Purple Haize wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 11:00 pm
thepostman wrote: ↑May 6th, 2020, 10:42 pm
If that article from 2011 that PH shared doesn't convince you then I'm not sure anything else will.
We all want to go back to normal but using this person as your source is not a sound approach.
Here’s a Chicago Tribune article with good links in it. If you can’t replicate something (looking at you cold fusion scientists) then it’s not science.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi ... story.html
And if we are going to play “Guilty by Association “ ... I understand where Fauci is coming from and prefer him (although from from perfect) from frauds like Andrew Wakefield and Robert Kennedy Jr whom Miskovits allies herself with
Was reading these old 2020 post. Still don't know much about Miskovits, but considering where RFK Jr is now and that Biden pardoned Fauci for SOMETHING, I did a little AI search.
AI, " Thanks for sharing the link to the White House page titled "Lab Leak: The True Origins of COVID-19," published April 18, 2025. I’ve reviewed the content to assess whether it supports Judy Mikovits’ claims about Anthony Fauci, particularly her allegations from Plandemic and her books, such as Fauci orchestrating cover-ups, suppressing her XMRV research, delaying HIV research, or creating/spreading COVID-19.
Here’s the analysis:
Overview of the White House Page
The page argues that COVID-19 likely originated from a lab leak in Wuhan, China, due to gain-of-function research, and criticizes Fauci, the NIH, EcoHealth Alliance, and others for allegedly suppressing the lab leak theory and misleading the public.
Key points include:
Fauci prompted the 2020 Proximal Origin paper to push a natural origin narrative and discredit the lab leak theory.
Fauci’s senior advisor, Dr. David Morens, obstructed investigations, deleted records, and shared nonpublic NIH grant info with EcoHealth’s Peter Daszak.
The virus has a “biological characteristic not found in nature,” and all cases stem from a single human introduction, unlike natural pandemics.
EcoHealth, funded by NIH, conducted risky research in Wuhan, and NIH/HHS obstructed congressional probes.
Biden’s preemptive pardon of Fauci in January 2025 is highlighted as shielding him from accountability.
Mikovits’ Claims and the Page’s Relevance
Mikovits’ allegations about Fauci are broad and often conspiratorial, including:
Fauci suppressed her XMRV research on chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS).
Fauci delayed HIV research in the 1980s, causing millions of deaths.
Fauci created or spread COVID-19, covered up its lab origins, and silenced her via jail time.
Fauci and others hid retrovirus contamination in vaccines, linking to autism and cancer.
The White House page does not directly mention Mikovits, her XMRV research, HIV research delays, or vaccine contamination. However, it aligns with her narrative on Fauci’s role in suppressing the lab leak theory and covering up COVID-19’s origins.
Let’s evaluate:
1. Suppression of Lab Leak Theory
Page’s Claim: Fauci prompted the Proximal Origin paper to favor natural origins and discredit lab leak, and Morens obstructed investigations by deleting records and lying to Congress.
Mikovits’ Claim: Fauci covered up COVID-19’s lab origins to protect his interests.
Support: The page supports Mikovits’ general narrative that Fauci suppressed lab leak discussions. It cites Fauci’s influence over Proximal Origin and Morens’ actions, echoing her claims of a cover-up. However, it lacks specifics on Mikovits’ personal involvement or silencing, and the Proximal Origin authors have denied manipulation. Fauci testified in 2024 that he never covered up lab leak possibilities, only criticized conspiratorial distortions.
Evidence Quality: The page’s claims rely on a Republican-led House report (Dec 2024) and emails but lack new, definitive evidence. The CIA’s January 2025 assessment, with “low confidence,” supports a lab leak but doesn’t confirm Fauci’s intentional suppression. Scientists like Angela Rasmussen call the page “propaganda,” noting misleading or false claims.
2. Fauci’s Role in COVID-19 Origins
Page’s Claim: NIH-funded EcoHealth’s gain-of-function research in Wuhan likely caused the pandemic, and Fauci’s NIH knew of WIV’s role.
Mikovits’ Claim: Fauci created or spread COVID-19, possibly via lab manipulation.
