Illegal Biolab in California: Dr. Li-Meng Yan’s conversation with “Ask Dr. Drew” Pinsky
Transcript.
ILLEGAL BIOLAB IN CALIFORNIA: Escaped Virologist Warns of CCP Spy Links w/ Dr. Li-Meng Yan — Ask Dr. Drew (Dr. Drew Pinsky), 15 August 2023
TEN TAKEAWAYS:
So-called “gain-of-function” virus research is not legitimate. It is a cover for bioweapons research. We know this because a bioweapon and its countermeasure (either antidote or vaccine) are developed simultaneously.
Dr. Li-Meng Yan claims that Drs. Fauci, Baric, Daszak and others affiliated with the World Health Organization and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill conspired with the CCP to create Sars-Cov-2 as a bioweapon.
The World Health Organization’s pandemic plan and other proposals should not be viewed as beneficial or benign, according to Dr. Yan.
In Dr. Yan’s opinion, promoting the use of the mRNA “vaccine” without adequate testing, especially to children and pregnant women, was very irresponsible. Coronavirus vaccine research going back to Sars-1 in 2003 has been unsuccessful because the spike protein causes inflammation and other side-effects.
Despite acknowledging the many flaws and gaps in the Covid-19 mRNA “vaccine” studies, Dr. Drew Pinsky defends his decision to vaccinate his obese and elderly patients, saying he believes there is a “net benefit” for those patients.
Dr. Yan identifies the problem of a lack of independent oversight of the pharmaceutical field, pointing out that the same people who developed the bioweapon also developed the “vaccine” as well as provided the testing. She believes China controls or influences everyone involved in the pandemic.
Dr. Yan is investigating the illegal “biolab” facility recently discovered in Reedley, California, which is not a functioning lab but is a storage space. She connects the facility to a Chinese business consortium. Based on the presence of large numbers of specially-bred (presume engineered) lab mice and at least 20 types of infectious pathogens (including samples of malaria, dengue, tuberculosis, HIV, meningitis, chlamydia, and Covid-19), she believes this could be evidence of a planned attack or attacks on the U.S. and she further believes there could be many more facilities like it.
According to Dr. Yan, China has a large, deep network of agents working in American universities. She says China’s international network is working to destroy the United States.
Dr. Yan says the existence of the furin cleavage site and evidence of other modifications in the Covid-19 virus suggests that the virus was lab-created. Coronaviruses in nature do not have the furin cleavage site.
Dr. Yan encourages the United States to take proactive steps to protect our country and people against China’s aggression.
(8:10)
DREW: Li-Meng Yan is a Chinese virologist, she’s a physician, she was involved in the research and development of the coronavirus backbone, and when she started asking questions she was essentially told she would be disappeared if she continued asking questions …
(8:30)
She fled, and she is still in hiding, though you can listen to her and watch her … you can follow her on Twitter at @DrLiMengYAN1, you can also listen to her show The Voice of Dr. Yan on America Out Loud Radio Network. Please welcome Li-Meng Yan. Welcome back!
YAN: Thank you, Dr. Drew.
(9:00)
DREW: So tell them, if you wouldn’t mind. I always like just reviewing so people understand who may not have been introduced to you in the past. A brief sketch of what your career was, and when you realized something fishy was going on, and maybe what you’ve learned since?
YAN: My background is medical doctor, and later I came, from China, obtained my M.D. degree from […] Medical University, and then I went to the University of Hong Kong for study. And after that I turned to do virology study because I was invited by the leader of the WHO reference lab, Dr. Malik Peiris — to join their team. So I turned to become a virologist and work in the WHO lab for five years handling influenza and other infectious disease virus as well as vaccine development.
At the end of 2019, the last day, I was secretly assigned by my supervisor, the WHO expert Dr. Leo Pung? in that lab, to investigate Covid-19 virus. At that time we just know there was novel coronavirus happen in Wuhan. They wanted me to use my very unique but massive network back to China to understand what happened.
(10:28)
So briefly, I quickly collect a lot of information from headquarter office of China CDC to local Wuhan hospital from the […] to […] labs. And then I report to — in a realtime manner. And conveniently these WHO experts in my team got the information, they know that, China is covering up, and most […] this is something very fishy.
However, they choose to help China, they choose to work with WHO to cover it up. Including deny the human-to-human transmission for so long.
And later until mid-January when I do more investigation, they wanted me to be the person to help them find evidence of raccoon dog in the Wuhan wet market. And they thought the raccoon dog would be the zoonotic host….
(11:30)
And the more study I did, finally I realized that this is based on the sequence knowledge, this virus, Sars-Covid-2, was developed based on People’s Liberation Army scientists. Because they own a very unique virus they pretend [is] from East China, they named it as DC45. And also — that is a twin stream —
And they found it, in 2015 to 2017 do modification, working with Wuhan Institute of Virology and other People’s Liberation Army lab, as our civil labs, including my lab, provide the knowledge, finally, that gets us Covid-2. However, they wanted you to believe the release of Sars-Covid-2 is from the raccoon dog from the wet market. So altogether I start to review the truth from 19th January 2020.
