← The Tucker Carlson Show
The Tucker Carlson Show
Covid Whistleblower: Predicting Pandemics & Exposing the CIA and Peter Daszak’s Alliance With China
02:07:04
Loading summary
Transcript386 lines
- [00:02]
Host
The holidays have arrived at the Home Depot and we're here to help bring.
- [00:05]
Dr. Andrew Huff
The excitement with decor for every part of your home.
- [00:09]
Host
Check out our wide assortment of easy to assemble pre lit trees so you can spend less time setting up and more time celebrating. And bring your holiday spirit outdoors with unique decor like one of our Santa inflatables. Whatever your style, find the right pieces at the right prices this holiday season.
- [00:28]
Dr. Andrew Huff
At the Home Depot.
- [00:33]
Host
So I think most people have concluded that the creation of COVID was probably not what they told us. It probably didn't evolve naturally out of a pangolin in a seafood market, and that the Wuhan Institute of Virology probably played a role. The US Government played a role, but it is impossible to find anyone, or has been for us anyway, to find anyone who has kind of like direct connection to any of the main players here. None of them will do an interview.
- [01:02]
Dr. Andrew Huff
None.
- [01:03]
Host
You were the vice president of the Eco Health alliance, your former military guy tied to the intel world. You worked at federal nuclear lab in New Mexico for years and then you wind up at your scientist PhD and then you wind up working for EcoHealth alliance in New York City. You think it's like this World Wildlife Fund operation designed to like track diseases among wildlife globally and protect the wildlife, protect the people. It's like kind of a crunchy outfit. It's do Gooders, basically. You show up there, you help them raise a bunch of money from the feds and you become the vice president and then you discover it's not what you thought. So that's the story that you told me at breakfast, which is an amazing story. Thank you again for coming. I'm going to bow out now and let you continue the story from there, assuming I've been faithful in my rendition of it so far.
- [01:59]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Perfectly accurate. And thank you for having me. This is sort of like a dream of mine.
- [02:03]
Host
Oh, well, I'm so excited you're here and because this has been gnawing at me. Where did Covid come from? And how was the US government implicated? It clearly was. But you never meet anyone who can say that they know the players, but you do. So with that, you show up there, you become VP of Eco Health alliance, the now famous Eco Health Alliance. And when did you start to realize this wasn't the World Wildlife Fund?
- [02:48]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Shortly after I was working there. So I was hired as a senior scientist to take over a. What I learned after the fact, I sort of lied to. But it was a failing department that was doing predictive forecasting and analytics. And after I brought in all that money from the Department of Defense, I actually sort of saved Eco Alliance. It was financially on the rocks. That $4 million really transformed the organization. And with that, in my expertise in technology, I was actually improving the systems and technology company wide. Peter Dasak, who is the president or CEO of Equal Health alliance, liked everything that I was doing. He was very impressed.
- [03:24]
Host
Peter Dasak is like a figure out of history now. I mean, Peter Dasak is like at the very center of COVID Oh, absolutely.
- [03:29]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And we'll get to that. So, so Peter promotes me to vice president and then I start attending executive meetings and I get involved in all the different other aspects of the company or at least visibility to what's going on. The main driver funding of Equal alliance was from this program called Prediction. And Predict was funded by USAID to go out and conduct global surveillance of infectious diseases to predict and forecast emerging pandemics. At least that's what they were telling everyone they were going to do.
- [03:59]
Host
Seems like a virtuous thing to do, by the way.
- [04:01]
Dr. Andrew Huff
No, and it seemed completely virtuous. And I had actually been doing that type of research my entire career, at least as a scientist and engineer. And I was doing that type of work at the National Laboratory. I continued that work funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. When I was at Equal alliance. That's where the first big check comes from for $4.06 million. And once I'm promoted and I'm looking at this USAID predict program, I decided to go dig into the literature and all the technical reports to see what this is and how it actually works. And I read through this, this phone book of material and I, I assess that it's a giant boondoggle. There's no way that they're going to be able to predict or forecast infectious diseases. They weren't collecting enough samples globally or in the countries that where they were collecting them. They weren't collecting the data on a systematic and routine basis, which is one of the fundamental core concepts in, in biosurveillance. And you start to ask the question.