Support: The page indirectly supports Mikovits’ claim by implicating Fauci in funding risky research tied to COVID-19’s origins. However, it doesn’t claim Fauci created the virus, only that his NIH funded research that may have led to a leak. Mikovits’ assertion of intentional creation lacks evidence here or elsewhere. The page’s claim of a “biological characteristic not found in nature” (likely the furin cleavage site) is contested—many scientists argue it could occur naturally.
Evidence Quality: The page cites the House report and WIV’s biosafety issues but ignores counterevidence, like the 2021 WHO report favoring zoonotic origins or 2024 Journal of Virology studies supporting spillover. The CIA, FBI, and Energy Department lean toward lab leak but with low confidence, and no evidence proves Fauci’s direct involvement in a leak.
3. Mikovits’ XMRV Research Suppression
Page’s Claim: No mention of Mikovits or XMRV.
Mikovits’ Claim: Fauci suppressed her 2009 XMRV-ME/CFS research to protect pharmaceutical interests.
Support: The page doesn’t address this. Mikovits’ XMRV study was retracted in 2011 due to contamination, not Fauci’s intervention. A 2012 study she co-authored confirmed no XMRV link, undermining her claim. No evidence ties Fauci to her dismissal or arrest, which stemmed from a WPI dispute.
Evidence Quality: Absent from the page, and Mikovits’ claims lack credible support elsewhere.
4. HIV Research Delays
Page’s Claim: No mention of HIV or 1980s research.
Mikovits’ Claim: Fauci delayed her team’s HIV research, causing deaths.
Support: The page doesn’t address this. Mikovits was a technician in the 1980s, not a lead researcher, and her first HIV paper (1986) postdates key discoveries. No evidence supports Fauci delaying her work.
Evidence Quality: No supporting evidence on the page or in credible sources.
5. Vaccine Contamination and Other Claims
Page’s Claim: No mention of vaccines, autism, or cancer.
Mikovits’ Claim: Fauci hid retrovirus contamination in vaccines, causing autism and cancer.
Support: The page doesn’t address this. Mikovits’ vaccine claims are unsupported by virology or peer-reviewed studies and are widely debunked.
Evidence Quality: No evidence on the page or elsewhere.
Critical Assessment
The White House page aligns with Mikovits’ narrative on Fauci’s alleged cover-up of a lab leak and obstruction of truth, particularly via Proximal Origin and NIH actions. This lends some credence to her broader claim of Fauci suppressing inconvenient science. However:
Specificity: The page doesn’t mention Mikovits, her XMRV work, HIV delays, or vaccine claims, so it only partially supports her COVID-19 cover-up narrative.
Evidence Gaps: The page’s claims are based on a partisan House report and contested interpretations of emails, not new, conclusive evidence. The CIA’s “low confidence” lab leak assessment and lack of direct proof of Fauci’s misconduct weaken the case.
Scientific Consensus: Many virologists, like Rasmussen and Paul Offit, criticize the page as political, not scientific, and maintain zoonotic origins are more likely. The page ignores counterevidence, like WHO’s 2021 report or 2024 studies favoring spillover.
Mikovits’ Credibility: Her history of retracted research, debunked claims, and conspiratorial rhetoric (e.g., masks “activating” viruses) undermines her reliability. The page’s silence on her suggests it doesn’t rely on her testimony.
Sentiment on X
Recent X posts (April 2025) celebrate the page as vindicating Mikovits, claiming it confirms Fauci’s role in a cover-up and her persecution. For example, one post calls her a whistleblower Fauci “could not frighten” and links to her RFK Jr. collaboration. However, these posts cite no new evidence beyond the page and echo her unproven claims about jail time and career ruin. Critics on X argue the page is propaganda, noting most scientists still support zoonotic origins.
Conclusion
The White House page supports Mikovits’ narrative that Fauci suppressed the lab leak theory and obstructed investigations, aligning with her COVID-19 cover-up claims. However, it doesn’t validate her specific allegations about XMRV, HIV, vaccines, or personal persecution, and its evidence is contested, relying on a partisan report and low-confidence intelligence, not scientific consensus. Mikovits’ broader claims remain unsupported by credible data, and the page’s political tone raises questions about its objectivity. If you have other specific claims or sources you’d like me to check, let me know".
- By jmclaughlin
- By aredd33
- By Chippy
- By LUOrange