A researcher from the Wuhan Institute of Virology has confirmed what many people have suspected. In a revealing interview with The Jerusalem Post Chao Shao asserted that COVID-19 was engineered to be a “bioweapon” developed by the CCP and that higher-ups told several of his colleagues to find the “most effective” strains of the virus among varying species, including human beings.
During the exclusive 26-minute interview, Chao Shao shared an anecdote involving another researcher named Shan Chao, who allegedly admitted to being provided with four strains of coronavirus by a superior, reports The Jerusalem Post.
Shan Chao was instructed to test these strains and determine which one had the greatest potential to infect multiple species, with a particular emphasis on human infectivity.
Chao Shao also made sure to mention that several of his colleagues went missing during the 2019 Military World Games held in Wuhan.
According to him, one of the missing individuals revealed that they were sent to hotels accommodating athletes from different countries to “check the health or hygiene conditions.” However, Chao Shao suspected that these actions were unrelated to virology research and suggested that they were potentially involved in spreading the virus.
Additionally, Chao Shao disclosed that in April 2020, he was sent to Xinjiang to assess the health status of Uyghur prisoners held in the re-education camps, ostensibly to expedite their release.
The claims come after Republicans criticized the Biden administration for hiding details about the origins of COVID-19, saying that the White House’s report “obscures more than it illuminates.”
The report from the director of national intelligence published last week, which was several days past its required deadline, was intended to lay out the administration’s intelligence on the Wuhan Institute of Virology and its potential connections to the pandemic’s origin.
‘This is not sufficient.…We want the intelligence released, not their opinion about the intelligence,” Rep. Mike Turner (R., Ohio) said. ‘We passed a law saying, ‘Declassify it.’ It’s the law of the land. Release this so the American public can see it,'” writes The Washington Free Beacon.
It’s becoming clearer and clearer that the push back against lab leak premise spurred by Anthony Fauci and many on the left was driven by the fact that so many health bureaucrats were promoting a “despair” agenda.
In a shocking admission in The New York Times, though she’s so clueless it probably didn’t occur to her as such, outgoing CDC Director Rochelle Walensky wrote:
“Exactly one year after the first laboratory-confirmed case of Covid-19 was identified in the United States, I began my tenure as the 19th director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. At the time, vaccines were available, but new variants continued to emerge. I viewed my primary charge as bringing this country from the dark and tragic pandemic days into a more restored place.
In the two and a half years since that day, the world has faced an unrivaled density of public health challenges. There was the evolving Covid-19 pandemic, as well as the first-ever global mpox outbreak. The largest outbreak of the Sudan species of Ebola virus in Uganda in two decades threatened to spread across international borders; the first U.S. case of paralytic polio since 2013 was identified; over 80,000 immigrants from Afghanistan arrived, some with cases of active measles and other diseases that were contained; and the largest and longest highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreak among flocks of birds is ongoing around the world.
Public health work will continue to be critically important and the challenges just as complex. Yet I fear the despair from the pandemic is fading too quickly from our memories [NCP bolded], perhaps because it is too painful to recall a ravaged nation brought to its knees.”
At Hot Air, David Strom explains why she’d write something so gruesome. “Despair of course was one of the most powerful tools the Elite had to immobilize us and shut down society. They did everything they could to reinforce the notion that we are powerless in the face of disease, and that only the Establishment could save us.
They demanded sacrifices, symbolic acts, obeisance, and the turning over of our bodies for the satisfaction of the COVID gods, of whom the Elite were the representatives. Their decisions were often arbitrary, but complete obedience was demanded.
And this, Walensky warns, is just the warm up. There is more to come, and we need to live in fear and yes…despair.”
Maybe this explains why the same group of people push the idea that the “world is on fire,” pointing to the extreme, though unlikely, potential of climate change, which has likely had a devastating impact on teenagers and young people.
The University of California-Berkely wrote, “In a study conducted two years ago, researchers investigated the prevalence of climate anxiety among adolescents around the world and its potential impact on mental health. The study found that climate anxiety was a common experience among the surveyed adolescents, with the majority reporting feeling very or extremely worried about the impact of climate change on their future.
Further studies have found a significant association between climate anxiety and poor mental health, including symptoms of depression and anxiety. Adolescents with high levels of climate anxiety were more likely to report poor mental health compared to those with lower levels of climate anxiety.”
Politicians and bureaucrats have gone so overboard with predicting Armageddon that a group of climate researchers have begged them to stop trying to frighten people.
“In a letter in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,” New Conservative Post discussed last October, “the authors write that many scientists are focusing way too much of the worst-case scenarios of climate change and environmental shifts all around the globe. While the team notes that these problems are real, constantly preaching impending doom is counter-productive and overshadows the more likely outcomes of global warming. These more-likely outcomes fall into the middle of the climate change conversation — not good, but also not extremely bad.”