They created COVID in a lab and are making new pandemics. The ex-CDC chief warned, but most people stay silent.

Question

They made it in a lab.

They are making new pandemics in labs.

The former head of CDC has sounded an alarm about it.

Sheep population still too stupid and brainwashed to say one fucking word in defense of their own lives.

politicalfilm.wordpress.com/2024/07/13/c...

Answer 1

After looking at several high quality sources; like articles from Boston University, Yale, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), while also analyzing the source linked to this statement, I was able to identify that the claim is false and exaggerated. However, I could see how someone could think that COVID was created in a lab, but the hypothetical possibility seemed to have occurred from an accidental spillover, where as this claim seems to be blaming someone for intending to create COVID in a lab. I also think there is a level of bias and aggression in this statement that is likely linked to political affiliation. I mainly analyzed the NIH article, giving an overview of what COVID was and how it was created. The argument is that there are two possible theories and neither involves whoever "they" are and that they are purposefully making pandemics in labs. According to the NIH, COVID was either created by a, "a scenario of laboratory spillover events and human contact with zoonotic diseases." The scientists at NIH believe that COVID was originally transmitted to humans by animals rather than a leak from a laboratory, but there are still investigations occurring. The website linked to this claim also seemed not reliable at all and looked like a conspiracy theorist made it, no actual care for reliable information just a bunch or strange claims. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9874793/.

Comments

The sources you used are credible, and you did an excellent job explaing ththe different ways in which the claim that they made was untrue. I am wondering if you looked into the actual account that posted this and if they have made any other posts that expose their political affiliation if you are assuming that this claim is linked to that? You did a wonderful job in your explanation and layed your ideas out very clearly. I also like how you looked at the claim from their point of view while pointing out where their claim is incorrect.

---

Interesting that you used a blog post from a former FDA employee as a source — but I’m a bit skeptical here. While their credentials are relevant, it seems like the post is more opinion-based than evidence-driven. Did you check whether any peer-reviewed studies or official reports back up the same claim? Anecdotes from experts can be helpful, but if they’re not supported by data, they can also mislead — especially when used to counter widely accepted public health findings.

---

I agree with your take on this that this is a false statement, the person making this claim doesn't support his reasoning right away just false information and favoring conspiracy theories. Pandemics like COVID always start off with one person and then get spreaded uncontrollably, such as the Black Death.

---

I agree with you answer entirely. The post seems aggressive and the link that it led me too seemed to be created with the cult like intent. (https://politicalfilm.wordpress.com/sorry-clown/) Another source says that the CIA thinks with low confidence it could have been created in a Chinese lab. But they don't claim it's 100% true.

---

This comment does a good job of addressing the claims made are false. It does pose the question that the original claim may have some alternate perspective by linking a government website to where it explains where the claim could've came from which adds validity to the response.

Answer 2

When I first read the claim I went to the post that was linked which led me to this website: https://politicalfilm.wordpress.com/2024/07/13/cdc-chief-redfields-testimony/. There I was able to find the original claim that was stated on this post. After searching for related articles or stories I have found a link that explains why the Covid lab outbreak is most likely not true. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-5726811. This explains how the lab leak is a myth and the misinformation has been spreading.

Comments

After reading your sources, I'm curious why you rely on "Political Film Blog" as they don't have any sources cited and throw down X posts to service the fact. Your facts from BBC are backed, and the original claim is held to be misleading.

---

"I appreciate your effort in tracing the claim back to its original post on https://www.google.com/search?q=PoliticalFilm.wordpress.com. However, I'm a bit skeptical about relying solely on that source for the initial claim. While it's crucial to find the origin, https://www.google.com/search?q=PoliticalFilm.wordpress.com appears to be a blog with a clear political slant. Did you consider the potential for bias in how the claim was presented or framed there? It might be beneficial to cross-reference the claim with other sources from that time period to see how it was reported in less politically charged environments. Also, while the BBC article you linked is strong, the lab leak theory has been a source of much debate. It is not something that is easily disproven, and many scientist still believe that it is possible. It might be beneficial to find some scientific journals on the topic, and see if there are any that disagree with the BBC article."

---

I enjoyed reading your answer to this, but I still am kind of skeptical about how these sources rely on the facts of your reasoning; the source with BBC shows some misleading information that you later talked about, and it kind of gets me lost as I read through your explanation.

---

I agree with your overall take that the claim is fake. However, I think giving slightly more context on why and sharing your findings from the links could be really helpful for a reader. I liked that there are a few links to use for reference, but I think being able to dive into those more would give your fact-check more credibility.