- [05:00]
Host
Well, what, so this is your area. I should just say, like you've done a lot of research into how do you model this out? Like, how do you collect the data, how do you analyze it?
- [05:09]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I, I, I, I make the bold claim that I'm probably one of the world's leading experts in the area. I'm one of the few people that actually predict and forecast infectious diseases before they've occurred. And I've done it Peer reviewed literature. And I was actually so bold when I built my models and tested them. I actually had this published in, I think it was the Guardian newspaper in the New York Post before the outbreak hit. And this was the Zika, remember Zika virus?
- [05:32]
Host
Very well. Yeah.
- [05:33]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I was working at Eco Health Alliance. One of the models that I developed actually forecasted the amount of Zika virus that we'd received in the United States and where specifically. And I published that before it happened.
- [05:44]
Host
So you, you were very familiar with the technical details of a study of this kind of monitoring of this, like how big is the sample have to be in order to do this?
- [05:54]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, so the devil's always in the details. It depends on the, the characteristics of the infectious disease agent. They're talking about the population, where that population's located, the type of infrastructure. There's a lot of technical nuance because it's how healthy is the population? What is the probability that they'll be exposed to something?
- [06:11]
Host
Right.
- [06:12]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And then what, what were the, what are the likely transmission dynamics within that population? And does it have the ability to go from a small isolated outbreak to an epidemic to a pandemic?
- [06:24]
Host
So, but because this is your specific area, you look at the details of what EcoHealth alliance, your new employer, is now doing and it's immediately obvious to you, like instantly obvious, that this is not real.
- [06:37]
Dr. Andrew Huff
It wasn't real. And the real crazy aspect here is that once I'm promoted, I'm going to all these different meetings with the funders of the program. So Dr. Dr. Dennis Carroll, who is the program manager, program director at USAID, who had a very close relationship with Dr. Peter Dasak and these fundraising events we're doing where we're telling everyone that we're going to go, we're going to forecast and predict these emerging infectious diseases that can cause pandemics. And I'm sitting in the audience and I'm watching my boss and these other people telling everyone that they're doing this. And like I mentioned, if you look at the technical reports, it's just very clear that this is not technically possible. So it begs the question, you know, as me being an ethical person and a good scientist, an engineer, what are we doing here? Right.
- [07:24]
Host
Because we're not doing the thing we said we were doing.
- [07:26]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Exactly. And you know, it gets sort of darker than that real quick. So once I'm sitting in these executive meetings, one of the first meetings that I sit in is a fudget, a budget, a budget, a budget. And forecasting me meeting budget though That's, Yeah, it's fun to be the good Freudian slip. A budget and forecasting meeting for the company. And each vice president in charge of the area is going around talking about our budget, how our employees are doing, you know, operations types of things, typical corporate stuff. And you know, I asked the question because, I mean, well, how much money are we spending on wildlife conservation? And because when I interviewed at the company and all our branding and marketing messaging was that we're doing infectious disease researched to protect wildlife and engage in conservation activities or something to that effect. And the room goes quiet and you know, I'm looking at everyone and why is everyone sort of staring into space or staring at me? And eventually Peter Das looks at me and with sort of a maniacal laugh says, we're not doing, we're not doing any conservation work. This is like a nightmare. Yeah. And I'm just, I'm just shocked. And you know, I, I came directly from the, the national laboratory system, San Diego National Laboratories, and I was trying to get away from that type, type of work. I was actually excited to go work at a crunchy granola non profit organization.
- [08:51]
Host
Where I was protecting wildlife because the Autobahn Society.
- [08:54]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah. And as we, as we were discussing earlier, we're both avid outdoorsmen, we love nature, that kind of thing. And I thought I was going to get into more of that. I was excited, like, hey, maybe I'll get a chance to have a trip out to the woods or the jungle and go protect some wild life. And I hear this and I'm like, okay. And you know, I digest it. Of course, I don't say anything. It's my boss, my other, the other executives. And then it drives more questions, you know, what are we doing here? And so I sat and sat in more executive meetings. I learned more and I quickly, you know, learned that we're sort of functioning as a beltway bandit type of operation, meaning that we're trying to get large contracts and grants in our area, which is in theory predicting and forecasting infectious diseases. But really what we were doing was, the simplest way of explaining is that we were running around the planet collecting infectious disease samples to build a bank or a library of infectious diseases. Which was odd.
