Using “the same platform methods used for Pfizer’s COVID-19 and seasonal influenza mRNA vaccines.”
Researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Pfizer Inc. have created new, engineered H5 bird flu influenza genetic constructs, including a codon-optimized hemagglutinin (HA) gene with a synthetically altered cleavage site, as documented in a Saturday npj Vaccines publication.
According to the authors, the stated purpose of the study was to evaluate an mRNA-based H5 vaccine, which they describe as “a nucleoside-modified mRNA construct encoding the full-length, codon-optimized HA protein with the polybasic cleavage site deleted from A/Astrakhan/3212/2020 A(H5N8).”
The paper confirms that the engineered HA used in the study was genetically modified beyond its purported natural form.
Cleavage Site Optimized
The authors state that the cleavage site was synthetically altered, writing that the polybasic amino acids were “mutated from ‘REKRRKR’ to ‘RETR’.”
The cleavage site is like a switch that must be cut to turn the flu pathogen “on” so it can infect cells, and if this site can be cut by many types of enzymes in the body, the virus can spread more and cause worse disease.
LNPs for mRNA Therapeutics
The engineered constructs were then formulated into lipid nanoparticles following “the same platform methods used for Pfizer’s COVID-19 and seasonal influenza mRNA vaccines.”
The work was conducted by multiple CDC branches, including the Influenza Division, the Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology, and the Office of Advanced Molecular Detection.
Pfizer Scientists at BSL-3 Lab
It was carried out by Pfizer scientists at the company’s Pearl River, NY facility, with additional involvement from ORISE.
The authors specify that “all research involving HPAI A(H5N1) viruses was conducted within Biosafety Level 3 enhanced (BSL-3E) or ABSL-3 facilities at the CDC.”
100% Transmission Rate
To test the performance of the engineered constructs, the CDC–Pfizer team conducted live-virus challenge experiments using human-derived H5N1 isolates.
The ferrets were infected with virus formations “A/Chile/25945/2023” and “A/Michigan/90/2024… from a farm worker exposed to infected cattle.”
Using these human isolates, the researchers documented efficient mammal-to-mammal spread, reporting a “100% transmission rate” in unvaccinated ferrets.
Funding & Conflicts of Interest
The funding disclosures indicate direct federal and corporate sponsorship.
The authors state: “This work was funded by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and by Pfizer Inc.”
The authors also disclose full corporate participation in the scientific process, writing: “Pfizer was involved in the design, analysis, and interpretation of the data in these research studies, the writing of this report, and the decision to publish.”
Additionally, the paper notes that Pfizer researchers associated with the project are “inventors on patent applications relating to influenza mRNA compositions.”
Bottom Line
The new study documents that CDC and Pfizer jointly engineered new H5 constructs through codon optimization and cleavage-site mutation, formulated them using Pfizer’s mRNA-LNP platform, and then tested them against recent human H5N1 isolates inside CDC BSL-3E laboratories.
The result is a federally backed, corporate-driven program in which U.S. authorities and Pfizer quietly engineered H5 influenza genetics and tested them with human-infecting H5N1—blurring the line between vaccine development and high-risk pathogen manipulation.
The dangerous experiments raise national security concerns.
As countries engineer avian influenza bird flu pathogens without restraint.
The World Health Organization and Egypt’s Ministry of Health just completed a national-scale workshop training nearly 300 surveillance officers to expand real-time monitoring of influenza and other respiratory pathogens across the country.
The move comes as this website has been tracking multiple governments performing gain-of-function experiments on avian influenza “bird flu” pathogens (see below this article), raising worries of another orchestrated, man-made pandemic.
The WHO announcement frames the workshop as routine and annual, masking the scale of the expansion and the integration of surveillance functions under WHO guidance.
“The annual meeting and accompanying workshop on integrated surveillance of acute respiratory infections (ARIs), conducted by the Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) Country Office in Egypt, brought together around 270 public health professionals.”
More than a simple “meeting,” this represents a consolidation of a national respiratory surveillance grid.
Two hundred and seventy surveillance officers trained at once sounds more like a deployment than a workshop.
The framing as “annual” makes the expansion appear normal and non-threatening when, in reality, it marks a significant expansion of WHO’s operational footprint inside Egypt’s health system.
Thirty Sentinel Sites Feeding a Unified National Surveillance Grid
The announcement identifies the personnel being trained, revealing a full-spectrum surveillance workforce (epidemiology, clinical staff, data specialists) rather than a narrow set of influenza experts.
“The participants, all involved in surveillance, included epidemiologists, data officers, physicians, nurses and laboratory specialists drawn from 30 ARI sentinel sites across 15 governorates.”
This proves the surveillance integration is nationwide.
“Sentinel sites across 15 governorates” means Egypt’s surveillance network is now being unified under a single reporting system.
Bringing in data officers signals the transition to real-time digital surveillance and automated reporting pipelines that feed directly into WHO’s global systems.
A Surveillance Framework That Never Powers Down
The WHO announcement reveals the core mission: strengthen surveillance for influenza and all respiratory viruses—not limited to outbreaks or emergencies.
“The sessions aimed to strengthen national capacities in disease surveillance for influenza and other respiratory viruses and improve preparedness for respiratory disease threats, particularly those with pandemic potential.”
They want to treat all respiratory viruses—seasonal or otherwise—as potential triggers for global coordination.
The phrase “other respiratory viruses” quietly expands surveillance beyond influenza to include COVID, avian flu, MERS, and any future pathogen, making continuous monitoring the norm.
This is how perpetual surveillance infrastructures are justified.
The workshop covers multiple pathogen classes, including zoonotic viruses, merging animal-origin threats with routine respiratory surveillance.
“The discussions covered a wide range of topics, including updates on the global and national epidemiological situation of influenza, COVID-19, avian influenza, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and zoonotic respiratory infections.”
So the system is designed to take in constant “signal noise” from zoonotic sources—livestock, poultry, wildlife.
Zoonotic data is always active, which means alert conditions can always be justified.
Folding zoonotic viruses into human surveillance pipelines is a central feature because it guarantees a steady stream of “pandemic potential” warnings.
WHO Uses ‘Performance Evaluations’ to Enforce Surveillance Compliance
The announcement describes the unification and standardization of national operating procedures, indicating that Egypt’s surveillance mechanics are being aligned directly with WHO standards.
“Participants reviewed standard operating procedures for ARI and influenza-like illness (ILI) sentinel surveillance and laboratory operations, alongside findings from performance evaluations.”
The mention of “performance evaluations” means WHO is grading Egypt’s compliance with global surveillance standards.
The evaluations will serve as a mechanism for harmonizing Egypt’s protocols with WHO’s prescribed methods.
This is an oversight structure.
Once surveillance is standardized, WHO essentially co-authors the national surveillance workflow.
Building the Digital Backbone of a Permanent Respiratory Surveillance State
The WHO press release goes on to introduce the digital component—data integration, dashboards, and real-time reporting—showing that Egypt’s network is being plugged into a centralized digital surveillance architecture.
“They explored how digital tools and platforms can enhance ARI data quality and timeliness and discussed data reporting through the National Electronic Disease Surveillance System (NEDSS) and the ARI/ILI Power BI dashboard which are used to collect, analyse and visualize respiratory surveillance disease data.”
The system they’re describing allows centralized ingestion of respiratory data across Egypt, instant analytics, automatic WHO reporting, and algorithmic signal detection.
The Power BI dashboard represents the command interface of a national respiratory surveillance grid.
This is the infrastructure required for automated “health security” triggers, border protocols, and potential digital health certifications.
PRET: WHO’s Framework for Perpetual Surveillance, Now Active in Egypt
The WHO directly names PRET, acknowledging that Egypt is now being operationally aligned with WHO’s new global framework that replaces traditional outbreak response with permanent readiness.
“The sessions also covered WHO’s Preparedness and Resilience for Emerging Threats (PRET) framework, an innovative approach designed to improve countries’ pandemic preparedness, emphasizing its alignment with Egypt’s national health security priorities.”
PRET is the system designed to bypass the need for treaty ratification by embedding WHO frameworks in national systems through “technical assistance.”
Once PRET is integrated, WHO gains operational influence during any declared emergency.