(12:30)
DREW: Let me stop you. As time has gone, on I have learned many layers to this story. One was, I went back and looked carefully at the Nature article that was put out, Kristian Andersen and that whole group. I found their argument in that article — it was a letter, it wasn’t even an article, that’s why they were able to turn it around so fast — but what were your critiques of that letter? If found it to be reasonably convincing. Maybe not right, but it was reasonably convincing. What did you think?
(13:00)
YAN: When I read that article, I understand what happened. Because that article was submitted and published at the end of February, I remember, which is after the Lancet article — Lancet letter, signed by 27 scientists.
They have already […] to claim that Sars-Covid-2 came from nature. Definitely not from lab. And praised Chinese Communist Party. And then Kristian Andersen and other people published that article.
I know they would publish such article. Because when I report when I got with evidence to my boss, and also it goes to the big boss Malik Peiris. So Malik Peiris’ feedback is, he will work with Germany’s virologist Christian Drosten to write a nature origin article. And he immediately show his denial of lab origin —
(14:00)
DREW: Hang on, I want to make sure … to drill into this as much as I can, really try to understand it. So, you were invited to be part of that study group that wrote the Nature article?
YAN: No.
DREW: When you read the article, what is your criticism — I understand you’re looking at the behavior and saying, oh my goodness, they were covering this up. But what specific criticism do you have of the Nature article itself? Because when I read it, I could see why these guys convinced themselves of this.
(14:38)
YAN: Ah. I see what you mean. So, yeah. So, besides the things behind this article. Just based on this article, they never deny the real possibility of lab origin. But what they did is they used a lot of scientific words to let you get into their possibility, and they told you that there are so many virus previously were proven from nature. And we are the scientists, we control the voice. You should listen to me, don’t think about the lab origin, you see. Possibly this comes from nature, and the other possibility it can come from nature, and somehow we think it can come from nature.
So this is something I at the time, from my perspective, I would say, they have actually prepared for one day, someone will reveal their tricks.
And they can say, oh, we’re scientists, we’re innocent, we believed it could come from nature because of this, this, this. And so, I don’t know, it can come from lab. So that’s what they want.
(15:44)
DREW: And you mentioned early on the raccoon dog. I thought pangolin, was, is that the same thing? Is pangolin the same as raccoon dog …
YAN: Pangolin is the one which eat ant. Looks like small —
DREW: Like an anteater.
YAN: Yeah, cute and —
DREW: Aardvark —
YAN: Raccoon dog is also cute, and, but it’s not raccoon, not dog. It’s like civet cat. More like a small, fluffy fox or something. What they want, CCP doesn’t have only one protocol to, how to say, perfect this nature origin theory.
(16:32)
They want you to believe there [is] enough evidence they can provide you little by little. So according to their — because when I started radio it was, back to middle January 2020 from the Chinese YouTube blog. At that time it was very influential, and I [could] get feedback, even from my friends, although they don’t know I’m the whistleblower.
(16:56)
So, China immediately respond to that. That’s why they start to — like Shi Zhengli the bat woman in Wuhan — to talk about, ‘we found some virus from a drawer which we obtained ten years ago from […] West China.’ And they say it looks similar, 96% similar to Sars-2. It’s called ITJ-13.
(17:22)
And also they started to use People’s Liberation Army scientists working with civil scientists — including some of my colleagues in Hong Kong University — to publish the pangolin virus. And these are actually fabricated. Because I have examined these papers in my […] reports, it shows they have made up data, and just because they need to fulfill some theory.
So, pangolin, according to them will be something carry similar things and maybe transfer it to, transmit it to bat and bat transmit it to human.
DREW: Got it.
(17:58)
YAN: And they also want raccoon dog. Because you will see, especially this year, several more articles talking about raccoon dog as a host, although there is no evidence. But they insist. Because according to the best protocol, China, my lab in Hong Kong, have found that the Sars1 in 2003 came from the bat and then to the civet cat in Guangzhao wet market, to human.
So, if we can show that, again, bat come to wet market, or maybe pangolin to bat to wet market in Wuhan, to raccoon dog which is similar to civet cat, people should not question it. Because we already have such story established, so you should believe this story again. That’s why this year —
(18:48)
DREW: Is that Sars1 story, is that accurate? Or is that another made-up story? Because, the reason I’m asking that, I don’t know if you’re familiar with David Martin. We interviewed him last week, and his claim is that the research organization with Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina was working on some of these same viruses back before Sars1, and he’s worried that that’s where it came from, and that it was during the Obama administration that that — if I get these details right — that research Baric was doing was sent to China and sent to the Ukraine. Do you know anything about that part of the story?
(19:38)
YAN: I haven’t talked to Dr. Martin, and I have listened to some of his interview. What I can say is, based on the part I have listened to, maybe not all of his statements, there is something really credible because he has worked in such lab before at that time. And for me, back to 1990 to 2000 I was just a kid. So I don’t have much information at that time.
(20:08)
But what I can tell you is, based on my research, my own focus on CCP’s bioweapons study and others since these years, back to 1980s China has already started to send their scientists, virologists, go U.S. And in 1996 there was already some scientists working with Ralph Baric in North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
DREW: That’s right, yeah. I’m aware of that….
(20:45)
YAN: China has already get collaboration with Ralph Baric, back to at least 2000, publicly. And at that time Ralph Baric, his study was not that influential, but somehow China sees the potential capacity of his study and they start to get more and more collaboration.