- [09:53]
Host
And, and it's, I'm sorry to keep laughing. It's so. This is so dark. I don't, that's a, I can't help it.
- [09:59]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, it was odd from the standpoint. I was still looking at this as a scientist trying to figure out what we were doing. And there's not A ton of publication value in cataloging infectious diseases. You can get one simple publication from identifying a new or novel pathogen in a species. But it's sort of a one and done thing. It doesn't really drive future research. Right. So if you, you find you discover something, it's great, you found it, it's a publication. But that's not going to drive your next cycle of funding because typically you want to be very strategic about this. Well then if you start to look at the other portfolio of research at Ecowath alliance and what some of my peers, other vice presidents in their researchers, what they're up to and the, the places where our employees had joint employment or co employment with and the work that they were doing, it became apparently obvious we were engaging in gain of function research and viral discovery to make new novel pathogens and I wanted nothing to do with it.
- [10:59]
Host
Well, Grand Canyon University is not like most American colleges. It focuses on the things that actually matter. It is not a ripoff. It is the real thing. It's private, affordable Christian university, located in the heart of Phoenix, one of the largest universities in the country actually. At Grand Canyon University, education is more than academics. It is about opportunity. The chance for every student to live out the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Rights are not given by the government. They were bestowed at birth, at conception, by God. That's just a fact. And Grand Canyon University is not going to lie to your kids and claim otherwise. It tells the truth. So you know, you're thinking a quality education is rare, so this probably costs a fortune. Colleges constantly jack up their costs. They probably do the same. Well, they don't actually. GCU has maintained the same tuition for 17 straight years. They're not in education to get rich at the expense of students. The whole thing is actually about learning. How refreshing. With flexible online classes, hybrid learning options. GCU offers 340 academic programs. Students benefit from a collaborative learning environment, dedicated faculty, personalized support to help them achieve their goals. The pursuit to serve is yours. Let it flourish. Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University. Private, Christian, affordable GCU Ed.
- [12:24]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Listen, we're all looking for a way to make more money, but let's be honest.
- [12:28]
Host
The idea of learning something new, taking.
- [12:31]
Dr. Andrew Huff
On more risk or working harder, nobody.
- [12:33]
Host
Wants that these days.
- [12:34]
Dr. Andrew Huff
That's where TruTrade comes in.
- [12:36]
Host
Their AI driven technology enables you to.
- [12:39]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Generate income passively without risking your own capital, wasting your time or needing years of experience.
- [12:45]
Host
TruTrade has created institutional grade software, the.
- [12:49]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Same type hedge funds and big banks use. But now it's available to everyday people like you and me. And here's the best part, they'll even guarantee your trading capital. We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars you can trade with.
- [13:01]
Host
And I don't know about you, but.
- [13:02]
Dr. Andrew Huff
That kind of funding could be life changing. Looking for a smarter way to make money? Download their mobile app ON Android or.
- [13:09]
Host
Ios or go to TrueTrade IE right now that's T r u T R.
- [13:14]
Dr. Andrew Huff
A D E IO Funded accounts are.
- [13:17]
Host
Limited, so don't wait. Reserve your funding today and let technology earn for you.
- [13:23]
Dr. Andrew Huff
See Terms. When did making plans get this complicated? It's time to streamline with WhatsApp, the secure messaging app that brings the whole group together. Use polls to settle dinner plans. Send event invites and pin messages so no one forgets mom 60th and never miss a meme or milestone. All protected with end to end encryption. It's time for WhatsApp message privately with everyone.
- [13:51]
Host
Learn more@WhatsApp.com so you're rather than like predicting the threat to human and wildlife populations, you're actually just creating new deadly viruses.
- [14:02]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Exactly.
- [14:04]
Host
And the, this is not what they advertised on LinkedIn.