Answer 3

I think that your headliner was very eye-catching and intriguing. However, as I looked closer into your sources, I noticed that the sources from your claim were personal blog sites, which alarmed the claim's validity. After further inspection, the blog provides numerous conspiracies, posted on social media as "X" (formerly Twitter) as claims. However, looking deeper into your claim, I found an article that may provide a more valid response to your claim on Science.org - "House Panel concludes that Covid-19 Pandemic came from a lab leak". The article described that the virus may have been created and leaked from Wuhan, China. Though there is superstition, it has not yet been proven true. The article may read "Scientists think". 

Comments

You made a good point about the credible sources, but I wouldn't treat the House Panel’s conclusion as a fact. The reports given can still be politically motivated and might not be as strong as peer reviewed research.

---

This is a great point that there is strong superstition in a claim such as this one. While many people have strong opinion on whether or not the disease was made in a lab, the source your provided makes it clear that there is no true evidence that anything of that nature occurred nor was there a lab leak.

---

identifying that many of this individual sources of evidence comes from personal blogs is key is determining if something is a real claim or just rather a personal opinion, great on pointing that out and you provided solid evidence to prove this

---

You make a great point. After I did some digging into the sources the claim provided I realized that they weren't backed by enough information, and they were based on opinions. I like how you explained that the article you provided from Science.org explains this claim that many people have has yet to been proven.

---

You actually make a great point with this comment. After doing my own research, I saw that the sources the claim used didn't have enough information and were mostly opinion based. I also liked how you mentioned credible sources. People often overlook the power of a strong source.

Answer 4

After investigating the provided source to support the claim, both the claim and the source seem to use a lot of opinionated beliefs connected to political identity, versus actual claims supported by factual evidence from reliable sources. The overall look of the source screams unreliable as it fails to cite important things such as authors, evidence, and neutral sources that can support its claims. It appears more as a post board where the creator has uploaded opinionated claims and tweets from certain politicians with bias in their statements. Scientists from the source Science News have investigated these theories and were able to debunk these claims. In the article, "No, the coronavirus wasn't made in a lab. A genetic analysis shows it's from nature," scientists were able to identify that more than likely not lab-made because its genetic features differ greatly from known viruses, showing no signs of lab engineering. Also, genetic similarities to bat and pangolin coronaviruses prove that it was very unlikely to be lab-made and came from a natural origin.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-covid-19-not-human-made-lab-genetic-analysis-nature

Comments

I think your analysis is clear regarding what you find problematic about this user's post. Identifying biases and claims rooted in opinions allows whoever reads this fact-check to understand exactly where you're coming from. You also did a great job analyzing the non-credible sources used to make this original claim.

Answer 5

After researching this claim using high-quality sources, including articles from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Nature, and congressional testimony from former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield, I found that the claim is mostly false and misleading. The statement that "they created COVID in a lab and are making new pandemics" implies intentional, coordinated action to manufacture pandemics, which is not supported by any credible evidence. I can understand why some people might think COVID came from a lab, especially because even some U.S. government agencies like the FBI and Department of Energy have said a lab leak is possible, but they emphasize low confidence and do not suggest it was engineered on purpose.

The NIH states that there are two leading origin theories: a natural spillover from animals or a potential lab-related accident. Neither includes proof that COVID was intentionally created or that "they" are currently making new pandemics. The part about the "ex-CDC chief warning" refers to Dr. Redfield’s personal opinion that a lab leak might have occurred, but again, he has never said it was deliberate or part of an ongoing plan to create pandemics.

The site linked to this claim was not a reliable source. It looked like a conspiracy-driven blog with no citations or science-based analysis. In contrast, sources like this NIH article explain that while the origins of COVID-19 are still under investigation, the claim here is an exaggerated, speculative interpretation rather than fact.

Comments

Great source and breakdown of the information. It's important that you point out that when a lab leak is reported as a potential cause, it is meant as an accidental lab leak, and many people seem to misunderstand this. It's nice that you empathize with this misunderstanding in your answer. I think it is also important to understand where this claim may be coming from. There is a possibility that the reason many people are taking this to mean the virus may have been created in a lab on purpose lies in their political leanings or other biases. A lot of conspiratorial, anti-scientist, and often anti-vaccination sentiment tends to be found in right-leaning views.

