The Biological Weapons Convention went into effect in March 1975. When you examine synthetic biology in 2026 and the arc of capabilities going back these 51 years, it is not an exaggeration to say it was like trying to write nuclear arms control before the Manhattan Project had revealed what industrialized physics could actually do. It needs updating.

More evidence Francis Collins and Fauci actively but secretly participated in producing the early consensus that they had nothing to do with creating Covid and that anybody who suggested otherwise wasn't "trusting the science."

My comments as to the charges towards Munster and Kwe: 1️⃣ There is a sub-culture of cutting through the authorisations to get samples in one's lab. Don't be fooled: tt's largely about ego, and having access to interesting samples before anybody else so that one may write a paper. That is simply unacceptable. 2️⃣ Failed virus inactivation is one of the main causes of research-caused outbreaks. Let's not pretend it's ok to not declare 'inactivated' viruses. 3️⃣ Try importing some illegal drugs in Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia or Malaysia. Even a tiny amount for 'personal use'. You may get a death sentence. 👉🏻 When a researcher, for his/her own ego, transports a virus, hopefully correctly inactivated, across a border without declaration, s/he risks not just his/her life but the lives of many. It's totally unacceptable. @DrJBhattacharya

"Virology research is obviously important because viral diseases are important. New anti-virals can be developed, as can new vaccine modes. What needs to be banned is the practice of making new potential pandemic pathogen viruses. Lab leaks are ubiquitous but if there aren’t any novel pathogens in a lab then there won’t be any to leak."

Remembering when I asked @ewanbirney what he thought about Pekar et al. '22. I think he did read it, but not critically. I wish he'd paid more attention to the reasoning, and less to the author list including Rambaut and Holmes.

Scripps virologist Kristian Andersen claims NIH virologist Vincent Munster is "being targeted for what appears to be minor (if any) 'offenses.'" Andersen puts the word offenses in scare quotes. FYI: Munster was charged w/ smuggling & lying to a federal officer--two felonies.

Virology research is not a crime. Repeatedly and blatantly violating biosecurity procedures to smuggle dangerous pathogens into the country is a crime. Deleting federal records is a crime. Rasmussen is one of the most toxic and disgraced virologists involved in covering up the deadliest biological accident in history. It's unsurprising that she's friends with criminals and defends their dangerous biosecurity violations. She is a serious threat to biosecurity, and it's sad that anyone is still ignorant enough to support her dangerous BS.

This sharing of Covid origins intel within US gov should've happened in week 1 of 2020. It would've informed everyone of a likely lab origin of Covid and preempted cover-up attempts. Why did it take 1.5 years for a whistleblower at DARPA to uncover a damning virus engineering proposal by Wuhan scientists and for this to be shared with NIH leaders who had funded similar research in Wuhan?

In 2021 a DARPA whistleblower said that he had uncovered a grant proposal in an unmarked folder with plans to create viruses like COVID, and that names of Wuhan scientists on the grant proposal matched names in U.S. intelligence intercepts. Less than two weeks after the DARPA whistleblower’s report, the NSC “warmly” invited Fauci to be briefed again.

It sounds harsh, but any scientist who still believes this in 2026 is meaningfully threatening biosecurity and public health. The public evidence for a lab origin of SARS-CoV-2 is overwhelming. CIA, FBI, DOE, and German intelligence have access to additional data and concluded lab origin. There is nothing left standing of the Worobey/Pekar papers after responses from Stoyan and Chiu, Nod, Weissman, Bloom, and the data biases described by Gao/Redfield. Authors of the Worobey/Pekar papers were also caught committing uniquely dangerous acts of scientific fraud including ghostwriting conclusions they knew to be false, and attempting to delete early seqs from a server without leaving a record. Millions died from preventable biosafety errors. We simply cannot afford to continue treating people like Patrick as legitimate voices on biosecurity and biosafety. The harsh reality is that deadly accidents keep occurring because of the ignorance, arrogance, and dangerous biases of men like Patrick.

The single most dangerous campaign of biological disinformation of this century was the effort to cover up the origin of COVID (the deadliest accident in history). Several leaders of this historic disinformation campaign attended #GHS2026 and continue to threaten public health.