- [14:07]
Dr. Andrew Huff
No, this is, well, it wasn't even LinkedIn. It was actually after their website. But you get it. The, the, the, the funny part is if you look at the gain of function work and how they were even spinning it was that they were trying to even make the argument scientifically in the peer reviewed literature that this gain of function work that they were doing, and this was through Dr. Ralph Barrack's laboratory at the University of North Carolina, that they could model and simulate pandemic potential from the g of function work. And that in itself is a scientific fraud in my opinion. It's not really possible to predict how a disease will spread in the community either. Animals, humans, wildlife, from looking at the genetics and doing gain of function work. But that's what they, the argument that they were effectively making back to the US government and other sponsors of our research portfolio. In my book I discussed this, but you know, Dr. Anthony Fauci gets a lot of the blame for this gain of function work. And I, I wrote numerous whistleblower complaints. I think I wrote whistleblower complaints to every U. S Agency involved, dod, dhs, usda, Fish and Wildlife, it's a long list. The CIA, which we can get to in a little bit. So it's very clear that the research that we're doing had an earlier origin than Dr. Anthony Fauci. And that's really USAID and maybe the State Department formulating a relationship with the Chinese at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And if you follow the proposals or scientific proposals and technical proposals which were submitted to the US government and trace that back, and I have all the original documents to prove this, it looks like the path for developing the gain of function partnership with the Chinese bioweapons Lab began around 2010 or 11.
- [16:11]
Host
What was the purpose of that relationship?
- [16:13]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, at the time I had no idea. And this is specifically, I'm talking like 2015, 2016.
- [16:23]
Host
Right.
- [16:25]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Fast forward to today. I have much more information where I can sort of, you know, I thought about this in great detail and had a number of other interviews and I came to the conclusion that the purpose, real purpose actually of Eco alliance doing this gain of function research with the Wuhan Institute of Virology was for us to collect intelligence on the Chinese bioweapons lab. And you know, I had this very interesting moment when I worked at Eco Health alliance where it was, it was around the holidays, I think it was in late 2015. I was working late to finish our project and Dr. Dasak, I was working late on project and actually as a co worker working with Dr. Peter Dasak was fantastic. He was extremely hard worker, very diligent. He knew the publication game. He knew how to woo the people, the program sponsors that were funding our work. So professionally, I, I loved working with him in that aspect.
- [17:24]
Host
Smart.
- [17:25]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Very well, I would say. Cunning. Yeah. I don't think he was much of a scientist actually. I think he's very weak as a scientist and engineer. But in terms of a project manager and a program manager, he was very, very strong.
- [17:38]
Host
Yes.
- [17:40]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So we're leaving, we're locking up the office. We're in the vest, vestibule up on the 15th floor of our, our building in New York City. And he goes, andrew, do you mind if I ask you a question? It's my boss. Sure, Peter, go ahead. Well, somebody from the CIA approached me and they're interested in the places we're working, the people we're working with, in the data that we're collecting. Do you think it's a good idea that, that I, that I speak with them? And he just said a lot of things which just set off all my alarms because I came from the, you know, I'm a product of, you know, the so called deep state of the national security complex. I held the top secret clearance and here's my boss telling me that he had a side conversation with the CIA and I have all these immediate thoughts. Does, Was he really talking to someone from the CIA? Was it someone pretending to be from the C8 CIA? Exactly. Because I'm like, does this guy know what he's dealing with? Exactly. You know, I had had to say something. I said, peter, it never hurts to speak with him. There could be money in it. And it was, I think, a very honest, direct assessment of what he had just told me. We made small talk, we went down the elevator and we went our separate ways. I walked home to my, my place up on the 40 45th street, and that was the end of it. Well, over the next, you know, several weeks, in between meetings at the coffee cooler, I had to ask Peter, I'm like, hey, how's that thing with the, the CIA going? And, you know, you know, he wouldn't say much, but, you know, the, you know, sort of indicated that it was progressing. And about the third time I asked him, he was mum about it. He didn't want to, he didn't want to talk about it anymore. And so I don't know if he was trying to tell me what he was actually up to because I was from that world or if he just really wanted my honest opinion. I, I have no idea. But now Fast forward to SARS COV2COVID and everything that's happened. It's very clear to me that Peter Dasak was probably used as a CIA asset to obtain access to that laboratory in the way that we obtained access to that laboratory. Because, mind you, it was well known in my circles, going all the way back to when I was a PhD student, that this laboratory in Wuhan was essentially the Chinese military's bioweapons laboratory. So how would you get access to it? Right, they're not going to allow Westerners to just come in and where Senator Rand Paul and a number of other congressmen have been completely wrong about this, in opinion, and I've told them so in writing, is that this wasn't the US government giving the Chinese $400,000 to conduct gain of function research. I mean, just think about how preposterous this is.