Answer 6

The claim that "they created COVID in a lab and are making new pandemics," supposedly warned about by the previous CDC director, is untrue and unsubstantiated. Dr. Robert Redfield did express a personal opinion in 2021 that COVID may have leaked from a lab, but he did not say it was engineered or created on purpose, and he did not make any statement that new pandemics are being produced. In a BBC News report, various U.S. intelligence agencies have investigated the cause of COVID. Two considered the possibility of an accident in the lab (an unintended leak), while others favored a natural cause. None had evidence of intentional creation. The BBC is a government-funded official broadcaster based on reports and expert interviews, therefore a trustworthy secondary source. A longer piece by New York Magazine's Intelligencer explains how the lab leak theory came to be popular and how it is generally misstated. That article includes commentary from scientists and traces the story back to its earliest online versions, giving readers a look at how rumor turned into misinformation. Even though Dr. Redfield's past experience as CDC director gives validity to his opinion, he clarified that it wasn't established on the basis of classified information or hard facts. The sources I have used are transparent about their data and cite government agencies and specialists. On the other hand, the first argument is from a blog without the credentials of the author, no use of citations, and the use of conspiracy theory language, all which indicate bias and low credibility. Although it is right to inquire about where COVID came from, to twist suspicion into allegations of planned pandemic creation is misleading and not based on credible facts.

BBC News: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64891745

New York Magazine: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html

Comments

This is a great comment. The fact you mentioned the personal opinion to expand the misconception of this post is a great point to make. Looking at your sources they are credible and provide much information about the truth behind this statement. It was great to apply them in your fact check because the comment lacks substance.  Reading this I was not left confused with the information, I felt informed and confident even after checking your sources. I was skeptical of the New York Magazine sources, but the author used much citations and cited credible data reports.

Answer 7

After looking at this source it is clear that the claim that COVID and other pandemics were created in a lab is not only false but exaggerated. Although it's understandable that people can be suspicious of its creation in a lab that could be because of accidental spillover but there is no evidence to support the claims. The NIH states that the virus likely emerged from animal to human contact from bats not from deliberate creation. The sarbecovirus naturally infects bats in Asia and other places. Scientists have long warned that these SARS-CoV-2 could pose future pandemic threats. Therefore this pandemic was not created in a lab but animal-human contact.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7470595/#:~:text=Nevertheless%2C%20a%20large%20body%20of,in%20Asia%20and%20Southeast%20Asia.

Answer 8

The source of this blog comment comes from a website that has no professional journalistic ties and is a personal blog based on individual views. The site accepts post submissions from people with no journalistic background, which significantly weakens credibility.  Theres many legitimate and credible sources such as bbc.com that have released articles disproving the claims in the post as well as academic sources such as The Lancet and the World Health Organization which are both highly respected and reliable sources. The website itself comes off as biased and hateful using aggressive language and images throughout the website to relay political messaging. I find this quote to be false information and the website to be highly biased and not credible.

Answer 9

On the BlueSky account this claim was posted to, the individual links a political blog, claiming to be "censored by big tech," containing information from the McCullough Foundation (founded by Dr. Peter McCullough) regarding a discussion between former CDC director Robert Redfield and Senator Ron Johnson about the mRNA vaccine and its adverse effects. In an article about the mRNA vaccine, FactCheck.org states that "Dr. Peter McCullough, [is] well known for spreading COVID-19 misinformation...McCullough, along with five other authors [of the related review], are also affiliated with and have a financial interest in The Wellness Company, a supplement and telehealth company that sells unproven treatments, including for purported protection against vaccines." (source 1)

The user's claim of COVID-19 being made in a lab has little to no relevance to the linked video, as Robert Redfield does not mention any information regarding this belief in the clip. Disregarding the lack of correlation between the argument and the evidence, upon further research into the claim, an article from the NIH (source 2) provides a link to a scientific paper written by several biosecurity experts regarding the origin of COVID-19. These scientists state that "SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] is the seventh coronavirus known to infect humans...Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses in nature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible." (3) 

Research is still being conducted to further investigate the origins of COVID-19, but with the available information, the claim that it was purposefully made in a lab is at the very least significantly misleading. This is supported by their unrelated choice of "evidence" and their discreditable provided sources.

Sources:

source one: https://www.factcheck.org/2024/07/flawed-autopsy-review-revives-unsupported-claims-of-covid-19-vaccine-harm-censorship/

source two: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/9701/

source three: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

Answer 10

The origins of the COVID-19 pandemic have been a subject of extensive debate and investigation. Former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield has publicly stated his belief that the virus likely resulted from a laboratory accident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). In a March 2021 interview, he remarked: “I still think the most likely etiology of this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory, you know, escaped.” This perspective aligns with assessments from certain U.S. intelligence agencies. For instance, in December 2024, a House panel concluded that COVID-19 likely leaked from a Chinese lab partially funded by U.S. taxpayers. The report highlighted risky gain-of-function experiments at the WIV as a contributing factor. However, it’s important to note that the predominant scientific consensus supports a natural origin of the virus. The World Health Organization’s 2021 report deemed a lab leak “extremely unlikely,” favoring zoonotic transmission from animals to humans. Here are the sources I found: 

• CIA Now Favors Lab Leak Theory on Origins of COVID-19

• Former CDC director testifies at House hearing on COVID-19 origins