And actually CCP has [been] using the establishment with America for the diplomatic relations from end of 1970s to deliver their academic spies to the United States.
(21:22)
Remember, CCP learned all these things from Soviet Union. And their top scientist, a virologist, one of the top bioweapon virologists studied from Soviet Union for several years with […] go back to 1950s. So they have cultivate their students in U.S. When they see you are working on biodefense, study vaccines, working on potential bioweapon things.
Just think about, why don’t they think about steal technology and work back in their labs and attack you?
(21:58)
DREW: I’m beginning to think there are layers and layers to this bioweapons story. And there may be espionage and counterespionage. I mean, who knows what about whom, and who’s trying to keep an eye on whom? Why? And it’s U.S., it’s China, it’s the Soviet Union, it’s Ukraine, I don’t know, who else is involved with this?
But it’s deeply worrisome. And I know that although we outlawed so-called ‘gain of function’ research here, obviously we outsourced it. Right at the same time that we increased Dr. Fauci’s salary to be the highest paid federal official in the land. Interesting.
(22:40)
Just all very interesting, and disturbing. I wish we could know more, but maybe we can’t? I don’t know. One of the things, if I’d been smarter and thought about it for two seconds, I would have realized — I used to be kind of defensive, and, ‘well, of course, they have to do these kind of gain-of-function to develop some of the vaccines against these things, to anticipate what they might be.
No, it’s the opposite. When you’re developing a bioweapon, you want to have a vaccine for that bioweapon so your people and your army can be protected while your enemy is not protected. Right? They must go hand-in-hand.
(23:18)
Vaccine and bioweapons research must always be completely simultaneous. Is that accurate?
YAN: Yes. According to CCP’s People’s Liberation Army document, they have well documented. When you start to study the bioweapon, you definitely want to get the countermeasure, right? It can be antidote or vaccine.
(23:45)
Also, if the vaccine can be used a bioweapon, they will also think about that. However back to this case, I would say, based on information we have already, it all pointed to China for purposely release[ing] Sars-Covid-2 as a bioweapon. And their countermeasure, their vaccine, actually doesn’t work well. So, that is a point.
DREW: What do you feel now, as time has gone on, about the lab leak hypothesis theory, fact, however you want to think about it? Why would this country go to such lengths to try to avoid talking about that? What is our — unless it’s that the Chinese have infiltrated so deeply that they are influencing some of the — I don’t know, what do you say? I’m trying to figure this out — it doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
(24:42)
YAN: It’s layers by layers, like you say, like the onion, we’re peeling the onion. So the point is, first, it came out at a point that people don’t have any awareness of that […]. Why I was appointed as investigator? Because except for very few people in China, even back to Hong Kong, we don’t have any information. WHO, U.S., you all rely on my report and then go to the scientists and then to make some other decisions. And of course they may have other sources but I haven’t hear[d] about this kind of whistleblowers.
(25:25)
From the outbreak, it should be around end of October [2019] to early November when the real outbreaks start[ed] to infect more Wuhan people. Until early March [2020] it [came] to [the] U.S. Four months, you don’t have any way to get this virus. Even like Stanford or NIH scientists want to publish the article on Covid-19, they get to us, my lab, to get samples to do the research.
(25:58)
So in this case, it offer[ed] China enough time to prepare for the following propaganda, and also using their networks — they really have massive network in U.S. For that case, for forty years at least, plus someone stayed here longer. And they know how to use academic collaboration, commercial collaboration, politic things to tie all the people with them.
(26:25)
So, these people are kind of sticky to the spider net. And then China […] will promote “anti-Asian, anti-Chinese” if you dare to blame China for the virus origin you will be the “anti-Asian.” And then they created more things like promote vaccines, and promote other things — pharmaceutical companies will gain a lot of benefits in this kind of pandemic. And then, this kind of benefits will make them tend to collaborate with nature origin.
(27:04)
Because, [if] you know this [came] from nature, you immediately think about you need a vaccine. But if you know if come from the biolab, this is bioweapon, you will definitely think about countermeasure[] rather than vaccine.
So this is kind of logic. Altogether China knows how Americans think about. Chinese government know America. They study America for so many years. And they have their puppies [puppets?]. Like Fauci, Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric. They have their communist international like my boss Malik Peiris, and also Dr. Tedros in WHO. Altogether politicians, journalists, all the other people had to listen to these experts. So that make it very difficult for people to pursue the truth, especially back to the beginning of the pandemic.
(27:58)
DREW: What do you think about the new international so-called treaty that the World Health Organization is pushing forward to try to, essentially, have authority over sovereign nations and elected officials? Just curious what your opinion is?
YAN: Many experts, especially in the virology field — because I work in this field — they are working with CCP or they are helping CCP. And in this case you should not trust an international organization if they have such clear tendency to put CCP in their operations. Because to use international organizations to reshape the international regulations, and also create concept to serve the CCP’s […] is CCP’s national strategy.
(28:50)
DREW: It seems like the World Health Organization has gone well beyond the CCP strategy, where they want nature to have equivalent valence and importance to humanity. Not just animals, but also geology to be equally important as yourself or any other human agent. That doesn’t sound CCP to me, that sounds like the World Health Organization marching off into its own direction.
