Expert testimony from two scientists adds to the evidence which identifies the origin of COVID-19. The scientists believe the virus leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and that it was the result controversial gain-of-function (GOF) research.

Despite all the statements from governments (and in particular the Chinese) there is no evidence to support the theory that the COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) virus emerged from a wet market in China.


Because no animal host or widespread animal-to-human transmission has ever been found.

The SARS-CoV-2 has a unique trigger on it’s surface which is called a furin cleavage site and a unique code in the genes for that site is called a CGG-CGG dimer; neither of these markers exist in natural coronaviruses.

However these codes are known to have been used in Gain of Function (GOF) research which was being conducted at the Wuhan laboratory.

SARS-CoV-2: Made for Human-to-Human Transmission.

(another sign of GOF research)

The two scientists were both called as witnesses before the House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Select Coronavirus Crisis hearing. The hearing was held June 29, 2021.

Their testimony/evidence confirmed that the origin of COVID-19, was a leak from a laboratory in Wuhan, China and that it was a direct result of controversial gain-of-function (GOF) research.

Many people believe that short of China confessing or a whistleblower coming forward we’ll never truly know the origin.

However Dr Richard Muller, Professor Emeritus of physics at the University of California, Berkeley, stated during his testimony,

“We have a whistleblower, the virus itself.”

Muller, who has worked on scientific efforts that have won Nobel Prizes, told the hearing that the virus, which came out of China, carried with it all the genetic information about its origins.

Muller said:

“In my mind, there are five compelling sets of scientific evidence that allow us to reach this very strong conclusion that, yes, it was a laboratory leak.

Dr. Steven Quay, the first scientist to testify, came to the same conclusion that COVID-19 has a laboratory origin, based on “six undisputed facts that support this hypothesis.”

What follows is a summary of the evidence, which you can hear in the video above.

Scientific Evidence

Quay is a physician and scientist with an impressive background. He has published hundreds of articles which have been cited in science journals over 10,000 times.

Quay also holds 87 patents across 22 different fields of medicine and has invented seven FDA-approved medicines.

Quay firmly believes that SARS-CoV-2 came from a laboratory in China.

In his published research paper of over 140 pages, Quay makes a strong argument that there is virtually no chance that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is from nature.

According to Quay:

“In the last 18 months, we’ve learned an intense amount about the origin of the pandemic, but one of my frustrations is that virologists and science writers around the world seem to want to ignore what has been learned and the inevitable conclusion it reveals.

As inconvenient as it is, I believe the evidence conclusively establishes that the COVID pandemic was not a natural process, but instead came from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and that it has the fingerprints of genetic manipulation for a process called gain of function research.”

Quay: Made in China

Quay stated that six undisputed facts support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from a lab.

1. COVID Didn’t Begin in a Seafood Market.

In the early days of the outbreak, China told the world that the COVID-19 pandemic began at the Hunan Seafood Market, a wet market in Wuhan, because half the initial cases were associated with that location.

This is reminiscent of other coronavirus outbreaks, including SARS-Cov-1 (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), both of which began in animal markets.

However, Quay said:

“After 18 months, we know it [COVID-19] did not begin in a market in Wuhan for three reasons.

First, none of the early COVID patients from the Hunan market were infected with the earliest version of the virus, meaning that when they came to the market, they were already infected.

Four patients with the earliest version of virus had one thing in common. None had exposure to the market.

Second, none of the environmental specimens taken from the market had the earliest virus either, which means they also came into the market already infected.

In addition, 457 animals from the Hunan market were tested, and all were negative for COVID.

Another 616 animals from suppliers to the Hunan market were also tested, and all were negative.

Wild animals from southern China – 1,864 of them, of the type found in the Hunan market – were also tested and found to be negative for the virus.

2. The Virus Has Not Been Found in an Animal Host

Scientists have tested 80,000 samples from 209 different species, but the SARS-CoV-2 virus has not been found in a single specimen.

Quay said:

“The probability of this for a community-acquired infection is about 1 in a million.

This is what you’d expect for a lab-acquired infection.”

3. No Cases of COVID Were Detected in Blood Samples Prior to December 29

If the virus had emerged naturally from a wild animal, a small number of cases would likely have already been in circulation.

However, Quay said:

“After testing 9,952 stored human blood specimens from Wuhan hospitals from before December 29, there was not a single case of COVID in any specimen.

It was expected that between 100 and 400 would be positive. The probability of this for a community-acquired infection is also about 1 in a million, but this is what you’d expect for a lab-acquired infection.”

4. No Evidence of Multiple Animal-to-Human Transmissions

With prior coronavirus outbreaks like SARS and MERS, 50% to 90% of the early cases were clearly linked back to various animal-to-human infections. For SARS-Cov-2, 249 early cases of COVID-19 were examined genetically and they were all human-to-human transmission.

On the subject of a community-acquired infection, Quay said:

“This is the probability of tossing a coin 249 times and getting heads every single time. This is, however, what you’d expect for a lab-acquired infection.”

5. SARS-CoV-2 Has Two Unique Factors That Point to GOF

SARS-CoV-2 has a unique trigger on the surface called a furin cleavage site and a unique code in the genes for that site called a CGG-CGG dimer.