Naming PRET outright signals that Egypt’s infrastructure is now being shaped to meet PRET’s requirements for sustained respiratory surveillance and rapid WHO-driven response.
Bottom Line
Egypt’s new WHO-guided influenza and respiratory surveillance upgrade is a quiet rollout of PRET—a framework that centralizes global respiratory monitoring under WHO standards and feeds constant influenza, COVID, bird flu, MERS, and zoonotic signals into real-time digital dashboards.
This turns “preparedness” into a perpetual surveillance regime, where respiratory data becomes the trigger for future restrictions, emergency declarations, and global coordination.
What makes the timing more concerning is that these surveillance expansions are happening as multiple governments continue engineering avian influenza viruses with pandemic traits—yet none of these programs are being halted.
PRET ensures the monitoring grid is in place before the next laboratory-engineered pathogen emerges.
With 270 surveillance officials trained across 30 sentinel sites, Egypt’s national system is now synced to WHO’s operational architecture.
And this same PRET-aligned model is being replicated country by country, building a global respiratory surveillance system that never powers down.
Two synthetic H7N7 hybrids demonstrated silent, high-risk shedding behavior in experimental chickens.
The United Kingdom’s top government virology lab engineered new avian influenza viruses using reverse genetics, according to an October paper in Virology documenting the deliberate construction and experimental infection of chickens with synthetic H7N7 avian influenza variants.
The study findings are revealed as the WHO builds a permanent international system for collecting, storing, and redistributing pathogens under its new Pandemic Agreement.
The work, performed at the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA-Weybridge), reconstructed the mutation pathway by which low-pathogenic bird flu transitions into a lethal high-path strain.
The study confirms that government researchers created two genetically engineered influenza viruses, altered at the exact molecular switch responsible for converting mild bird flu into its highly pathogenic form.
The paper—“Infection of point-of-lay hens to assess the sequential events during H7N7 high-pathogenicity avian influenza emergence at a layer premises”—states that APHA scientists generated two recombinant H7N7 viruses through reverse genetics (“RG”):
“Two viable RG rescued recombinant LPAIVs were genetically identical to the isolated H7N7-HPAIV except for the CS, with one containing a DBCS (H7N7-DBCS) and the other a SBCS (H7N7-SBCS).”
These engineered viruses were then used to infect groups of live hens under SAPO Level 4/ACDP Level 3 biocontainment—the UK’s highest animal-pathogen security facilities.
The bird flu experiment raises national security concerns, given that Congress, the White House, the Department of Energy, the FBI, the CIA, and Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) have confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic was likely the result of lab-engineered pathogen manipulation.
Governments all over the world are performing the same experiments on bird flu pathogens.
Creating New Bird Flu Viruses With Engineered Cleavage Sites
The engineered viruses differed only at the hemagglutinin (HA) cleavage site, the key molecular feature that determines whether an avian influenza virus remains low-pathogenic or becomes systemically lethal.
H7N7-SBCS: a synthetic virus with a single-basic cleavage site
H7N7-DBCS: a synthetic virus with a di-basic cleavage site
Both constructs kept all internal genes identical to a known high-path H7N7 outbreak strain, meaning APHA researchers produced low-path versions of a high-path virus with engineered cleavage-site mutations.
The paper states:
“The SBCS, DBCS and MBCS (HPAIV) viruses were otherwise genetically identical (including the internal genes).”
In plain terms, they took the genome of a highly pathogenic bird flu virus, edited the cleavage site to make it “low-path,” and then infected chickens to observe how the high-path virus might emerge again.
This is the same cleavage-site mutation that historically turns H5 and H7 viruses into lethal strains.
The Engineered Viruses Showed New Functional Behavior
Although created as “low-path” models, the engineered viruses demonstrated new and concerning biological behavior:
Infection rates differed sharply between the constructs.
The DBCS-engineered virus behaved more like a high-path precursor.
Birds exposed to engineered strains survived later high-path challenge—but 95% still shed high-path virus, creating silent spreaders.
The study reports:
“Prior H7N7-LPAIV exposure did not prevent H7N7-HPAIV replication… 20/21 (95%) shed H7N7-HP.”
That means infected birds carried and expelled high-path virus without dying, a dangerous epidemiological function not typical of standard high-path bird flu outbreaks.
This creates a superspreading scenario in which visibly healthy birds shed lethal virus into water, bedding, and surrounding environments.
The environmental sampling confirmed this:
“H7N7-HPAIV environmental contamination occurred… in drinking water and mixed straw/feces.”
A Step-by-Step Reconstruction of How High-Path Bird Flu Emerges
The study explicitly aimed to recreate the sequential mutation steps under which a low-path strain turns into a high-path one.
The authors describe the goal:
“Our current study aimed to model the sequential events… beginning with H7N7-LPAIV incursion, followed 2 weeks later by H7N7-HPAIV challenge.”
This experiment reproduces, in controlled conditions:
Introduction of engineered low-path virus
Mild, low-level infection
A second exposure to a high-path strain
Silent onward shedding of the high-path virus
Environmental contamination
Survival of spreading hosts
This combination of enhanced survival + sustained shedding is precisely the kind of phenotype that raises dual-use questions in influenza engineering.
Conducted in Government BSL-3/4 Facilities
All work occurred at APHA-Weybridge under strict containment:
“Experiments were carried out in UK approved SAPO level 4, ACDP level 3 biocontainment laboratories.”
SAPO Level 4 is one of the highest pathogen-containment designations in the UK, typically associated with agents capable of major agricultural or economic harm.
Bottom Line
A UK government virology lab:
engineered two new influenza viruses,
from a known high-pathogenic backbone,
altered the cleavage site, the genetic switch controlling lethality,
infected live hens with the engineered constructs,
and documented how these modifications enabled silent high-path virus replication and shedding.
This work confirms the intentional creation of new influenza viruses and demonstrates functional behaviors—particularly prolonged shedding without mortality—that raise significant dual-use and biosecurity concerns.
The world may be one step closer to another lab-made pandemic.
Bird flu publications skyrocket from fewer than 10 papers a year before 2010 to over 50 in 2025—with output expected to hit 111 by 2030, a tenfold surge.
A new Journal of Infection and Public Health paper published this month by Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) scientists reveals an unprecedented rise in bird flu–related research worldwide—and predicts that publications on avian influenza will nearly double by 2030, marking what the authors call “accelerating growth” in the field.
The data show that bird flu research output has exploded from fewer than 10 papers a year before 2010 to over 50 in 2025, with the authors projecting a jump to 111 by 2030—a tenfold surge in just two decades, signaling that bird flu has quietly become one of the fastest-expanding areas of global pathogen research.
The figures are based on data from Scopus, a global scientific database that includes most journals indexed in PubMed but extends far beyond biomedical research to cover environmental, veterinary, and policy studies.
This makes Scopus the broadest available measure of the worldwide surge in bird flu–related publications.
The revelation comes as this website has, for years, been raising alarms over the quiet expansion of international bird flu experiments and bird flu pandemic response infrastructure.
The new study, titled “Avian Influenza Research Through the Lens of One Health: A Bibliometric Study” (Elsevier, 2025), analyzed 315 publications on avian influenza between 2000 and 2025 and found that research has exploded since 2018.
The authors expect the trend to continue exponentially over the next five years.
Using a third-degree polynomial model, the team projected that the number of publications will grow from 62 in 2026 to 111 by 2030, with an R² of 0.93 indicating a strong upward trajectory.
“A marked increase occurred after 2018… Forecasts suggest continued growth, with the number of publications expected to rise from 62 in 2026 to 111 in 2030, reflecting increasing research interest and recognition” the paper reads.
The Post-2018 Acceleration
The new study identifies 2018 as the tipping point when H5N1 and One Health publications began to surge.
That timeline aligns with several key developments:
The 2018–2019 launch of the WHO–FAO–OIE–UN pandemic coordination framework under “One Health.”
The rollout of avian influenza vaccination programs in China, which reshaped global research priorities.
The resurgence of EcoHealth Alliance’s field work and U.S. government contracts related to avian flu viruses.
By 2025, the publication rate had risen to 56 papers per year—the highest in two decades
WHO, CDC, and EcoHealth at the Center of the Growth
According to the paper’s institutional data, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) leads the world in bird flu and One Health research output, followed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and EcoHealth Alliance.