(29:20)
But we’ll leave that for a second … You’d mentioned the spider web of connections amongst the CCP and the academics here in this country. We have this crazy biolab in Reedley, California, discovered a lot — I don’t even understand what has gone on there, but there seems to be very limited information about what there was and what they’re doing with it…. So when we come back I want you to give me your thoughts on that illegal biolab in California? Why aren’t we learning more about it? And I’m also curious if you are being […] interviewed by intelligence officials, are they listening to you, are they building a case, or are they even including you in any of their thinking?
[commercial break]
(34:30)
KALEB NATION: One of the most interesting things that [Dr. DAVID MARTIN] brought up last week was about how this was basically how … pushing the mRNA vaccines, one of the biggest goals was to circumvent the Catholic Church’s hesitations about gene editing and cloning and things like that. That was something I hadn’t ever heard before —
DREW: “CRISPR.”
KALEB: CRISPR, exactly. I had never heard that concept but that’s actually —
DREW: I think he sort of threw that in as a hypothesis. He was saying that … Moderna was working way back with the gain of function research at Chapel Hill in the ‘90s, and they had developed some mRNA-type technologies back then. And lo and behold it was refined in 2019, and then rolled out completely with the project Warp Speed.
(35:28)
KALEB: That was the thing that jumped out to me because I had never even considered that idea. Because I grew up, my whole family grew up very, very Catholic. And so I know all of these stories leading up. And that was a very interesting concept that I have to dig into and research more of. I didn’t know if she might have ideas about that as well. The Catholic Church is a very powerful organization, and they would shut down anything that goes against their beliefs. Very large group there.
(36:00)
YAN: Thank you, Kaleb. First, I want to talk about mRNA but I didn’t listen to that content from Dr. Martin. So, I don’t really know his statement. But when we talk about mRNA vaccine, I keep telling people, no matter what vaccine of Covid-19, it’s immature.… Back to the early beginning of the pandemic, that was very irresponsible to promote it to everyone, especially … the mandate policy, and to promote it to kids, to pregnant lady, this is very irresponsible.
Just back to my background, I teach public health to medical doctors in their course. And this is our professional field. So, in some kind of pandemic or outbreak, when you’re looking for the antidotes, or the way to prevent it, it’s not only you need to use an injection to solve it.
(37:05)
And like Covid virus, coronavirus, actually there is no safe and efficient way. Even people have studied for decade, and even since back to 2003 to Sars-1, after that monkeypox, tried to develop vaccines against the coronavirus. It doesn’t work. Why? Because the spike protein, they will bring some side effect to people, will interfere in your immune response, and also even create inflammation or other side effects which will make it not good to give people.
(37:45)
And also they can evolve very quickly. There are so many variants. Your vaccine cannot catch up this speed. And you cannot keep inject[ing] yourself, that will ruin your immune system.
And mRNA vaccine is just one of the technolog[ies] that are used for Covid vaccine. However, before Covid-19 vaccine, we now have mRNA technology applied to the — to pass the clinical trial applied to human. Why, in a sudden, before you understand the nature of this virus, before you know what kind of modification from People’s Liberation Army’s lab to this virus, without the large-scale clinical trial and long term observation, you suddenly push it to everyone?
(38:30)
And their lack of data, I can say, I would say they are purposely kind of ignored, when the pharmaceutical industry provided to the public, we didn’t do that, so you won’t think about that kind of data but those are very important data. Long term, effects on nervous system, all this.
DREW: This is another, sort of, unpeeling the onion that I’ve been looking into, and it’s increasingly concerning. One of the things I learned from Dr. [Joseph] Fraiman is that the FDA, when they’re trying to decide if something is a vaccine reaction, I’m using his words: ‘They got a guy. They’ve got just some guy that goes down and looks at the record and says, yes, this was or was not a vaccine reaction.’
Think about how insane that would have been had they done that in relation to Vioxx and coronary events?! This is one of the biggest scandals in the history of the pharmaceutical industry.
(39:38)
Every cardiac event associated with Vioxx was assumed to be related to Vioxx. But with this, they send a guy down to do something that NOBODY can do — can determine whether an event in proximal relation to the vaccine necessarily did or did not have something to do with the vaccine. Just report the data! They didn’t report the data.
So there’s that on one side, and then there’s the mandates. And the pushing. That’s the part that troubled me. I am convinced — and I have been looking at the data more and more — I am convinced that the vaccines had a net benefit in the vulnerable. Older, obese, frail. I am convinced that there was a net benefit there, that the risk was worth the reward. Even though we didn’t fully understand it, and even as I am sort of coming to understand it now, I am increasingly convinced that I did the right thing, for example, vaccinating all of my elderly patients. They seem to have derived a net benefit from that.
But that is a far cry from mandating children, and school age kids, and pregnant women. That’s so far from protecting the people that might have died of this illness.
(41:00)
And, what bothers me is there’s this continued analysis of the vaccine’s performance with the original variants.
I just read one today on Omicron. It said that three vaccines of the original mRNA — not the bivalent but the original set-up — had some decent effect on reducing hospitalization. Completely gone after three months. Completely gone. And while it reduced hospitalization by seventy percent within the first couple of weeks, is that from 12 hospitalizations down to 8 hospitalizations? Is that what we’re talking about here? How many people were actually helped by that? They never used death as an outcome — they never used that! — in any of the vaccine studies, which is another weakness. There are just so many layers of concern to this. What are your concerns?