Quay explained:

“These are two independent levels of uniqueness. Furin is a protein coding gene that activates certain proteins by snipping off specific sections.

To gain entry into your cells, the virus must first bind to an ACE2 or CD147 receptor on the cell. Next, the S2 spike protein subunit must be proteolytically cleaved (cut).

Without this protein cleavage, the virus would simply attach to the receptor and not get any further.

The furin site is why the virus is so transmissible, and why it invades the heart, the brain and the blood vessels.”

6. SARS-CoV-2 – Optimised for Human Transmission

Quay’s last point focused on SARS-CoV-2 being preadapted for human-to-human transmission. he said:

“Specifically, the part of the virus that interacts with human cells was 99.5% optimised.

When Sars-1 first jumped into humans, it had only 17% of the changes needed to cause an epidemic.”

How was SARS-CoV-2 “taught” to infect humans so efficiently in a laboratory?

Quay explained:

A commonly used GOF method to optimise SARS-CoV-2, would have been serial passage in a lab on a humanised mouse to develop human-like pneumonia.

In short, researchers infect the humanized mouse with the virus, wait a week, then recover the virus from the sickest mouse. That virus is then used to infect more mice, and the process is repeated until you get a virus that can kill all of the mice.

The challenge is to create the humanised mice to begin the process in the first place, but it’s known that part of WIV’s GOF research involved using humanised mice for experiments to determine which coronaviruses could infect humans, as well as research to make viruses that weren’t able to infect humans do just that.

According to Quay, WIV acknowledged they’ve been working with humanised mice, developed by Ralph Baric, Ph.D., at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, at U.S. taxpayers’ expense.

Five More Signs That Point to a Lab Origin

Whilst Richard Muller largely agreed with Quay’s testimony he also added five points of his own, which support the case that COVID-19 is a man-made creation from a lab.

1. Absence of pre-pandemic infections

Like Quay, Muller found the absence of pre-pandemic infections in more than 9,000 samples taken in Wuhan to be highly suspect.

He said:

“It’s unprecedented. It didn’t happen with MERS or SARS.”

2. Absence of a host animal.

Muller brought up the subject of a February 2020 Lancet letter, in which a group of 27 scientists, including Peter Daszak, with close ties to WIV, condemned “conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.”

Muller said:

“If you look at The Lancet letter, they say you can dismiss a lab origin because China identified the host animal and even went so far as to praise China for its openness.

This paper, The Lancet, does not read well when we look at it 16 months later.”

3. Unprecedented genetic purity

Agreeing with what Dr Quay had said, Muller also stated that SARS-CoV-2’s unique genetic footprint is unlike that of other coronaviruses like MERS and SARS, as well as that of other types of natural viruses.

But, he said,

“It is exactly what you would expect if you’d gone through gain of function.”

4. Spike mutation

Muller also highlighted the unique mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

Muller said.

“The fact that there’s no known way for that spike mutation to get there other than a gene insertion in a laboratory is a very powerful argument.”

5. Virus was optimised to attack humans

Muller said:

This is something that has never happened in natural virus releases, Muller said, “but it does happen if you run it through gain of function.

While there is no evidence in favor of a zoonotic origin for SARS-CoV-2, each one of these things is compelling by itself.

If we had any one of the five things, we should conclude that the evidence strongly favors the lab origin. And we have not one of the five, but all of them.

Muller also shared an anecdote from a colleague who said:

“A story as horrifying and more frightening than almost anything else in my life.”

In the early days of the pandemic, Muller explained how he had called on an expert virologist friend to help him review the literature which was suggesting there may have been a lab leak.

His friend refused, so he asked him if someone in his laboratory could do it.

But once again the answer was no again.

Muller pressed him on why the refusal, his friend responded with:

“If anyone in my laboratory is discovered to be working on a laboratory leak hypothesis, China will label us enemies of China and the laboratory will be blacklisted and we will no longer be able to collaborate.

We collaborate all the time with China. Nobody will take that risk.

The idea that China has managed to interfere, to break United States’ freedom of expression, freedom of investigation, freedom of thought through this collaboration is really scary.”

Muller then responded, calling it:

“One of the most chilling conversations I’ve had in my life.”

Ultimately, however, the truth will prevail as long as the long-censored lab-leak theory and evidence in support of it continue to go mainstream.

Developing Bio-Weapons is ILLEGAL

The Biological Weapons Convention, or Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, is a disarmament treaty that effectively bans biological and toxin weapons by prohibiting their development, production, acquisition, transfer, stockpiling and use.

Anonymous lives in the hope that, by revealing the true origin of COVID-19, we can bring those responsible for this crime against humanity to justice.

And Finally…

Thanks for reading. RiP and Anonymous hope you have a better understanding of where Corvid 19 came from.

We are aware that some of the funding the Wuhan lab attracted is a topic of some controversy. Don’t worry, we’ll be dealing with that. Very soon.

In the meantime, let us give y’all a Hidden in Plain Sound clue as to where that funding came from. Here’s The Rolling Stones – Sympathy For The Devil.

Enjoy. See you soon….

Author: Anonymous


Special thanks to

Dr. Joseph Mercola