EcoHealth is the same organization whose NIH-funded work in Wuhan has been at the center of worldwide controversy over gain-of-function experiments.
Table 1 lists the CDC as having the highest number of publications (13) with 271 citations, followed by the World Health Organization (WHO) (11 publications) and EcoHealth Alliance (8 publications).
In other words, the primary institutions steering the One Health–avian influenza research ecosystem are the same ones historically involved in dual-use virology, pandemic simulation, and cross-species virus manipulation projects.
‘Enhanced Cross-Sectoral Collaboration’—A Code for Expansion
The authors conclude by urging the global scientific community to strengthen “cross-sectoral collaboration” and “sustained surveillance” in poultry and wild birds, warning against “undetected transmission chains in resource-limited settings.”
While framed as disease prevention, this language mirrors the same pandemic-preparedness justification that has fueled massive funding surges into high-containment labs (BSL-2 and BSL-3) and pathogen collection networks around the world.
The study’s repeated emphasis on “biosecurity,” “interdisciplinary cooperation,” and One Health “integration” signals that governments and international bodies are institutionalizing H5N1 work as a standing global priority, not a short-term emergency response.
Normalizing a Permanent Bird Flu Research Pipeline
The study’s authors celebrate this acceleration as a sign of “increasing research interest and recognition.”
But for many observers, it represents something far more concerning—the normalization of a permanent, internationally coordinated pandemic creation and response regime built around H5N1 bird flu.
The report openly ties its findings to global governance structures such as the WHO and the United Nations, stating that the One Health framework is essential for “multisectoral collaboration” and for guiding “policy and research agendas” on avian influenza.
In effect, the paper documents the institutionalization of bird flu research as a permanent fixture of global biosecurity policy—a shift that blurs the line between public health and biodefense, and raises serious questions about how far these programs will go.
Bottom Line
The new Journal of Infection and Public Health study confirms what many have suspected: since 2018, there has been a coordinated expansion of avian influenza research worldwide.
WHO, CDC, and EcoHealth Alliance are leading the charge, and the scientific community now projects that output to double by 2030.
Behind the rhetoric of “One Health” and “collaboration” lies a long-term global infrastructure for studying, modifying, and surveilling avian viruses — one that could easily serve both pandemic prevention and pandemic creation agendas.
The normalization of this permanent H5N1 research pipeline marks the next chapter in the international “pandemic preparedness” agenda — and the public deserves to understand what’s being built, and why.
Internal NETEC document confirms H5N1 avian influenza preparedness at the core mission of new taxpayer funded hospital network.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), through its Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR), is funding a $37.5 million national hospital expansion to prepare for H5N1 bird flu and other high-consequence pathogens, according to a newly released internal federal document issued by the National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center (NETEC).
NIH and NIAID—which are under HHS, led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—are funding experiments that create brand new bird flu pathogens, raising conflict of interest worries as well as questions about the government’s motives (see list of articles below this article detailing these many experiments).
The new document—an internal Request for Proposal (RFP) dated October 15, 2025—details how HHS will use NETEC, a consortium of Emory University, the University of Nebraska Medical Center, and NYC Health + Hospitals/Bellevue, to distribute federal funds to 75 hospitals across the United States, converting them into federally designated “Level 2 Special Pathogen Treatment Centers” (SPTCs).
The RFP’s stated purpose is to “accelerate the domestic health care system’s readiness for [high-consequence infectious diseases], such as H5N1, Ebola, and others.”
Per the document:
“Under the guidance of ASPR, NETEC is now awarding $37,500,000 in funding to 75 facilities ($500,000 per facility) as they work to meet the requirements of NSPS Level 2 facilities. The funding will support activities such as training health care personnel, upgrading infrastructure, and acquiring specialized equipment to ensure Level 2 facilities meet NSPS minimum capabilities. These efforts are expected to ultimately result in the verification of funded facilities as Level 2 SPTCs. This expansion significantly enhances the nation’s surge capacity and geographic reach for managing HCIDs.”
The move comes as governments all over the world say they are creating hybrid bird flu viruses in biolabs, raising national security fears of another pandemic, whether intentional or accidental.
Those same countries ramp up bird flu vaccine production and distribution.
Meaning, once again, governments are creating both the problem and “solution” to another pandemic, raising conflict-of-interest worries.
H5N1 Avian Influenza Explicitly Listed as a Federal Priority
While the public press release announcing the grant avoided mentioning bird flu, the internal NETEC RFP directly names H5N1 avian influenza as a top threat driving the new hospital buildout.
“The emergence and sustained transmission of HCIDs, such as Ebola, mpox, and avian influenza (H5N1), have overwhelmed hospitals, exhausted critical resources, and underscored the necessity for coordinated efforts to protect health care workers while ensuring the delivery of safe and effective patient care.”
This wording makes clear that H5N1 preparedness—not just general infectious disease readiness—is a central justification for the $37.5 million initiative.
Federal Pandemic Infrastructure Expansion
Under ASPR’s direction, NETEC will administer the new program as part of the National Special Pathogen System (NSPS)—a tiered national network of pathogen treatment centers first created after the 2014–2016 Ebola outbreak.
The new Level 2 centers are described as “the backbone of a resilient, skilled response to special pathogen threats,” designed to serve as regional treatment hubs capable of handling clusters of patients during future high-consequence disease outbreaks.
The funding will support:
Upgrading isolation infrastructure,
Purchasing specialized containment equipment,
Training staff in special pathogen protocols, and
Coordinating with existing Level 1 Regional Emerging Special Pathogen Treatment Centers (RESPTCs).
Awardees must demonstrate “substantial progress towards meeting the minimum capabilities of a Level 2 NSPS facility” by the end of the funding period.
‘Level 2’ Centers Will Treat Patients for the Duration of Illness
Each Level 2 facility, the RFP explains, must have “the capacity to deliver specialized care to clusters of patients suspected of or infected by a special pathogen” and “serve as the primary patient care delivery center.”
Notably, funded hospitals must also agree to:
“Serve as regional and national assets and accept patients from outside of the United States or outside their respective state, county, or local jurisdiction if requested.”
That clause effectively integrates participating hospitals into the federal pandemic command structure under ASPR oversight, expanding the U.S. government’s ability to move special pathogen cases across state or national lines.
Institutionalization of Permanent Biosecurity Infrastructure
The NETEC RFP uses unmistakable national security language, describing high-consequence infectious diseases (HCIDs) as threats to “the nation’s health, economy, and national security.”
It emphasizes what it characterizes as the need for “enhanced biosecurity frameworks, robust clinical readiness, and surge capacity across hospitals,” positioning the Level 2 expansion as a cornerstone of HHS’s long-term pandemic preparedness architecture.
The RFP even notes that NETEC “has demonstrated its critical role in strengthening national health security by coordinating National Special Pathogen System responses to novel respiratory pathogens, mpox, and Lassa fever.”
In other words, the federal government is now formally embedding outbreak containment systems inside civilian hospitals, justified by avian influenza and other potential zoonotic spillover threats.
Timeline & Implementation
Applications for the NSPS Level 2 STAND Award opened October 15, 2025, and close December 2, 2025.
Final selections are expected by January 5, 2026, with the official “period of performance” scheduled from January 5 through June 29, 2026.
Eligible applicants must have:
An onsite emergency department,
Airborne infection isolation rooms,
Critical care and inpatient capacity, and
A sufficient baseline of resources to achieve Level 2 verification.
The RFP explicitly prohibits use of the funds for direct clinical care or research—focusing instead on infrastructure, staff training, and equipment acquisition.
From COVID Lessons to Bird Flu Systems
NETEC was originally established in 2015 after the U.S. treated imported Ebola cases.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, it served as a national training and coordination body for pathogen response across hospitals.
Now, under ASPR’s expanded authority, NETEC’s mission has evolved from temporary outbreak response to permanent pandemic infrastructure building, with H5N1 preparedness front and center.
The RFP states that the expansion “significantly enhances the nation’s surge capacity and geographic reach for managing HCIDs,” embedding what amounts to federally funded containment capacity across the entire U.S. hospital network.
Bottom Line
The internal NETEC document reveals that HHS’s Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR) is quietly constructing a nationwide bird flu hospital network under the banner of “special pathogen preparedness.”