In this newly released email, Francis Collins explicitly states that he (then Director of NIH), Anthony Fauci (then Director of NIAID), Jeremy Farrar (then head of the Wellcome Trust), and "Larry" helped draft Proximal Origin--and that their involvement was "appropriately" hidden. Failing to disclose their involvement at the time was unethical. More troubling, however, is that for years these individuals have continued to deny or minimize their roles rather than acknowledge them and accept responsibility...all while presenting themselves as champions of scientific integrity, honesty, and victims of unjust public attacks. Nature Medicine, which published Proximal Origin, has been aware of these concerns for years. Yet rather than issuing an editorial expression of concern and initiating a formal investigation into whether this and other alleged ethical violations associated with the paper warrant retraction, the journal has done nothing. But until the broader scientific community rejects rather than protects this type of behavior, and holds those that engage in it accountable, expect this unethical behavior to continue to be the norm.

Yes, obviously yes... overdue by 1 pandemic! "The UN must mandate inspections of high-containment labs, reporting standards for lab-acquired infections, &controls on the materials &machines used to synthesize deadly pathogens." Dr. Steve Quay @quay_dr archive.ph/Fk5Vo

In December 2011, then-NIAID Director Anthony Fauci co-authored a Washington Post OpEd titled "A flu risk worth taking," which offered a public defense of extremely reckless virology experiments. Simon Wain-Hobson has argued numerous times that this essay served as an omertà for the virology community, normalizing transgressive research and laying the groundwork for future experiments that likely caused the COVID-19 pandemic. ~15 years later, presumptive incoming NIAID Director Steven Quay publishes a new Washington Post OpEd titled "How to stop the next pandemic before it begins," advancing a message that is the opposite of Fauci's 2011 horror show. I appreciate the symmetry of the choice of venue and strongly prefer the message of Quay's OpEd published today to that of Fauci et al published back in 2011.

Simon Wain-Hobsons is one of the very top virologists in the world. The Racaniello, Rasmussen, Gronvall, etc, are still in pre-school compared to him. So, please, listen.👇🏻 "Cowards Die Many Times"

I agree 100% with Dr. Quay. His suggestions for biosafety and biosecurity reforms are common sense.

Read my OpEd today in the Washington Post about my book, The Code as Witness, and the five steps we need to take to prevent the next pandemic. washingtonpost.com/opinions/…

In the 11th episode of @SciFrTheFringe's "In Defense of Virology," virologist Simon Wain-Hobson and I discuss the 20-year history of missed opportunities to confront the risks and societal implications of dangerous virology research in the years leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic. We also use the 2020 paper "The Origin of COVID-19 and Why It Matters" (a paper on which recently indicted David Morens is first author and recent fired NIAID Acting Director Jeff Taubenberger is senior author) as a case study of how unscrupulous scientists have used an unethical practice of citing references that do not support the claims being made in an attempt to transform unsupported claims about COVID-19 origins into accepted scientific "facts."

Gratified the book is #1 in Virology, New Releases. People have asked me my thoughts on the proper way to handle dangerous research, based on research for the book. Here they are: Funding agencies should treat dangerous gain-of-function research and gain-of-opportunity research as related forms of high-risk life sciences research. The former increases biological hazard through experimental alteration of an agent or toxin; the latter increases pandemic hazard by collecting, concentrating, culturing, transporting, passaging, adapting, or situating naturally occurring agents in ways that materially increase their access to humans, humanized systems, dense populations, transportation hubs, laboratory amplification, or susceptible host populations, even absent intentional genetic engineering. Both should be subject to a conservative risk to benefit analysis before any funding occurs. With an estimate of 1.7 million unknown viruses in the world of which over 800,000 are potential human pathogens, my proposed policy is our best case scenario to avoid the next pandemic. IMHO

Join the event live or online. Registration information here. "Ahead of its June 9 publication, The Code as Witness reached #1 New Release status in the Amazon category, Medical Law and Legislation, reflecting early reader interest in COVID origins, scientific accountability, and biosecurity reform." Hudson Institute to Host Dr. Steven Quay for Launch of "The Code as Witness" prn.to/3QamUrE