The Highwire with Del Bigtree - GAIN OF FUNCTION SCIENTISTS DOWNPLAYED SAFETY RISKS

Episode Date: August 28, 2024

Breaking news from the non-profit U.S. Right To Know shows an early draft of a 2018 Ecohealth DARPA proposal dangerously omitting key points of their gain-of-function coronavirus research. Was this the blueprint that created the conditions for the pandemic?Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

We're really trying to find some evidence of natural evolution, but we keep turning over rocks like this. This is breaking news. This is, in order to frame this breaking news, in 2018, we had DARPA, which is an agency of the Department of Defense. They put out this solicitation for basically work. It says broad agency announcement preventing emerging pathogenic threats. They're looking for a biological technologies office. And you look in here, it says DARPA is soliciting innovative proposals to develop novel and scalable approaches to preempt viral spillover, not creative, but preempt it, and transmission from

animals or vectors into humans. Well, wouldn't you know, our friends at Equal Health Alliance, good old Peter Dazic and Ralph Barrick, his friend from North Carolina, they had a business plan ready to go. It was called Project Diffuse. And we really know about this because people got a hold of this. We covered this in a show before. but they said, hey, we have this business proposal. We have a lab all set up in Wuhan.

We know the scientists there. And we're going to submit this to the Pentagon here, to the DOD, to see if this works. So we look at this paper. This was Project Defused, diffusing the threat of Batborn coronavirus. It essentially proposed engineering high-risk coronaviruses, the same species as SARS-CoVi to synthesizing the spike protein with the fear and cleavage sites. We know that enhances transmissibility into humans. It's basically saying now, looking back, we have a blueprint for generating. stars Kobe 2 in a lab. So the U.S. Right to Know has recently got their hands on an advanced copy of their

business plan. So this was the business plan in draft form before they submitted it. And what's interesting about this is there's little notes on the side, little comments by Ralph Berrick and Peter Dasick and how to word this so the Pentagon will maybe pick them. So let's check those out. These are, again, breaking slides, breaking documents. So this is the article if anybody wants to read it at U.S. Right to Know American Scientists misled Pentagon on research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. So it says in here, the first slide, there's a comment by Peter Dazek. And you can see on the right there is his comment.

It says Ralph and Zhang Li, that's the infamous bat lady of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. If we win this contract, I do not propose that all of the work will necessarily be conducted by Ralph. he's in North Carolina. But I do want to stress the U.S. side of this proposal so that DARPA are comfortable with our team. Once we get the funds, we can then allocate who does what exact work. And I believe that a lot of these assays can be done in Wuhan as well. So just for the footnotes part, hey, let's not talk about China or Wuhan. Let's just say we're going to do this. Once we get the funds, we'll do it in Wuhan. Wink, wink, wink. So let's go to the next slide. Now this is, Peter Dazek again and they're talking about the who who they're going to put on the resume here. So the Pentagon is going to look and see who's going to be performing these studies. This is Ralph. He says, I'm sorry, this is Peter Dazek. He says, I'm planning to use my resume in Ralph's.

Lin Fah and Zingli. I realize your resumes are also very impressive, but I'm trying to downplay the non-U.S. focus of this proposal so that DARPA doesn't see this as a negative. So again, they're trying to hide the fact that they're like really working directly with China and Wuhan. But here's the cool one. So now they're talking about, this is Ralph Barrett. Now we're talking about the nitty-gritty. How are we actually going to do this? What kind of labs we're going to do this in?

The actual scientific work. Ralph Barak says this. In the U.S., these recombinant SARS-CoV are studied under BSL-3, not BSL-2, especially important for those that are able to bind and replicate in primary human cells. In China, might be growing these viruses under BSL-2. U.S. researchers will likely freak out. So if you look at the notes on the left side there, in the original copy of this, it says, well, we're going to do this in a BSL, biosafety lab level two.

And he says, hold on, hold on. Don't put that because the U.S. research is going to freak out. Tell them we're going to do it in biosafety level three. I mean, this is literally like, if you were imagining like a clothing company saying, let's just order it out of China. They don't sell the buttons on right. We know that, but Nike doesn't need to know that or, you know, something like that. like they're literally cheating it.

They're going to a cheaper manufacturing system, more dangerous. They know they're doing dangerous work, but don't tell anyone that China won't be taken as seriously as we would be here in America because everyone will freak out. And so remember when we were looking at the Slack comments, so the Slack comments was this back channel that was made public of all the researchers that were trying to figure out what happened in Wuhan during the early outbreak.

This was Christian Anderson. This was Eddie Holmes. So Christian Anderson, interestingly enough, says this on this Slack channel. He says, interesting, I'm all in for gain of function experiments. I think they're really important. However, performing these in a BSL 3 or less is just completely nuts. In my opinion, it has to be performed in a BSL 4 with extra precautions. So here's one of the leading virologist scientists saying BSL 4 or plus.

And then here literally is Ralph Berwick submitting a proposal to make SARS-CoV-2 to the Pentagon saying, And Bauer Safety Lab 2 in Wuhan sounds good to me. What could possibly go wrong. What's amazing about this is if this is what you do for a living, you're literally doing this to try and protect against bio weapons. And here you're making what you know would be a bio weapon in a lab where, you know, it has so much greater potential to leak out. But don't worry, it'll be happening in China and no one will know about it.

As though you're going to, you know, hide this thing under your bed. What is it you think you do for a living? If this gets out, it doesn't stay in China. And now we look at this through, you know, a retrospective lens and look back and say this thing, you know, all science says it did get out. And now you've got these guys knowing that that was a risk. Wow. I mean, I'd hate to be Fauci going in front of, you know, any congressional hearings right now. This thing is stacking up in a really, really ugly bad way for that guy.

Oh, man, I can hear the violins right now. And he'll be January 8th, January 9th. He's doing a congressional investigation that he agreed to show up for. Wow. And so just to tie it end on to this, you know, if you're talking to Peter Dazek, he'll say, well, we never got funded for this. So we didn't do those experiments because the Pentagon, the DoD didn't choose us. However, there's the article from the intercept just to put the fine point on this.

NIH documents provide new evidence, U.S. funded gain of function research in Wuhan. And that was NIH giving the money to EcoHealth Alliance. So they did fund this research. In 2018 was the start of the funding this research. and it was interesting because it's almost like well we didn't get the funding there but NIH gave it to us and let's just go ahead with this blueprint that seems to be what happened