The $37.5 million program explicitly cites H5N1 avian influenza as a primary threat and converts 75 hospitals into federally integrated treatment hubs for future high-risk pathogen outbreaks.
This marks yet another major escalation in the institutionalization of permanent pandemic infrastructure inside the United States, built through administrative expansion under the HHS biosecurity apparatus.
Country inks deal with CSL Seqirus—the maker of the world’s first licensed cell-based influenza bird flu pandemic vaccine, Audenz—to localize vaccine manufacturing ahead of a potential outbreak.
Saudi Arabia has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with CSL Seqirus and Vaccine Industrial Company (VIC) to localize the production of “cell-based seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines” for 2026 and 2027, according to a new press release from CSL published today.
The press release also highlights that CSL Seqirus already partners with over 30 governments worldwide on pandemic-flu response—underscoring that this is an international network of governments preparing for the same scenario.
The three parties have as “ambition to establish pandemic preparedness in 2026 and supply cell-based flu vaccines for the 2026/27 Flu Season,” per the release.
CSL Seqirus “is an influenza pandemic preparedness and response partner to over 30 governments around the world. This partnership will elevate Saudi Arabia’s influenza pandemic preparedness and response strategies in influenza.”
Translation: Saudi Arabia will be producing and stockpiling a vaccine built for a bird flu pandemic that hasn’t happened yet.
The move comes as countries around the world claim to be creating multiple chimeric, hybrid bird flu Franken-viruses in biolabs, raising fears of another government-made pandemic.
Saudi Arabia is now partnering directly with the maker of Audenz, which is CSL’s only—and the world’s only—U.S. FDA-licensed cell-based pandemic influenza bird flu vaccine.
Since Audenz remains the company’s only officially licensed pandemic vaccine, the bird flu shot is the clear focal point of this deal.
Though the jab isn’t mentioned by name in the press release.
The agreement—signed in Riyadh on October 30—includes provisions for:
Pre-pandemic vaccine stockpiles for “high-risk populations”;
An Advance Purchase Agreement (APA) securing pandemic vaccine doses for the wider public;
Domestic manufacturing at VIC’s new $133 million Sudair City facility to “reduce reliance on global supply chains.”
Why It Matters
This is not just about routine flu shots.
Saudi Arabia’s deal with CSL Seqirus is a strategic bet on a coming influenza pandemic—specifically a bird flu pandemic.
By tying the plan to “pandemic preparedness in 2026,” the Kingdom is essentially predicting that a worldwide influenza emergency could emerge within the next couple of years—and it wants its own domestic vaccine supply when it does.
CSL Seqirus markets Audenz as the “first-ever adjuvanted, cell-based influenza vaccine designed to help protect individuals six months of age and older against influenza A(H5N1) in the event of a pandemic.”
That wording—“in the event of a pandemic”—is now baked directly into Saudi Arabia’s national planning.
CSL’s statement that Saudi Arabia will “localize manufacturing” and build “pre-pandemic stockpiles” aligns precisely with the pattern seen in North American (here), European (here; here; here), and Australian pandemic biosecurity programs, which have been stockpiling H5N1 vaccines for years under similar contracts.
In May, the Trump administration announced its “next-generation, universal vaccine” platform called ‘Generation Gold Standard’ that is focusing on bird flu jab creation.
Gold Standard represents the institutionalization of a staggering conflict of interest.
As previously reported on this website, U.S. NIAID Director Dr. Jeffery Taubenberger—who now oversees U.S. taxpayer-funded gain-of-function experiments creating new bird flu viruses—is also a named inventor on the federal patent for the program’s beta-propiolactone (BPL)-inactivated “universal” bird flu vaccine at the center of Gold Standard.
This is despite BPL being a known carcinogen classified as a ‘Group 1B’ substance in Europe and ‘Group 2B’ in the U.S.
This raises profound national-security, informed-consent, and conflict-of-interest concerns at the very heart of America’s pandemic preparedness system.
Bottom Line
Saudi Arabia is betting billions that a bird flu pandemic could hit by 2026.
And it’s doing so by locking in partnership with the only company on Earth that already holds an FDA license for an avian influenza pandemic vaccine.
This is yet another instance of one of the world’s top vaccine manufacturers and one of the world’s most powerful governments officially preparing, on paper, for a bird flu pandemic.
Peer-reviewed study confirms reverse-genetics construction of a synthetic avian–human influenza hybrid in New York City through $150 million gov’t contract.
A new Vaccine journal study published earlier this month reveals that scientists at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York have engineered a synthetic chimeric bird flu virus by splicing genetic segments from multiple influenza strains—avian, human, and laboratory-adapted—into a single live construct grown in chicken eggs.
The risky work was done in the name of “vaccine development,” exposing how, time and again, vaccine production serves as a legal and moral shield for the same dual-use genetic manipulation routinely used to create potential bioweapons.
The project was funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), which is led by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.
The bird flu experiment raises national security concerns, given that Congress, the White House, the Department of Energy, the FBI, the CIA, and Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) have confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic was likely the result of lab-engineered pathogen manipulation.
Countries all over the world are quietly performing dangerous gain-of-function-like bioweapons experiments on bird flu pathogens while simultaneously developing bird flu countermeasures like vaccines and antivirals, raising conflict-of-interest worries.
The new lab-made bird flu virus, named cH15/3HK14N2HK14, was assembled through reverse genetics, a technique that builds a fully functional virus from cloned DNA.
The construct combines three separate viral lineages:
H15 head: from A/shearwater/West Australia/2576/1979 (H15N9), an avian seabird flu.
H3 stalk and N2 neuraminidase: from A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 (H3N2), a human seasonal flu strain.
Internal genes: from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1), a long-used lab strain that serves as the genetic backbone for research.
Per the study:
“For the group 1 cH8/1Cal09N1Cal09 virus, the H8 head domain was derived from the HA of A/mallard/Sweden/24/2002 (H8N4) and the HA stalk domain and the NA from A/California/04/2009 (H1N1). For the group 2 cH15/3HK14N2HK14 virus, the H15 head domain was derived from the HA of A/shearwater/West Australia/2576/1979 (H15N9), while the HA stalk domain and NA belong to A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 (H3N2). The internal genes of both viruses were derived from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1).”
In plain terms, Mount Sinai scientists merged three different influenza viruses—bird, human, and laboratory—into a single hybrid.
Serial Passaging Caused Genetic Mutation
The researchers then passaged the chimeric virus nine times in embryonated chicken eggs, allowing it to adapt and mutate.
They report that:
“Two different mutations were detected in the HA coding sequence at moderate proportions (53–65 %) … variations in the frequency of different polymorphisms were also detected in the HA, NA, and PB2 coding sequences along with changes in the non-coding regions (NCR) of the PB1 and PB2 gene segments.”
In other words, the hybrid virus mutated across key genetic regions associated with host adaptation and replication efficiency—hallmarks of gain-of-function evolution.
Chemical Treatment & Residual Surfactant
To inactivate and split the virus, Mount Sinai’s team exposed it to beta-propiolactone (βPL or BPL)—a known carcinogenic and mutagenic agent—and Triton X-100, a detergent recognized for environmental toxicity and endocrine disruption.
Even after processing, researchers kept residual Triton X-100 between 0.02% and 0.08% to “improve stability,” meaning trace levels of the chemical remained in the finished vaccine material.
Animal Testing & Resistance to Inactivation
Mount Sinai’s team injected mice with 5 micrograms of hemagglutinin (HA) derived from the chimeric viruses, confirming a strong immune response—proof that the lab-created material remained biologically and antigenically active.
Even more concerning, the paper reveals that the cH15/3HK14N2HK14 virus required higher concentrations of BPL to fully neutralize than other influenza strains.
The authors note that 0.025% BPL failed to inactivate the virus within 24 hours, forcing them to double the concentration to 0.05% to achieve total inactivation.
Per the study:
“The demonstration of absence of virus replication after βPL inactivation is a requirement by regulatory agencies. To optimize this, a 24 h virus inactivation kinetics study was conducted for both cH8/ 1Cal09N1Cal09 and cH15/3HK14N2HK14 viruses at 4 ◦C. The absence of HA titer after two sequential rounds of egg injection with neat sample was considered as an indication of complete virus inactivation. For the cH8/ 1Cal09N1Cal09 virus, 0.025 % (v/v) βPL resulted in complete viral inactivation after 24 h incubation. Treatment with 0.025 % (v/v) βPL was not enough to inactivate the cH15/3HK14N2HK14 virus within 24 h, so the concentration of βPL was increased to 0.05 % (v/v). In these conditions, complete virus inactivation was demonstrated.”