(42:00)
YAN: My concern is, one, America is a democratic country, and I know Americans feel dissatisfied more and more about your society, but you’re still one of the best, and a beacon of freedom in the world. Because you have the separation of power in your society. And it still works after almost 300 years.
However, we don’t have that separation in the medical field. So, that means the people who develop this countermeasure sell it to you, and also they develop bioweapon, and also they evaluate all the outcomes. They give you the concept. They are all the same people, in the same group. They have conflict of interests.
(42:50)
The have agreements they sign with the pharmaceutical industry. They may be controlled by Dr. Fauci because if you are a doctor and you don’t listen to the guidance, they will be withdrawing your license.
They can be the people who worked on both sides to promote the benefits to them to make them happy. So it’s like in the game, from coach, to player, to the judge. They are all friends. And why do you believe they can give you a fair answer, when we experienced such an historic pandemic come from a lab? And behind the lab, this is a nation. China is so powerful, they are strong enough to influence all of these people.
(43:32)
DREW: So tell us now what your thoughts are on that biolab in California that came to light — was this just a rogue operation or was this a sign of something more sinister going on?
YAN: I wrote one exclusive report last week, on the Voice of Dr. Yan. And briefly, what I can tell you, we are working with our sources back to China, to look for the information behind this biolab.
(44:00)
I don’t want to call it a biolab, it is really not a lab. […] However, based on what I have read from the court file, and also based on my experience using lab mouse, using virus, I can tell you, when this illegal lab in California — it’s called PBI, Prestige Biotech Inc. — this PBI is not a diagnostic lab at all.
Also, PBI insisted, in the court file, they are going to establish more factories in U.S., and they are looking for the place, they are preparing for that, to produce the diagnostic test products to help Americans. That is totally not true. Because, for a diagnostic lab, you don’t need [to] keep lab mouse at all. You can develop your kits, you can do some other experiments. But for the lab mouse, they are not used [for] this purpose.
(45:18)
And also, when you see that this lab kept almost [one] thousand lab engineering mouse, in that place that is just abandoned warehouse, that is no animal facility at all, and then the owner of PBI claimed this mouse was worth one million U.S. dollars, and it was developed after six years’ effort, they can carry the Covid variant. We don’t know what this mouse are. But from the day they moved this mouse to the abandoned warehouse, this mouse, even if [it was] worth [one] million dollar[s], it suddenly dropped to zero. Why? Because place cannot let the mouse have the health and the clean environment. And that’s why it already violates biosafety laws.
And this kind of mouse are dirty now, they are contaminated. They cannot be used to do any scientific research — unless you wanted to use it to do some non-scientific or even illegal research or experiments.
(46:25)
DREW: So was this some sort of knockout mouse? Or something? Where did a million dollars come from?
YAN: Yeah, they said it’s engineered.
DREW: OK. The knockout mouse. They’ve got, they’re absent an ace receptor or something?
YAN: Not knockout, we don’t know exactly what they’ve got.
DREW: I’m so confused. I’m so confused by this. Let me make sure I’m getting what you’re saying. One one hand you say it’s just a sloppy attempt to take advantage of the opportunity of Covid-19 in this country, right? It’s a possibility?
YAN: It’s not a sloppy — a greedy lab. It’s a greedy lab. They are not the one really working on diagnostic. They are the one who really want to get your money when they are doing illegal things.
DREW: And what would those illegal things be? What is it you are speculating they’re doing? I don’t understand that part —
YAN: So, basic fact is, they are illegal because they are registered in Nevada, and they don’t have any license or any requirements, they didn’t pass any examination to keep such a place in California.
(47:48)
And also the illegal thing is, they have kept at least 20 type of infectious pathogens in that abandoned warehouse, without any —
DREW: What are they doing? What do you think they’re doing there? What are they up to? This is what I’m trying to figure out?
YAN: Exactly, what they are doing. I have checked the pictures provided by the court file, and I have did my research. What I can tell you, this is not a functional lab. At least when it moved to this warehouse, I didn’t see the one that makes a warehouse a functional lab.
But what they can do is, if they want to conduct illegal things — it’s like if the terrorist wants to make a bomb in their garage, you can image that it’s [a] similar environment.
And, they have kept 32 big fridges, those are very expensive lab fridges, and full of bioreagent, chemical reagent, and infectious agents, including some medicines can kill us for multiple times.
(49:00)
They just keep it there! And for me, I would say, if they don’t have any other purpose, no one there now to work, go into that kind of warehouse, ok, if you wanted me [to] go there, I would tell you I don’t want to get … I don’t know what kind of things will make me infectious in such an environment.
So I would say, how could they get this infectious agent? Even you won’t get some of them, it’s so difficult. It requires very strict examination. And how could they keep all these things there, even remove the labels? There are numerous these kind of agents, materials, without labels.
(49:39)
Oh, this is malaria samples, written in Chinese. They are talking about this is positive malaria sample, but, including the serum, human serum — should be human — serum from India, and pf+ here means that this is the positive sample against a — most of these are malaria, malaria type, this kind of malaria has caused over 61 million cases in Nigeria in the past 20 years.
