Journal article Open Access

The Wuhan Laboratory Origin of SARS-CoV-2 and the Validity of the Yan Reports Are Further Proved by the Failure of Two Uninvited "Peer Reviews"

Yan, Li-Meng; Kang, Shu; Hu, Shanchang


Citation Style Language JSON Export

{
  "publisher": "Zenodo", 
  "DOI": "10.5281/zenodo.4650821", 
  "author": [
    {
      "family": "Yan, Li-Meng"
    }, 
    {
      "family": "Kang, Shu"
    }, 
    {
      "family": "Hu, Shanchang"
    }
  ], 
  "issued": {
    "date-parts": [
      [
        2021, 
        3, 
        31
      ]
    ]
  }, 
  "abstract": "<p>The&nbsp;origin of SARS-CoV-2 is a question that has attracted attention from all over the world. It has been portrayed by some as a great mystery, although the laboratory nature of this virus is evident to people with trained eyes. The fundamental reason for this current situation is a large-scale, multi-domain, deliberate scientific misinformation. In an effort to defeat this scientific misinformation and expose the true nature of SARS-CoV-2, we have published two scientific reports. Our first report showed, using substantial evidence and logical analyses, why SARS-CoV-2 must be a laboratory product and how it could be created conveniently by following well-known concepts and established techniques. Our second report exposed a large-scale, organized scientific fraud, through which the nature of SARS-CoV-2 as an&nbsp;<em>Unrestricted Bioweapon</em>&nbsp;was revealed. Our efforts were immediately met by great resistance. Within ten days of the publication of our first report, two self-claimed &ldquo;peer reviews&rdquo; came out to specifically criticize our report. The first review was published by four scientists from the&nbsp;<em>Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security</em>&nbsp;led by Dr. Gigi Gronvall. The second review was published on the&nbsp;<em>MIT Press</em>&nbsp;and produced by a group of four scientists led by Dr. Robert Gallo. Although we welcome critical reviews of our reports, such reviews have to be honest, logical, evidence-based, and produced by qualified scientists. These two reviews, however, did not meet any of the criteria. Unfortunately, these poor reviews were nonetheless used by the media to defame our reports, label laboratory origin theories as &ldquo;conspiracy theories&rdquo;, and further suppress the truth of SARS-CoV-2 origin. Building on these media reports, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime then&nbsp;greatly amplified its own voice and promoted the falsified&nbsp;theory that SARS-CoV-2 must have come from nature. In a continued effort to fight and defeat scientific misinformation, here we provide our point-to-point responses to these reviews. Part I of the document is our responses to the&nbsp;<em>MIT Press</em>&nbsp;review, and Part II is our responses to the review published by the&nbsp;<em>Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security</em>. We also included an opening statement at the beginning, where we summarized the main events of the&nbsp;<em>Unrestricted Scientific Misinformation</em>, including various cover-ups executed by individuals having close ties with the CCP regime, as well as Dr. Yan&rsquo;s sustained efforts in exposing the truth of COVID-19. We sincerely hope that this document may help the world recognize the ongoing misinformation campaign and come to the realization that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is an&nbsp;<em>Unrestricted Bioweapon</em>&nbsp;developed by the CCP regime. We believe that this realization is crucial in defeating the COVID-19 pandemic and in protecting the global community from future bioweapon attacks.</p>\n\n<p>&nbsp;</p>\n\n<p><strong>Publication Note (July 17<sup>th</sup>, 2021):</strong></p>\n\n<p>The three Yan reports used scientific evidence and analyses to prove that SARS-CoV-2 is an&nbsp;<em>Unrestricted Bioweapon</em>created by military scientists of the Chinese Communist&nbsp;Party (CCP) regime. These reports have played a pivotal role in revealing the true identity of the ongoing&nbsp;<em>Unrestricted Biowarfare</em>. For this reason, the CCP and its allies have been constantly launching attacks at the Yan Reports. Very recently, the&nbsp;<em>Rule of Law Foundation</em>&nbsp;(ROLF) and&nbsp;<em>Rule of Law Society</em>&nbsp;(ROLS), which we have listed as our honorary affiliation in our reports, requested&nbsp;<em>Zenodo</em>&nbsp;to have the original uploads of our reports closed. This was done by the ROLF &amp; ROLS without informing us authors or seeking our agreement. This is unacceptable because the work was done by us authors independently with no financial assistance provided by the ROLF &amp; ROLS or any other organization. Their action here has no scientific basis and is against the rules of scientific publications. To restore the availability of our reports to the world, we have therefore re-uploaded the three Yan reports. Our affiliation has been changed to&nbsp;<em>Yan Research &ndash; An Independent Research Team</em>.</p>\n\n<p>The current report was originally published on March 31<sup>st</sup>, 2021. As of July 16<sup>th</sup>, 2021, the original&nbsp;<em>Zenodo</em>&nbsp;upload of it has been viewed 246,571 times and downloaded 43,152 times. Upon mutual agreement, Dr. Jie Guan opted out of this publication and his contributions have instead been specified in the acknowledgements. Wording on the number of authors has been changed accordingly. Minor typos have been corrected.&nbsp;</p>", 
  "title": "The Wuhan Laboratory Origin of SARS-CoV-2  and the Validity of the Yan Reports Are Further Proved  by the Failure of Two Uninvited \"Peer Reviews\"", 
  "type": "article-journal", 
  "id": "4650821"
}
260,641
47,221
views
downloads
All versions This version
Views 260,641260,501
Downloads 47,22147,221
Data volume 102.8 GB102.8 GB
Unique views 101,981101,914
Unique downloads 40,28140,281

Share

Cite as