This means the Mount Sinai chimera Franken-virus demonstrated greater resistance to chemical inactivation, a red flag in vaccine manufacturing and biosafety settings where even small lapses could lead to accidental exposure.
U.S. Taxpayer Funding & Big Pharma Conflicts of Interest
The CIVICs program, launched in September 2019, is involved in more than 125 preclinical, clinical, and manufacturing studies related to influenza vaccines as of 2025.
The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), led by Dr. Jeffery Taubenberger and part of NIH, provided $51 million in first-year funding for the program.
Mount Sinai disclosed that it has filed patents on these chimeric influenza viruses, listing Krammer and Puente-Massaguer as inventors, and that Krammer personally consults for Merck, Pfizer, GSK, Sanofi, CureVac, and Seqirus, among others.
In effect, the same laboratory designing and manipulating these synthetic viruses also profits from their commercial vaccine applications.
Context: Global Bird Flu Engineering Boom
The revelation comes amid a wave of government-funded bird flu research around the world.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently declared avian influenza a “permanent emergency,” ensuring uninterrupted funding even during government shutdowns.
At the same time, foreign institutions—from Kazakhstan and South Korea, to Switzerland, to the U.K. and China—have engaged in similarly risky gain-of-function avian flu experiments combining multiple virus lineages.
Mount Sinai’s work confirms that such chimeric bird flu construction is also happening in New York City, under NIH contract funding and academic oversight.
Bottom Line
The new Vaccine paper makes clear:
A man-made bird flu chimera was constructed in New York City,
Mutated through repeated egg passaging,
Chemically treated with carcinogenic and toxic compounds,
And patented for future commercialization.
While branded as vaccine research, these experiments demonstrate dual-use biotechnology—capable of both “protection” and potential catastrophic misuse—occurring inside U.S. borders.
Given the grave national security implications and the proven global track record of lab-origin pandemics, there must be an immediate, permanent moratorium on all pathogen-enhancement and chimeric virus experiments—no matter how they’re labeled, licensed, or justified.
Birds injected with hybrid pathogen became contagious.
A new study published last month in Avian Diseases confirms that U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) researchers in Athens, Georgia, engineered a synthetic H5N9 avian influenza “bird flu” virus using reverse genetics—a gain-of-function method that assembles viruses from cloned DNA.
The U.S. Department of Energy, led by Secretary Chris Wright, helped fund the project.
Official Photo of Chris Wright, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy (Energy.gov)
The alarming experiment raises national security concerns.
The new paper explains that the vaccine virus was “generated by reverse genetics … using the HA gene of TK/IN/22 modified to be low pathogenic and N9 NA gene of A/blue winged teal/Wyoming/AH0099021/2016 with the remaining gene segments from the PR8 influenza strain.”
In plain terms, the USDA built a three-part bird flu chimera:
The H5 gene came from a 2022 highly pathogenic bird flu outbreak in Indiana turkeys.
The N9 gene came from a wild duck virus in Wyoming.
The backbone genes came from PR8, a decades-old laboratory strain optimized for high viral replication.
The resulting hybrid—an H5N9-PR8 chimera—does not exist in nature.
The risky work was done in the name of “vaccine development,” revealing how regularly potential bioweapons are created under the guise of claimed public health research.
It is not widely understood that vaccine production often serves as a legal and moral shield for the same dual-use genetic manipulation techniques utilized to build offensive biological agents.
The USDA’s new virus creation comes as the agency recently elevated bird flu to a permanent national emergency, guaranteeing uninterrupted funding for its manipulation and vaccine programs even during a government shutdown—cementing bird flu as a standing, institutional priority within America’s biosecurity and biodefense apparatus.
USDA is led by Secretary Brooke Rollins, who in February rolled out a $1 billion plan for fighting bird flu, confirming the agency is orchestrating both the problem and solution to a future avian influenza pandemic.
Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins (USDA.gov)
Lab-Enhanced Replication Ability
The USDA researchers admit that the lab-adapted PR8 strain was selected because it “replicates to high titers in eggs,” granting the chimera the ability to multiply rapidly—a function the wild H5N1 and N9 donor viruses lacked.
That change means the USDA-created virus can reach massive viral loads under laboratory or vaccine-manufacturing conditions—a textbook gain of function.
Synthetic Alteration of Pathogenicity
The hemagglutinin (HA) gene from the deadly turkey virus was manually modified to make it appear “low pathogenic”:
“…using the HA gene of TK/IN/22 modified to be low pathogenic…”
This involved editing the HA cleavage site, the molecular switch that determines whether a virus causes mild or fatal disease.
That modification created an artificial genetic variant—a version of H5 that has never existed in wild populations.
Vaccinated Birds Still Shed Virus
Once constructed, the chimera was injected into live turkeys to test “vaccine efficacy.”
Despite being described as “inactivated,” all vaccinated turkeys still shed live virus:
“All turkeys shed detectable levels of virus at one or more time points.”
Even with 100% survival, up to 100% of vaccinated birds in certain groups excreted viral particles from their throats or cloacae—meaning that vaccinated flocks could continue spreading the virus silently.
According to the data, all vaccinated groups shed virus, and some even developed mild symptoms:
“Two vaccinated turkeys in the 9 wk vaccination group exhibited clinical signs … mild unilateral periorbital swelling … mild lethargy from 6 to 7 DPC.”
The USDA’s own summary acknowledges that reducing virus shedding is “a critical aspect of HPAI vaccine efficacy,” but their inactivated vaccine did not eliminate it—meaning even “protected” birds could become long-term reservoirs.
Reverse-Genetics = Dual-Use Research
The USDA team produced the hybrid using a “reverse-genetics system,” the same technology used in dual-use gain-of-function research.
The system reconstructs viruses gene by gene, allowing scientists to mix and match segments from different species.
The resulting construct—combining avian and laboratory lineages—represents a clear functional enhancement over its wild counterparts, achieving:
Higher replication capacity (PR8 internal genes),
New antigenic profile (H5N9 combination), and
Synthetic attenuation (edited cleavage site).
USDA & Energy Department Funding
All authors—Jiho Lee, Chang-Won Lee, Sherif Ibrahim, David Suarez, and Erica Spackman—are government scientists employed by the U.S. National Poultry Research Center, part of the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service.
That means the same federal agency responsible for regulating poultry biosecurity is now engineering and testing new bird flu viruses in its own facilities—a conflict of interest for biosafety oversight.
The research was conducted under federal funding agreement “6040-32000-081-00D,” and the authors acknowledged additional support through a U.S. Department of Energy–USDA interagency agreement—confirming dual-agency collaboration in the creation of engineered pathogens.
Creating the Problem to Sell the Solution
While marketed as “vaccine research,” the study’s implications go far beyond poultry health.
The paper explicitly explores DIVA (Differentiating Infected from Vaccinated Animals) systems—tools designed to track infections in vaccinated flocks rather than prevent them.
“The NI-ELLA assay successfully detected antibodies to the challenge virus in vaccinated chickens and showed its potential application for DIVA-VI of vaccinated turkeys.”
In short: instead of eradicating H5N1, the USDA is normalizing its coexistence—vaccinating birds that continue to carry and shed lab-derived influenza strains.
Bottom Line
Under the label of “vaccine development,” the U.S. Department of Agriculture has quietly engineered a novel bird flu chimera that combines genetic material from a lethal turkey virus, a wild duck strain, and a lab-optimized replication platform.
The resulting H5N9 hybrid:
Does not exist in nature,
Acquired new laboratory functions, and
Was tested in live turkeys that continued shedding virus.
What this means is that U.S. government scientists are performing gain-of-function work inside USDA labs — creating, modifying, and testing synthetic avian influenza viruses that have the very properties of concern in dual-use bioweapons research.
In the absence of clear congressional oversight or international accountability, this kind of federally funded pathogen engineering inside domestic labs doesn’t just blur the line between defense and offense—it invites catastrophic biosecurity failure on U.S. soil.
