News
Featured Image
Anthony FauciFace the Nation / YouTube

WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews) – The research nonprofit that received a grant from White House COVID-19 czar Dr. Anthony Fauci to explore gain-of-function (GOF) research on coronaviruses had previously been turned down by another government agency over the work’s potential dangers, according to documents obtained by the conservative investigators of Project Veritas.

Veritas reports that the documents concern the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA’s) rejection of a March 2018 funding request by EcoHealth Alliance for GOF research, which entails intentionally strengthening viruses to better study their potential effects. DARPA concluded that the project would violate a preexisting moratorium on such research, and noted that EcoHealth’s pitch “does not mention or assess potential risks of Gain of Function (GoF) research.”

Yet the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which was under Fauci’s direction at the time (and still is today), went on to approve a grant for EcoHealth, which put the money toward research at several sites, including China’s controversial Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

Fauci and his defenders have vociferously denied the claim that the work NIAID approved constitutes gain-of-function research, but the new documents indicate that DARPA recognized it as such.

US Marine Corp Major Joseph Murphy, a former DARPA fellow, put it even more strongly in one of the documents, an August 2021 report to the Inspector General of the Department of Defense: “SARS-CoV-2 matches the SARS vaccine variants the NIH-EcoHealth program was making in Wuhan.”

Murphy’s report also sheds light on other hotly-debated aspects of America’s COVID response, including the ineffectiveness of the new mRNA COVID vaccines and the effectiveness of preexisting therapeutics such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.

“Because of its (now) known nature, the SARSr-CoV-WIV’s illness is readily resolved with early treatment that inhibits the viral replication that spreads the spike proteins around the body (which induce a harmful overactive immune response as the body tries to clear the spikes from the ACE2 receptors),” the report explains. “Many of the early treatment protocols ignored by the authorities work because they inhibit viral replication or modulate the immune response to the spike proteins, which makes sense within the context of what EcoHealth was creating. Some of these treatment protocols also inhibit the action of the engineered spike protein. For instance, Ivermectin (identified as curative in April 2020) works throughout all phases of illness because it both inhibits viral replication and modulates the immune response. Of note, chloroquine phosphate (Hydroxychloroquine, identified April 2020 as curative) is identified in the proposal as a SARSr-CoV inhibitor, as is interferon (identified May 2020 as curative).”

“By contrast, the “gene-encoded, or ‘mRNA,’ vaccines work poorly because they are synthetic replications of the already-synthetic SARSr-CoV-WIV spike proteins and possess no other epitopes,” the report continues. “The mRNA instructs the cells to produce synthetic copies of the SARSr-CoV-WIV synthetic spike protein directly into the bloodstream, wherein they spread and produce the same ACE2 immune storm that the recombinant vaccine does. Many doctors in the country have identified that the symptoms of vaccine reaction mirror the symptoms of the disease, which corroborates with the similar synthetic nature and function of the respective spike proteins. The vaccine recipient has no defense against the bloodstream entry, but their nose protects them from the recombinant spike protein quasispecies during ‘natural infection,’ (better termed as aerosolized inoculation).

Veritas adds that the documents were “hidden in a top secret shared drive.” DARPA Chief of Communications Jared Adams told the group that the setup “doesn’t sound normal to me. If something resides in a classified setting, then it should be appropriately marked. I’m not at all familiar with unmarked documents that reside in a classified space, no.”

“Who at DARPA made the decision to bury the original report?” asks Project Veritas CEO James O’Keefe. “They could have raised red flags to the Pentagon, the White House, or Congress, which may have prevented this entire pandemic that has led to the deaths of 5.4 million people worldwide and caused much pain and suffering to many millions more.”

Fauci’s defenders have insisted that the US-funded WIV research was not responsible for the COVID-19 outbreak, with National Institutes of Health (NIH) Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak telling lawmakers last fall that the bat coronaviruses it studied “are not and could not have become” COVID-19, due to the “sequences of the viruses [being] genetically very distant.”

Murphy’s report casts serious doubt on that insistence, as does a May report from Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee finding “significant circumstantial evidence” that COVID spread from a leak at WIV. “The U.S. Government must also provide a full accounting of any American cooperation with the Wuhan lab’s coronavirus research, including the support of these projects through U.S. Government funds,” the report declared. 

Also this week, Republicans on the House Oversight Committee released other emails in which scientists warned Fauci as early as February 2020 of the lab leak possibility. “It is unclear if either Dr. Fauci or [NIH director Dr. Francis] Collins ever passed these warnings along to other government officials or if they simply ignored them,” write Republican Reps. James Comer and Jim Jordan.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.