[…]
(50:25)
The previous bio company, Universal Meditech Inc., UMI. UMI somehow filed bankruptcy when American government accused them of doing something illegal. So UMI quickly bankrupted and transferred all these things to the creditor. PBI. PBI said, I’m the creditor, I don’t know what they give us, I don’t know there are infectious things inside.
(50:52)
However, they are lying. Because based on my information obtained from China, PBI, UMI belong to the same owners. And these owners have strong connection with public security of China, which is China’s police or FBI. And also with United Front which is Chinese government’s spy department focusing on overseas and the non-CCP population.
(51:20)
So they have a very strong connection. And they are using this warehouse more like they are going to transfer or do something in certain other labs, but they want to keep these things here.
We cannot exclude the possibility that they may use this warehouse to do some illegal things to.
(51:44)
DREW: So, again, I feel a little bit overwhelmed and still very confused. You threw out a few different theories, you sprinkled a few in there. Is it your contention that this could be some sort of bioterrorism lab waiting to unleash something?
(52:02)
YAN: If you want me to give you the conclusion, at the moment, I actually am still looking for the conclusion. But let me talk about the possibility.
The possibility is —
DREW: Give us the range of possibilities. Not just the most sinister, give us the most benign also, right? So give us the range of possibilities. Go ahead.
(52:25)
YAN: Yes. I would say, first, let me tell you what I can confirm now. First, it’s not an individual business. Ok? This is not a person who runs a sloppy lab and a lack of understanding of biosafety law. Individuals cannot be so capable to obtain these many type of infectious disease agents, materials, plus mouse, without surveillance. Without known by people. And without authority trying to argue with you, right?
And also, behind PBI and also UMI, the so-called bankrupted lab, they all have very good lawyers and accounting agents, CPA, based in US, especially in Nevada. And those people are already identified by our team. They are very active members, and even leaders, of CCP spy organization, United Front.
And also, when these companies back to China, they belong to the same large group. This large group is involved in biotech, medical … chemical, international transportation.
(53:52)
So when we see this warehouse, when we see there are a lot of abandoned boxes, deliveries come from China actually this company back to china is the top company sends the material to U.S. to this place, to UMI. So in a big large group of companies in China, they have got something from China or from other countries, they deliver to U.S. Initially they deliver to UMI, and UMI somehow [feel] they are under surveillance and they file bankruptcy.
(54:30)
And they just give you a new PBI and said they know nothing. So these are all things very suspicious. However if you know CCP style, you will know this is a pattern. This is a pattern to avoid your investigation or postpone your investigation. When the Chinese Communist Party want to do some illegal operations.
(55:00)
You can just compare to the cartels. Cartels always do these kinds of things. Same to CCP. But CCP is more powerful. So I also have identified, as I said, in the same large company, large group, they have the immigration business. Which means, in China, if you are not the person who have very strong connection, like family members, with police, with public security, and if you’re relationship is not strong enough, like beyond the city, like province or national level, you cannot do this kind of business at all.
So this company is not just a big group who want to do something by itself. It has to require the national power to get so many infectious agents to U.S. and also materials, tons of things, and also so many mouse. This mouse, they spent six years to develop that, it takes a lot of money.
(56:00)
And also, I want to tell you something I haven’t revealed yet. Recently our investigation pointed out to the very top level CCP experts in biology field, and this is the business related to their family. So let me tell you background information, what does it mean.
It means, you have a family member who is a loyal CCP top ranking member. That’s why CCP trusts you, CCP can give you these kinds of political missions. You use your way to create a commercial empire and then that will avoid the accountability of investigation by foreign countries.
(56:48)
DREW: What do you imagine — I know you haven’t concluded anything about what these people, and I get you’re convinced that the CCP is deeply involved with it. What are they doing? What is this thing? What do you imagine this could be?
YAN: OK, so, let me tell you what [it] could be. There could be a lot of possibilities.
Since this lab [has] already [been] discovered in California, near a Navy base, and we don’t know whether it’s the first one, the last one — I don’t think it’s the only one because PBI says they have other place [that] can store this, since they ask the judge [to] allow them to transfer this mouse and the materials to the other place they have in [the] U.S.
So I can tell you, my first image, if a fire, explosion, happened — and then suddenly you will face numerous outbreaks or even pandemics, and the mouse run away, you don’t know what kind of pathogen it carries. And people don’t know what happens, you would get infected.
Let me ask you, is this a problem of American government or CCP government?
(57:55)
So, people, before you do all the investigation [and] pointed [the bio lab] out to [be connected with the] CCP, most people definitely will think this is a problem that U.S. government should be in charge of.
Still at that time, see, U.S. government plus Americans will be blamed in CCP, Russian or their Axis propaganda.
DREW: I see —
YAN: You will be the criminals.
DREW: I see.
YAN: And, however you are the victims.
DREW: I see. Oh, interesting. This will be our own lab leak, this will be our lab leak essentially.
(58:32)
YAN: Yeah. It will become yours since this is [a] U.S. company. And also lack of surveillance [oversight]. To ask you, why you don’t surveillance it, why don’t you know this, right? It’s really similar to Covid-19. And also, will it happen … if it didn’t happen in an extreme way, it happen little by little, suddenly maybe in the east U.S. some outbreak. And in the border maybe another outbreak. And somewhere else. Where it [appears to] come from nature.