Given that the COVID pandemic killed millions of Americans, there should be a permanent moratorium on all pathogen creation and manipulation—even when it’s done in the name of drug development.
It’s time for a permanent moratorium on all pathogen creation and manipulation—no matter how it’s justified—because Americans should never again be forced to bankroll both the killer cause of a crisis and the government’s profitable “solution” to it.
The discovery coincides with a U.S. policy move placing bird flu and bovine tuberculosis under indefinite emergency status—raising urgent questions of intent and global coordination.
A new study published last month in Veterinary World confirms that scientists from Kazakhstan and South Korea have engineered a live hybrid virus that combines genetic material from avian influenza “bird flu” and Mycobacterium bovis, the bacterium that causes bovine tuberculosis.
Governments all over the world are quietly generating an army of new bird flu pathogens, without a peep from the mainstream media or popular influencers.
The new chimeric influenza–tuberculosis pathogen was created inside Kazakhstan’s government-run Research Institute for Biological Safety Problems, with technical collaboration from Seoul National University in South Korea, and funding provided by Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Education and Science.
According to the authors, they “generated recombinant influenza viruses expressing M. bovis antigens ESAT-6 and TB10.4 using a standard reverse genetic system.”
In plain terms, the team used reverse-genetics, a lab method that assembles new viruses from cloned DNA, to insert tuberculosis genes into the flu genome—creating a synthetic viral-bacterial hybrid.
They further explain: “We produced a vaccine strain expressing the M. bovis mycobacterial proteins ESAT-6 and TB10.4 from the NS1 open reading frame of the avian influenza virus through reverse genetics with virus replication in embryonated chicken eggs.”
In other words, the tuberculosis genes were physically embedded inside the influenza virus’s NS1 gene, then amplified inside live bird embryos to generate infectious viral particles.
The NS1 gene in bird flu controls the virus’s ability to evade the host immune system and replicate efficiently inside infected cells.
The generation of a bird flu-tuberculosis Franken-virus comes as the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s FY2026 emergency funding plan quietly placed both highly pathogenic avian influenza and bovine tuberculosis under the same permanent “no-year” emergency funding status—elevating bird flu and tuberculosis research, including gain-of-function and vaccine development, to federally protected, continuous-operation programs even during a full government shutdown.
Taken together, the creation of a live bird flu-tuberculosis chimera overseas and the U.S. government’s decision to grant both pathogens permanent emergency status raise serious national security concerns.
The timing and alignment of these actions suggest more than coincidence—raising pressing questions about whether global agencies and their partners are merely preparing for future outbreaks, or deliberately coordinating the groundwork for one.
The scientists note that the NS1 gene “was modified to include the antigen sequences.”
That means the flu virus’s genetic code was deliberately edited to carry foreign bacterial fragments.
They add: “The virus was attenuated by modifying the NS1 protein by inserting alien sequences derived from the target protein amino acid region 124.”
Translated, the researchers confirm they altered the flu virus by altering a key protein and inserting “alien” genetic material—a literal cross-species fusion between virus and bacterium.
Microscopic Confirmation of the Hybrid Virus
Under an electron microscope, “the virion morphology of the recombinant viruses corresponded to that of the avian influenza viruses. The virions were spherical and enclosed in a bilayer supercapsid with ~10 nm glycoprotein spikes, which determine the hemagglutinative or neuraminidase activity.”
Simply put, even after being spliced with tuberculosis genes, the new organism was said to still look and behave like an influenza virus—complete with its purported spike-covered shell used for cell infection.
Verified ‘Genetic Chimeric Structure’
Molecular testing showed the genetic combination held together across generations: “The first cloning stage showed a preserved genetic chimeric structure in the NS1 genome segment, as confirmed by RT-PCR.*”
Meaning: laboratory sequencing confirmed the hybrid DNA remained intact, proving the chimeric virus was genetically stable and self-replicating.
The study’s schematic further details the exact makeup:
“The recombinant segment of the non-structural protein 1 (NS1) gene express[es] the ESAT-6 and TB10.4 antigens of the virulent 0078-Mycobacterium bovis-8/RIBSP strain. The yellow rectangle represents the NS1 regions, while the green rectangles represent the mycobacterial genes.”
In plain language, the figure shows flu genes (yellow) fused with tuberculosis genes (green)—a clear depiction of genetic grafting across species.
Replication & Stability
The team reported the new virus replicated efficiently:
“The recombinant vector expressing the mycobacterial antigens showed a high hemagglutination activity of 1:128 at an infectious activity level of lg 6.75 ± 0.07 EID50/0.2 mL.”
In other words, each dose contained roughly five million infectious particles, confirming robust viral growth.
They also verified the genetic insert stayed stable:
“To evaluate the stability of the inserted gene, five serial passages of the virus were carried out in embryonated chicken eggs at 34 °C.”
This means the hybrid virus could be re-grown repeatedly without losing its tuberculosis genes—evidence of lasting biological stability.
Bottom Line
The Veterinary World study confirms that scientists from Kazakhstan’s Research Institute for Biological Safety Problems and Seoul National University created a genetically engineered, self-replicating organism that merges the genetic material of tuberculosis bacteria with avian influenza virus.
Their own words describe a “recombinant influenza virus” with a “preserved genetic chimeric structure” and “alien sequences” inserted into the NS1 gene—a live, replicating influenza–tuberculosis chimera manufactured inside bird embryos.
The timing of this creation—coinciding with the U.S. government’s decision to grant both bird flu and bovine tuberculosis permanent emergency funding—raises profound national security questions.
It suggests a coordinated international framework in which the same pathogens now being engineered in foreign labs are simultaneously being prioritized and federally protected under U.S. biosecurity policy.
Whether framed as “vaccine research” or “preparedness,” these programs collectively point to a globally synchronized architecture of high-risk pathogen development and continuity planning—one that operates beyond public consent, outside normal oversight, and increasingly blurs the line between defense and deliberate design.
Avian influenza officially elevated above nearly every other disease in the country’s federal continuity plan—after USDA rolled out $1 billion bird flu plan earlier this year.
Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins remarks announcing the MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) Commission, Thursday, May 22, 2025, in the East Room of the White House. (Official White House Photo by Joyce N. Boghosian)
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has quietly confirmed that highly pathogenic avian influenza (H5N1)—the same “bird flu” virus currently at the center of international gain-of-function experiments and vaccine production—will continue to receive emergency funding even during a full government shutdown.
According to the USDA’s FY2026 Lapse of Funding Plan, issued last month, the agency’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will keep drawing from so-called “no-year emergency funding balances” to sustain select animal and plant disease programs indefinitely.
Out of all diseases, bird flu made the list.
And unlike normal appropriations, no-year funds never expire.
“No-year emergency funding balances will support continuation of animal and plant health emergency programs including new world screwworm, highly pathogenic avian influenza, exotic fruit flies, African swine fever, bovine tuberculosis, and rabies,” the plan states on page 23.
The move comes after USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins in February rolled out a $1 billion plan for fighting bird flu.
While governments are creating both the problem and the solution for a future bird flu pandemic (as they did for COVID-19), the USDA is now ensuring that the funding pipeline for those very operations—viral manipulation, surveillance, and pharmaceutical development—remains permanently open, immune to congressional oversight, public objection, or even the collapse of the federal government itself.
USDA’s recent actions confirm that bird flu has been formally elevated to a standing national emergency—an institutionalized, self-perpetuating priority that guarantees the continuation of biosecurity and vaccine programs regardless of political process, fiscal restraint, or the existence of an actual outbreak.
The United Nations and the World Health Organization are also mobilizing their own pandemic command structure around bird flu—with the WHO reactivating its global influenza emergency framework and the U.N. convening 500 international “experts and decision-makers” for the world’s first-ever “Global Dialogue” on bird flu coordination—a synchronized effort that mirrors the pre-COVID buildup of global pandemic infrastructure.
A Stunning Admission: Bird Flu Funding Can’t Be Stopped
In plain terms, this funding admission means that even if Congress collapses, the White House freezes, and all other federal operations are shuttered—the U.S. government will still keep funding bird flu programs.
Not monkeypox, Ebola, Marburg, or Chikungunya—but bird flu.
That level of protection is extraordinary.