- [20:26]
Host
Yeah, they don't, they don't need the money.
- [20:28]
Dr. Andrew Huff
They don't need the money. Right. So. So what do they need? What do you think?
- [20:32]
Host
Technical expertise, I would think.
- [20:34]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And what else? The actual technology. So the technical expertise and the technology. So the trade that was made is that we were actually transferring Advanced biotechnology from Dr. Ralph Barrick's laboratory to the Chinese for access to the laboratory so we could collect intelligence on it. And some of that might fall under the umbrella of scientific diplomacy, which I'm actually a huge proponent of, but not with the Chinese. And, and that's where I, so I.
- [21:02]
Host
Don'T know, I have no, you know, I have no way to evaluate what you're saying, but, except against things I've seen in other areas. And that is exactly how the world works. What you just said, that, that is, that's how things really are, right? Is the US government makes deals with people that they, not really on their, you know, whoever it is, Gaddafi, Maduro, I mean there's long standing and ongoing relationships with a lot of people. I think the public would be shocked to know we're in relationship with. But the motive is always the same. The closer I get, the more intel I can gather.
- [21:34]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I think your, your, your assessment of the, the global scheme of which how the US government operates in IT and formulates relationships is accurate.
- [21:43]
Host
Oh, I've seen it.
- [21:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And I think a lot of that is doctrine. You know, they want to try to obtain close relationships with the highest ranking government officials possible. And sometimes the, the methods and how they do that are questionable.
- [21:57]
Host
But it's always the same. I mean you'll be, this literally happened to me the other day. You're talking to, you know, a well informed person and they're like oh yeah, yeah, I knew so and so it's like what, what, how in the world were you connected to that person who's bad kind of the human equivalent of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And it's like, well because like that person is someone who has a lot of information that we want.
- [22:18]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Oh absolutely. And, and I've always the same, a number of intel agents from various agencies that, that showed me pictures of the very high profile evil people. Of course, of course. And I, I actually have no problem.
- [22:33]
Host
Omar Gaddafi was working with Mossad and CIA. Yeah, right. So of course. And I'm not even attacking anybody at all. I'm just saying that is the actual truth of the world that I have seen personally.
- [22:45]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So, and, and I, I, I, I agree with your truth. And I think the more questionable part is why are we giving advanced technology to our enemies? And where this really gets strange is that when I did work at Eco Alliance, I did object to working with the Chinese. So the next phase of Predict funding is coming along. Predict two.
- [23:07]
Host
Okay, okay. So Predict is the program that you described earlier that supposedly monitors global wildlife populations to get a head start on preparing for a pandemic.
- [23:17]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, to predict and forecast it.
- [23:18]
Host
Predict and forecast.
- [23:19]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So maybe, maybe get a head start. Could be a more accurate framework or at least have an assessment of what's circular. That's probably a fair characterization. But predict two, they're basically going to continue this boondoggle operation and expand the portfolio research with China. And once I was promoted to vice president, they put me onto the predict program at my own request because it was sort of the sexy thing that Equal Health alliance was doing, and I wanted to be a part of it because you get by name on more publications, more notoriety, and they wanted to make me a country coordinator. And I ended up being the one of the country coordinators for Sudan and then also Jordan, and then Peter Dask Floyd that I help him with China. And I, when that came up in the meeting, I said, I want nothing to do with this. I'm, you know, still my top secret clearance is in good standing. I object to us doing the work with China. And I actually said in the meeting, like, aren't you the slightest bit concerned that the Chinese are going to do something nefarious like they're going to steal our intellectual property there? You know, the Chinese have a pattern of lie, cheat, and steal. So why. Why do we want to do this work with China? And I said that in the executive meeting. And I was trying to protect the company more so even just the national security risk side of it, I was trying to protect the company. And, you know, Peter gave a very political response that, you know, the, the work with China is very important, and this. This relationship that we have with the Chinese is very important. Really. I think the. The only thing that was important to Peter is the fact that this Chinese, at least cut out of the bigger contract was a lot of money. Exactly. And, you know, he had already been sort of flipped as a intel asset to collect the Chinese in the lab. And this wasn't going away. And this was all the. The window dressing to make it look legitimate.