Especially when they see it is malaria, TB, tuberculosis, and also meningitis. All these things already exist in nature. How you could you confirm, to tell people, this is from the lab? And so, you will face a natural origin outbreak, you will die in miser[y], and you don’t know the truth!
(59:26)
DREW: Yeesh. The malaria, you alluded to it being the worst form of malaria, so I’m guessing you’re talking about falciparum, right? Malaria?
YAN: Yep. Yeah.
DREW: And falciparum doesn’t occur out here, we don’t get falciparum. Even from the south. It does not —
YAN: They won’t tell you this is from border. They won’t tell you this is from some — maybe some mosquito just fly to U.S. without visa. I mean, there’s not only malaria, there are dengue, HIV, Covid, HSV, Rubella, and also so many bacteria, and you don’t know whether they are modified or not.
And you really don’t know. So many human samples, you don’t know what it is because [they] remove[d] the labels. And you are CCP’s top enemy in the world.
(1:00:20)
DREW: Do you think our intelligence, or our biowarfare infrastructure is looking at what’s in that lab?
YAN: I think so, in the court file they have mentioned FBI and other departments working together. To be honest, I don’t think your intelligence community would be stupid [enough] to believe this is just a small lab to make quick money. When they look into the problem is so serious.
(1:01:48)
DREW: It seems like more than a sloppy situation […]. As usual it’s sort of breathtaking to talk with you. I had the same experience talking with David Martin, it was sort of a different perspective, which was more about the history and the international nature of bioweapons development and gain of function development and how much more — how deep this runs and how this is going on around us without our knowledge. And that even in the face of this country outlawing it, we’ve carried on.
And strangely, one of these countries where we carried this on [Ukraine] is now receiving, has received over $120 billion from us to defend themselves. Interesting.
(1:02:30)
NATION: Dr. Yan, do you think there are more labs that are like this that are hidden across the country that we’re just not seeing, and this is just the one that we found?
DREW: We know there’s more than one cause they’re sending their stuff, they’re sending their stuff to their other sites!
NATION: True. But ones that are illegally operating like this? Cause I know doing testing on viruses, that’s all above board, that happens a lot. But the way that they were handling. And then just the fact that by going through bankruptcy it appears that another company inherited all these controlled substances, basically, through bankruptcy. Which is not the way the system is supposed to work.
And I wonder if this is a loophole that has to be closed somehow, with these dangerous chemicals. Because like what if there was a lab that’s authorized to do tests with anthrax, and then they go bankrupt. Does the anthrax get passed down to whoever gets their assets in bankruptcy? That doesn’t seem right, at all.
(1:03:22)
YAN: First, file bankruptcy but give the business’ money transferred to your friends […] is the way CCP always use in China, or to the other countries. They can avoid accountability. They can just change another several people and then you can […] respect to them.
When we talk about more labs, we know the [saying]. When you found one cockroach at home, you know there will be hundreds and thousands. So I won’t say this is the only one. Suddenly found by the local officers and suddenly so terrible. So definitely this cannot be the only one.
(1:04:00)
And also, based on what I see, this is more like the hub. They could do some illegal things, but it’s also might [be] because there are not regular staffs working there. It’s more like they […] have talked about, they are going to establish the, build the new factories, build the new labs. So at that time they might even acquire the license. But they can do more illegal things beyond that license.
(1:04:25)
And that they already have their people working here in your universities, in the industries, in CDC and NIH working on the dangerous things. So if they pass it to certain spies in this kind of organization, and they can carry other things in that kind of legal facilities.
(1:04:45)
So there are so many possibilities. That’s why China knows that to promote propaganda. Say this is anti-Asian if you are talking about this lab and China. This was published by AP news. This all can tell you that it’s not only individual things. It’s not only one thing.
(1:05:05)
DREW: So, you’re a racist. I didn’t know that about you. [Laughter]. You and Caleb, both you guys are racist!
NATION: Everyone reporting this story, according to China, is being racist. But that’s the concerning part to me. Even if everything with this was legitimate, if the whole story is legitimate, this was just a mistake through bankruptcy and all that, that’s a major national security loophole, that’s there, a big security hole —
(1:05:30)
DREW: I would think. Well, and so, right. And so based on that, I wondering where, Li-Meng, where are we going? Where does this go, all this? What are your predictions for the future? Now that we’re aware of what’s going on, are we going to make it better? Are we going to clamp down internationally, or is this horse out of the barn, so to speak? Is it something that is so far down the road, that it’s like whack-a-mole we’re going to be just constantly when something comes up we’re going to be knocking it down and it’s going to get worse?
(1:06:05)
YAN: There are always loopholes. Definitely we should improve it … However, when you do all these things, you should know, CCP and their allies, like Russia and North Korea … are watching you. And they are already prepared to attack you and destroy you. They have spent so many decades focusing on that, and communism international exists.
(1:06:32)
So altogether there are also bad people in U.S. helping them because they have benefits. So what we want to do is identify your enemy. When you try to improve or change the loopholes. You should not forget that. You should not isolate yourselves. America should insist to be the leader in the world. And also don’t give more time to China to other countries to destroy you. Because you give them more time, you have more chance to provide your problem weakness to them. They know you’re vulnerable they will little by little kill you.