Bird flu has been singled out for continuous, uninterruptible funding, on par with national defense and nuclear security operations.
No other infectious disease—human or animal—is afforded this kind of permanent continuity status in the USDA’s emergency budget architecture.
This isn’t normal policy language.
It’s an institutional declaration that bird flu is being treated as a standing national emergency, whether or not an actual outbreak exists.
What does the government know that we don’t?
And why does the United States continue to perform dangerous gain-of-function experiments on bird flu viruses when Congress, the White House, the Department of Energy, the FBI, and the CIA have confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic was likely the result of lab-engineered pathogen manipulation?
Just before the COVID pandemic, former NIAID Director Anthony Fauci was funding similar dangerous coronavirus experiments while the government was simultaneously developing a COVID vaccine.
Taken together, these problem-solution orchestration patterns raise national security, conflict of interest, and informed consent concerns.
A Signal of Pre-Planned Pandemic Operations
This USDA no-year emergency bird flu funding revelation comes as federal and international partners are already pouring billions into bird flu vaccine stockpiling, cancer-linked bird flu jabs, and bird flu gain-of-function lab experiments.
The USDA’s emergency funding clause guarantees that none of these operations—research, surveillance, vaccine testing, or field trials—will ever be interrupted, even if the rest of the government runs out of money.
This continuity effectively locks in a permanent and unprecedented bird flu response infrastructure, insulating bird flu activities from public debate, budget oversight, or congressional defunding efforts.
In other words, the government has pre-authorized bird flu as the one disease that can bypass the normal political process.
Prioritizing Bird Flu Over All Else
The USDA’s plan lists only six diseases eligible for automatic emergency funding: H5N1 bird flu, African swine fever, rabies, bovine tuberculosis, exotic fruit flies, and New World screwworm.
Yet only one of these—H5N1—is currently the focus of global vaccine production, laboratory gain-of-function work, and pandemic-level preparedness programs.
This choice is not accidental.
It shows that H5N1 has been politically and financially elevated above all other animal diseases as the presumed next pandemic threat.
It also means federal agencies are ensuring that avian flu vaccine and biosecurity operations will proceed uninterrupted, regardless of whether Congress approves a budget or the public objects.
Implications: A Built-In Bird Flu Apparatus
The USDA’s FY2026 Lapse of Funding Plan document proves that the U.S. government has already built the infrastructure to respond to an H5N1 “emergency” long before any such emergency exists.
It guarantees:
Constant funding for H5N1 surveillance, lab work, and vaccine production.
Operational continuity across USDA, BARDA, and CEPI-linked vaccine programs.
No congressional check or pause on H5N1-related activities—even under government collapse.
When paired with the ongoing gain-of-function experiments enhancing H5N1’s ability to infect mammals, this shows the federal government isn’t merely preparing for a bird flu outbreak—it’s institutionalizing it as a permanent national focus.
Bottom Line
The USDA’s FY2026 emergency funding plan quietly exposes how H5N1 bird flu has been hardwired into the U.S. government’s permanent emergency infrastructure.
While nearly every other program would go dark in a shutdown, bird flu remains protected—its funding guaranteed, its operations untouchable, its continuity automatic.
This is not routine budgeting.
It’s a declaration of institutional permanence for a virus that has not yet caused a human pandemic—an extraordinary move that places bird flu response programs on the same level as national defense and nuclear security.
By pre-authorizing H5N1 funding to flow indefinitely, the federal government has created a self-sustaining pandemic apparatus—one that cannot be defunded, debated, or democratically constrained.
Taken together, the USDA’s emergency funding clause, NIAID’s gain-of-function work, and the global vaccine push reveal a chilling reality: H5N1 isn’t just being prepared for—it’s being positioned.
The government has pre-selected bird flu as the next pandemic—and built a financial machine to keep that plan running forever.
Is the next bird flu pandemic no longer a question of if, but when?
WHO received $8 billion during the COVID-19 pandemic—is that why it’s expanding bird flu pandemic response infrastructure instead of demanding bird flu gain-of-function be halted?
A Wednesday publication in the Journal of Infectious Diseases confirms the World Health Organization (WHO) is quietly expanding its global pandemic infrastructure—this time around the threat of an H5N1 “bird flu” pandemic.
Not chikungunya. Not Ebola. Not Nipah. Not monkeypox.
Bird flu: the very virus countries are dangerously enhancing in labs even as they develop the vaccines and drugs to contain it (see recommended reading below this article).
In other words, while governments are creating both the problem and the solution to a bird flu pandemic, the WHO is building the command structure that will manage the global response when that crisis arrives.
The WHO’s bird flu paper surfaces as the United Nations, the most consequential international institution in existence, convenes 500 experts for a “global dialogue” on the same threat, signaling that global institutions are quietly aligning their pandemic machinery around bird flu.
The new report was written by officials in the World Health Organization’s Department of Epidemic and Pandemic Management.
It describes a permanent coordination system linking governments, pharmaceutical companies, and humanitarian agencies through two mechanisms: the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework and a new Interim Medical Countermeasures Network (i-MCM-net).
Together, they allow WHO to “coordinate availability, equitable access to, and timely allocation of medical countermeasures at the global level: strengthen coordination efforts and provide strategic orientation to ensure a coherent response to pandemic threats, with a focus on the global level.”
Key Question: Why is the WHO more focused on creating bird flu pandemic response infrastructure than on demanding governments halt all gain-of-function and reverse genetics experiments on bird flu—or all pathogens, for that matter?
One reason might be that the World Health Organization received a total of approximately $8 billion in funding during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The massive inflow of cash was unprecedented in the organization’s history and timeframe, as it greatly exceeded the approved biennial program budget of $5.84 billion.
COVID-19 made the WHO richer than ever.
What would a bird flu pandemic bring in?
And is that potential pandemic profit more important to the WHO than stopping what causes pandemics in the first place?
WHO traces the origin of these systems to the early-2000s H5N1 outbreaks:
“During 2005, changes were observed in the epidemiology of H5N1 disease in animals, and human cases continued to occur with high mortality (33% to > 50% case fatality),” the new Journal of Infectious Diseases publication reads. “The virus evolved and expanded its geographical range and became endemic in poultry in parts of Asia, increasing the size of the population at risk.”
The paper explains that these events prompted creation of an international antiviral stockpile “for strategic use during an evolving outbreak.”
“Considering the impact of a pandemic caused by the highly pathogenic virus, WHO was asked to explore the establishment of an international stockpile of antivirals for strategic use during an evolving outbreak in an attempt to contain it at the source or at least delay spread.”
Two decades later, WHO again points to the potential of an H5N1 pandemic to justify maintaining that infrastructure indefinitely.
New Supply Agreements & Industry Partners
In May 2024 WHO signed a donation agreement with F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., securing up to five million courses of Tamiflu over two years.
“These antiviral treatment courses would be critical in the early stages of the response to an influenza pandemic,” writes the WHO.
The supplement lists additional sponsors—Roche, Gilead, Shionogi, Cidara, Eradivir, Leyden Laboratories, and the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations—showing direct corporate integration in the WHO’s antiviral and vaccine network.
How the Systems Intersect
WHO’s i-MCM-net is designed to manage global distribution of antivirals and vaccines once they are licensed or “emergency use” authorized.
(We do not need an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for any bird flu vaccines or pharmaceuticals because we already have safe and effective FDA-approved medicines for the disease: Xofluza and Ivermectin).
The international agency already tested the network by allocating 2.4 million monkeypox vaccine doses in 2024 and states it will serve as the operational model for future influenza events.
In effect, laboratory research, pharmaceutical development, and international logistics are now operating in parallel lanes that converge under WHO coordination whenever an influenza pandemic threat is declared.
The Scale of Coordination
The WHO paper also notes that the organization is activating the i-MCM-net before the forthcoming Pandemic Agreement enters into force:
“Pending entry into force of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, WHO is working with Member States and relevant partners to ensure the interim Medical Countermeasures Network (i-MCM net) is operational to respond to public health events requiring a coordinated international response.”
That means the infrastructure for global response is already functioning in anticipation of a coming H5N1 or other influenza emergency.
Bottom Line
Across science, industry, and policy, H5N1 bird flu has become the organizing focus of a worldwide pandemic-response regime.