- [25:00]
Host
We're sorry to say it, but this is not a very safe country. Walk through Oakland or Philadelphia. Yeah, good luck. So most people, when they think about this, want to carry a firearm. And a lot of us do. The problem is there can be massive consequences for that. Ask Kyle Rittenhouse. Kyle Rittenhouse got off in the end, but he was innocent from the first moment. It was obvious on video. And he was facing life in prison. Anyway, that's what the anti gun movement will do. They'll throw you in prison for defending yourself with a firearm. And that's why a lot of Americans are turning To Burna. It's a proudly American company. Burna makes self defense launchers that hundreds of law enforcement department's trust. They've sold over 600,000 pistols, mostly to private citizens who refuse to be empty handed. These pistols, and I have one fire rock hard kinetic rounds or tear gas rounds and pepper projectiles and they stop a threat from up to 60ft away. There are no background checks or no waiting periods. Burner can ship it directly to your door. You can't be arrested for defending yourself with a Burner pistol. Visit Byrna B y R N a dot com or your local sportsman's warehouse to get your stay or burna.com.
- [26:12]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And Doug here we have the Limu Emu in its natural habitat helping people customize their car insurance and save hundreds with Liberty Mutual. Fascinating. It's accompanied by his natural ally, Doug.
- [26:27]
Host
Uh, Limu is that guy with the binoculars watching us.
- [26:30]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Cut the camera. They see us.
- [26:32]
Host
Only pay for what you need@libertymutual.com Liberty Liberty Liberty Liberty Savings Fairy Unwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and affiliates Excludes Massachusetts.
- [26:41]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Imagine fast hydration combined with balanced energy. Perfectly flavored with zero artificial sweeteners. Introducing Liquid Ivy's new energy multiplier. Sugar free. Unlike other energy drinks, you know the ones that make you feel like you're glitching. It's made with natural caffeine and electrolyte.
- [27:02]
Host
So you get the boost without the burnout.
- [27:04]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Liquid IV's new energy multiplier. Sugar free hydrating energy. Tap the banner to learn more.
- [27:10]
Host
Yeah, I. Again, I don't have any background information so like you could tell me anything. But everything you're saying sounds right to me just based on what I have seen. Can I just back up a tiny bit and ask some practical questions?
- [27:24]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Sure.
- [27:24]
Host
About what Eco Health alliance was doing. So you said before you got to the portion when they were acting as an intel asset, which sounds right. You said they were compiling, collecting a library of viruses from around the world. How does that work exactly? How do you collect a virus in a Sudan, for example? Any country. How do you do that?
- [27:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Sure. So it's a. I guess in my mind it's very straightforward. But typically first you form a relationship with the diplomatic mission. So the embassy, the consulate for the United States, they might refer you to either hospitals, professors, other academics or companies in country. Or maybe you already have those relationships from past work that you've done. You then go on a trip to that country and you go sort of do an assessment of their laboratories. You collect sort of information Try to gauge these people have the capability, do you know what they're doing? Are they going to spend our money wisely? So it's a business trip and it's very business focused and you're assessing their capabilities. Then once you have a good feeling with their capabilities, you begin the contracting process with that foreign entity. And if you're doing everything by the book, you run these people through US Government systems to make sure that they're not terrorists or evil people. So we're not giving money to terrorists. That didn't happen at Equal Health Alliance. It did not happen. I found out about that after the fact as well. But we try to figure out who these people are and then if they're capable. Oftentimes it's universities, either the ag school or at a foreign university, the veterinary school or human medical center. Then we, we formulate the contract, we send them the cash, and then they would either go out and collect the samples or we would travel or have our personnel travel to go collect the sample. So if we're talking about bats, it depends what species you're dealing with, Right? But if you're dealing with bats, you set nets or traps in a bat cave, for example, you catch the bat in the net and then you go out there in your personal protective equipment and you take feal swabs, blood, saliva from the animal, and then you then package that so the, the DNA will not be degrade and transport back to the laboratory. And then depending.
