? 

Ivermectin, an antiparasitic medicine used in both humans and animals for 50  years, has been tried and found successful both as a preventative and as an early intervention treatment.  

The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FCCC) has been monitoring the effectiveness of the drug against the coronavirus. Ivermectin, the FLCCC explains, “is a well-known, FDA-approved anti-parasite drug that has been used successfully for more than four decades to treat onchocerciasis “river blindness” and other parasitic diseases. It is one of the safest drugs known. It is on the WHO’s list of essential medicines, has been given 3.7 billion times around the globe, and has won the Nobel prize for its global and historic impacts in eradicating endemic parasitic infections in many parts of the world.” 

On December 8, 2020, Dr. Pierry Kory, head of the FCCC, testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs regarding the use of Ivermectin in COVID cases.  

“Ivermectin is a miracle drug,” he stated. “If you take it, you will not get sick.” 

In a recent review of the emerging evidence that Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19, the FCCC reported that the drug has been used successfully on a mass scale in Goa, India, Mexico, Peru, Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil.  

The cost for eight tablets of Ivermectin comes to about $45US.  


Despite the continued reported success of Ivermectin, the drug is absent from the NIH Treatment Guidelines and is only recommended under ‘Additional Considerations’ for those Covid patients living where parasitic worms are endemic. 

The WHO opposes the general use of Ivermectin to treat the coronavirus, however. In their March 2021 announcement, they recommended against using the drug “in patients with COVID-19 except in the context of a clinical trial.” 

Hydroxychloroquine, the drug announced and used by former President Donald Trump as COVID-19 medication has also been side-lined. Fauci, the FDA, and the NIH have all denounced its effectiveness and warned against using it to treat the coronavirus. The WHO issued a ‘strong recommendation’ (December 2020) against its use remarking that this “applies to patients with any disease severity and any duration of symptoms.”  

Last May Daszak has also signalled his disapproval of hydroxychloroquine by tweeting an Reuters article about the drug. He introduced it with the quotation “Researchers found that patients on hydroxychloroquine did not get better significantly faster than those not treated with the drug. Adverse events were also higher inpatients receiving the malaria drug.”  


However, Yale University’s Dr Harvey Risch is a firm proponent of the drug’s use against COVID-19. The epidemiologist caused a stir in medical circles, including his own workplace, when he advocated the use of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for the coronavirus. Last May, he published an article in the American Journal of Epidemiology entitled “Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk COVID-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis.” Last August, he told Fox News host Mark Levin that the evidence was “overwhelming” that hydroxychloroquine reduces risk of hospitalization or death from COVID-19.” 

America's Frontline Doctors are also convinced that hydroxychloroquine is effective.  In its 29-page “White Paper“, the not-for-profit citizen’s advocacy organization concluded that “Chloroquine, a relatively safe, effective and cheap drug used for treating many human diseases including malaria, amoebiosis and human immunodeficiency virus is effective in inhibiting the infection and spread of SARS CoV [an earlier coronavirus] in cell culture.” 

The White Paper continued: “The fact that the drug has significant inhibitory antiviral effect when the susceptible cells were treated either prior to or after infection suggests a possible prophylactic and therapeutic use.” 

The document makes the following important observation regarding the continual promotion of Remdesivir: 

“It is well known that newly patented drugs can be extremely profitable if there is demand and no other supply. The demand for Gilead’s Remdesivir, which is used late in the disease, obviously will plummet if the disease is stopped by HCQ early. Remdesivir is sold for $3200-$5700 per treatment and the federal government has already purchased all or most of it. The generic HCQ is ~$10 per treatment.” 

Remdesivir, Gilead Sciences notes on their website, “has been approved or authorized for temporary use as a COVID-19 treatment in approximately 50 countries worldwide.”