While laboratories across the U.S., Europe, and Asia continue conducting gain-of-function and reverse-genetics experiments that enhance bird-flu viruses, governments and pharmaceutical companies are simultaneously developing the vaccines and antivirals to counter those same engineered strains.
At the center of it all, the World Health Organization is orchestrating the global command structure—the supply chains, stockpiles, and distribution systems that will deploy those medical products once the next pandemic is declared.
COVID-19 showed that pandemic response can generate unprecedented funding and influence for global health institutions.
The WHO’s current expansion suggests it is preparing to replicate that model—this time around H5N1.
Whether viewed as preparedness or unchecked consolidation of power, the coordination now underway is one of the most extensive and consequential mobilizations around a single virus threat since COVID-19—and it is happening in plain sight.
Majority of infected individuals became contagious to others, raising national security and informed consent concerns.
A federally run experiment funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation deliberately infected 80 American adults with a lab-grown pandemic influenza virus at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland.
Data from 74 of those infected were analyzed, and 53 of them (72% of analyzed participants, or at least 66% of all infected participants) were confirmed to be shedding the pathogen, meaning they were actively contagious and could infect others.
We do not know whether six participants who were excluded from the study after being deliberately infected were shedding the virus or not.
Regardless, 53 of the individuals became contagious to others.
The human-infection experiment—officially published in Science Translational Medicine (Aug. 2025) under the title “Nasal and systemic immune responses correlate with viral shedding after influenza challenge in people with complex preexisting immunity”—was conducted entirely under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
The original HHS manuscript can be found here or downloaded below.
According to the paper, participants were “challenged with 10⁷ half-maximal tissue culture infectious dose (TCID₅₀) of a 2009 pandemic H1N1 strain, A/Bethesda/MM2/H1N1.”
That purported virus was not naturally circulating.
It was a lab-engineered clone of the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus, manufactured by NIH scientists in Bethesda and maintained as a standardized “human challenge” stock.
The virus name itself—A/Bethesda/MM2/H1N1—identifies it as an NIH-made strain.
The “Bethesda” designation marks its laboratory origin at NIH’s Maryland facility, and “MM2” denotes the second master-mix batch of the cloned challenge stock.
80 Individuals Deliberately Infected Under HHS Oversight
The study describes the deliberate exposure of 80 adults to this laboratory-made pandemic influenza strain in 2019.
“The challenge study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01971255) was performed at the NIH Clinical Center between April and October 2019,” the study reads.
Interestingly, that means the 80 human participants were intentionally infected with the NIH-made H1N1 influenza virus roughly five to six months before COVID-19 was first reported in Wuhan, China (December 2019).
So, while the study was published in Science Translational Medicine in August 2025, the actual human infections occurred in mid-2019.
Half of those deliberately infected had been vaccinated roughly two months earlier with a commercial quadrivalent influenza vaccine; the other half had not.
“All 80 participants were brought into the NIH Clinical Center as mixed cohorts and challenged with 10⁷ TCID₅₀ of influenza A/Bethesda/MM2/H1N1 virus … and assessed daily for a minimum of 9 days.”
Although only 74 participants were ultimately included in the analysis (after six were excluded), every one of them was intentionally inoculated with a live, replication-competent pandemic virus.
The experiment was run on U.S. federal property by U.S. government scientists.
It was approved by the NIAID Institutional Review Board (IRB No. 19-I-0058), making it an officially sanctioned HHS human-infection study.
The human infection experiment was carried out under a multi-million U.S. taxpayer dollar project titled “Universal Influenza Vaccine Development” (project number 1ZIAAI001372), led by Dr. Jeffery Taubenberger.
Dr. Taubenberger—listed as an author on the study—is the current NIAID Director, taking over Anthony Fauci’s spot.
Confirmed 72% of Analyzed Participants—& at Least 66% of All Infected—Became Infectious
A total of 80 volunteers were deliberately infected with the NIH-made influenza virus, but data from only 74 participants were included in the final published analysis.
Among those 74 analyzed participants, 53 were confirmed to actively shed virus, meaning they were contagious.
Because the six excluded individuals were not evaluated for viral shedding, the true number of infectious participants could be higher, but only 53 are confirmed in the published dataset.
That equates to 72% of the analyzed group and at least 66% of everyone infected becoming contagious, some for several days.
Shedding was tracked by daily nasal swabs using the BioFire Respiratory Pathogen Panel and qRT-PCR testing for the influenza M gene.
Participants were considered “shedding” when viral RNA was detected in nasal-wash samples.
“[P]articipants shedding virus for two or more days showed higher early viral loads and exhibited stronger induction of antiviral responses compared with participants who shed virus for one day.”
The highest viral loads appeared in multiday shedders on days 1–3 post-infection, coinciding with the most severe flu-like symptoms, as measured by NIH’s FluPro symptom scoring system.
Vaccination Failed to Prevent Infection or Shedding
Vaccination did not prevent infection.
The paper admits that “vaccinated shedders” displayed increased T-cell activity and inflammatory markers, including CD8A, PD-L1, IFN-γ, IL-6, and TNF-β, compared to unvaccinated shedders—indicating that vaccination did not stop infection but instead triggered a hyper-inflammatory immune response.
Females were three times more likely to clear the infection after only one day of shedding, while males were more likely to shed virus for multiple days.
Funding: NIAID, DARPA, and Gates Foundation
The study lists its financial backers as:
NIAID Intramural Research Program (grants AI000986-12 and AI001157-07)
DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), contract HR0011831160
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, grant OPP1178956
That combination of government and private funders represents the same triad—HHS, the Pentagon, and the Gates Foundation—responsible for many dual-use biological and “pandemic preparedness” programs that blur the line between public health and bio-defense research.
Containment & Biosafety Measures Not Disclosed
Remarkably, the 2025 Science Translational Medicine paper and HHS manuscript provide no description whatsoever of biosafety precautions—no mention of negative-pressure rooms, isolation conditions, or post-infection quarantine protocols to prevent secondary transmission.
Readers of the study are unable to verify how the government prevented infected subjects from spreading the lab-made virus to others, raising national security concerns.
It further raises grave informed-consent concerns, as individuals who interacted with these infected volunteers beyond the study setting were never informed that they might be exposed to an NIH-made pandemic influenza virus.
Given that 72 percent of participants were confirmed viral shedders, this omission raises serious biosafety and public-transmission concerns.
Conducted Entirely Under HHS Authority
The trial was hosted, funded, staffed, and overseen by HHS agencies from start to finish:
Conducted at the NIH Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland
Run by the NIAID Laboratory of Infectious Diseases
Reviewed by an HHS Institutional Review Board
Carried out under HHS Good Clinical Practice guidelines
In short, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services infected 74 American adults with a lab-grown pandemic influenza virus to study viral shedding and immune-system responses—while omitting basic transparency about containment.
The nation’s top health agency is infecting Americans with pandemic-grade pathogens.
Bottom Line
The federally directed experiment—funded by NIAID, DARPA, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation—was a live human-infection challenge using a lab-engineered influenza strain created by NIH scientists in Bethesda.
Eighty adults were deliberately infected with the laboratory-made pandemic H1N1 virus; data from 74 were analyzed, and 53 of them (72 % of those analyzed, or at least 66 % of everyone infected) were confirmed to be shedding the pathogen—actively contagious and capable of transmitting it to others.
The six excluded participants were also infected, but the government provided no data indicating whether they shed virus, leaving the full extent of contagiousness unknown.
No description was provided for biosafety controls, isolation conditions, or post-infection release criteria, meaning the public record offers no verification of how HHS prevented the spread of its own lab-created virus beyond the NIH facility.
This omission raises not only national-security concerns but also informed-consent violations, since people who may have interacted with participants outside the study were never notified of possible exposure to an NIH-made pathogen.
Although the paper frames the experiment as advancing “next-generation vaccine development,” its findings instead showed that vaccination failed to prevent infection or viral shedding and appeared to trigger immune hyperactivation in vaccinated participants.
The newly published HHS study therefore stands as a rare, fully documented example of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services deliberately infecting American citizens with a laboratory-grown pandemic-grade virus—underwritten by HHS, DARPA, and the Gates Foundation, with no transparent account of how the resulting contagion was contained.
fox files 
Recent Comments