(1:07:12)
DREW: One last question before we wrap up. There was a bit of a weird conversation going on on the restream chat here about the furin cleavage site. My understanding is that furin cleavage sites do occur in nature, but there are certain qualities on this one that was specific to things you had done research on. Is that accurate?
(1:07:34)
YAN: I, myself, have done the research provided in my […] report on the furin cleavage site. This means I do it in the lab. So, furin cleavage sites exist in virus, but in certain types of virus. Conveniently, Covid-19 coronavirus, Sars-Covid-2, this beta coronavirus […] doesn’t have furin cleavage site in nature.
(1:08:00)
That’s why now so many CCP promoted scientists try to tell you they found something in nature, after the pandemic, which would show you the furin cleavage site. It doesn’t exist. So this is smoking gun evidence. And it’s not the only part modified in the Covid-19.
(1:08:20)
DREW: Right. It exists in some coronavirus subcategories, not in this particular sars-coronavirus.
YAN: No. […]
DREW: Right. And you’d said there there were other aspects to this virus. I just want to clarify this, before I let you go, that sort of were — you knew — had been manufactured because you were involved with that, back when people were doing that.
(1:08:44)
YAN: I worked with people who were involved in this. I myself didn’t provide my knowledge or involved into the real experiment. But I can tell you I have this knowledge, and all these things, I have identified with my team, multiple modified functions in Covid-19 virus. More than furin cleavage site. And they would all bring pathogenesis to people.
(1:09:14)
DREW: All right. Well, is there, have I left anything off the table? Is there anything else on your mind these days, any thing else of concern, before we wrap up? I appreciate your thoughts, and time, as always, very interesting to speak with you. Is there something that you’re worrying about now?
(1:09:29)
YAN: I’m not worried about too much, but I really want people to know that among all your enemies China is most powerful, and because it is a nation is has more capacity to do those things individuals or international organizations cannot do. So you really need to realize your enemy is very evil. They are very evil towards their own citizens, they are also very evil towards foreigners because humans are just tools for them, disposable.
So in this case you don’t have much time, you really need to focus on eliminate your enemies. Don’t wait for opportunity, you should be very active, don’t be reactive.
(1:10:16)
DREW: All right Li-Meng Yan, everybody, you can follower her on Twitter, @drlimengyan1 is where you can find her on Twitter. And where do they get the radio show?
YAN: The voice of Dr. Yan every Saturday, Sunday, EST time 4pm on America Out Loud on I Heart Radio, also after that you can listen on Spotify, Google Podcast, and all the other apps for free.
DREW: Well thank you again, I am sure, as I continue, as you say to, peel the onion, I will have more questions for you in the future. Thank you for being a great resource for us and we will continue to try to come to a deeper understanding of the world we live in. Thank you.
YAN: Thank you.
DREW: Those of you, I’m watching you out on the restream, let’s see if there are any last minute questions there. Yes, CCP did target her as also did the People’s Liberation Army. The PLA.
So, the other thing that came up on the restream was people railing on me for saying that the vax had some benefit. I’m not saying the vaccines were a panacea, I’m not saying the mandates were appropriate. I’m saying there was, like most things in medicine, it’s not all one way or all the other. It’s a nuanced thing. Which is one of the reasons why this whole experience, for me, has been so disturbing. It’s never all black and white in medicine. It just isn’t. And so for me, the risk-reward has come down pretty much in favor of protecting the vulnerable.
(1:11:58)
Up to this point. I really don’t know what we’re doing right now with the newer variants. Susan just had Covid, it was a cold. My patients have had Covid, I’ve got paxlovid, I’ve got monoclonal antibodies, they don’t need the vaccine. And it doesn’t clearly cover this variant. And even the measurements against the previous Omicron show it only worked for three months and not a minute after that.
(1:12:21)
That was it. And so, why are we pushing it? Well, if somebody’s really vulnerable, and somebody’s motivated, and had no reaction to the vaccine, ok. If the want to do that, I’m ok with it. But to mandate it, and to push it still .. we’re now seeing the risks of it come into focus, where we’re seeing the cardiac risks. If you remember what Dr. Martin said last week, one of the original studies’ purposes of this coronavirus, or the earlier versions of the coronavirus was to study its effects on rabbit hearts. It was affecting rabbit hearts.
(1:12:53)
So it clearly has a propensity for cardiac tissue, it’s something to do with the spike protein, this is not a completely benign intervention.
So, yes, to be overly enthusiastic is not a good idea, but to try to allow individual physicians to use their judgement and use their assessment of the risk reward to deploy these various measures — vaccine, treatments, paxlovid — if people want to use other things as well, that’s up to them and their doctors. That’s not up to me. And they should be free to do so. And it’s nobody’s business — nobody’s business — what is going on.
(1:13:35)
Maybe the profession needs to police itself a little bit, and its peers. Ok. They should be looking at the literature and people should be asked to defend themselves. But beyond that it should not go anywhere else. There’s no way other people outside the profession should have opinions about what somebody’s doctor is, or is not, doing, particularly if the outcomes are good.
…
#####
The key points list at the beginning are very helpful, and saves having to wade through a lot of confusing conversation!