- [29:35]
Host
Where's the laboratory?
- [29:36]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, it depends on what country you're working in. So every country had, we had different agreements with, contractually about who owned the samples, who would store the samples. And the other thing that's happening in the, in the background here is that technology is advancing.
- [29:50]
Host
Yes.
- [29:51]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Okay. So at one time in this type of research, you actually had to have the physical sample. Today we're at a point you no longer have to have the physical sample. You can actually send the DNA or RNA code digitally to somebody else and they can recreate it. So this field has advanced tremendously over 10 years and this is taking place as advancement while we're doing this work. Oftentimes the samples then were physically transported back to the United States or mailed or shipped.
- [30:23]
Host
You can mail a deadly bat virus from a third world country to the.
- [30:27]
Dr. Andrew Huff
U.S. well, there's a, a manual from the CDC and USDA and HHS of how to transport samples. So yes, there are rules and process of how you can.
- [30:36]
Host
So almost all of that mail goes.
- [30:40]
Dr. Andrew Huff
On commercial airliners typically and, and there's really not a whole lot of risk from a collected sample. For first of all, you don't even know at this point whether there's a new deadly virus present in the sample.
- [30:52]
Host
In the bat or.
- [30:53]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah. In the batch of the saliva. Yeah, you have no clue. Once it gets back to the United States and then it goes to at least at Equal alliance, it would go to Ian Lipkin's laboratory at Columbia University where he was a specialist in. He's a pretty well known viral epidemiologists with really good lab chops. And another doctor who worked with us named Simon Anthony would work with him to isolate, and I did well at first, identify and isolate new viruses or novel, novel viruses. So that's where it typically took place. Then the mechanics of this or operations of this, that information or sample would be sent to another laboratory like Ralph Barrick's laboratory, where he would continue the.
- [31:32]
Host
Work down at Chapel Hill.
- [31:33]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Chapel Hill and do the gain of function work.
- [31:35]
Host
It's just, just, can I just approach this from an autistic perspective? So what you're saying is there are like people around the world in bat caves in some faraway country sending potentially novel and dangerous viruses to New York City like all the time, and people are not even aware of this.
- [31:55]
Dr. Andrew Huff
There's a huge, I won't say huge, but I mean a non trivial, trivial amount of these types of samples being shipped around the world globally. And if they're properly contained and packaged, it's really that much that, not that much of a risk. And actually Dr. Ralph Bar developed some of these methods of how to send what's called a chimeric virus on a sheet of paper and envelope, which is low risk. The bigger risk becomes when you start to clone or replicate that agent at scale, you know, human medicine, public health, epidemiology, transmission risk. Now you look at this, you have to have a substantial quantity of a virus which is, you know, a substance mixed in the air or be exposed to it to become infected with it. Because you have an immune system that works okay. And sometimes you get exposed to these things, you don't even know it because your immune system fights it off. Right, right. So the, I think sometimes the risk is overblown and the fear around transporting samples, I think most of the time that's actually pretty low risk. There's been a series of transporting accidents which occurred from 2008 to2012 or 14, I want to say, which actually led to the, the ban or partial ban on gain of function research.
- [33:07]
Host
What kind of accidents?
- [33:08]
Dr. Andrew Huff
There One of the high profile ones was that I think it was Bacillus anthracis was being shift shipped from one of our US government BSL four laboratories under CDC control to another laboratory and it went missing and they found it sitting in the corner.
- [33:25]
Host
Some porch pirate stole it?
- [33:27]
Dr. Andrew Huff
No, it wasn't a porch pirate, but they found it someplace and it wasn't properly secured or in. Completely off.
- [33:32]
Host
Yeah, I mean we live in a world with like Chernobyl and misdiagnoses and I mean I believe in, I think there are a lot of, you know, rigorous, responsible scientists. But you know, people make mistakes. I mean over and over time and with scale, like mistakes will happen. Right.
- [33:48]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, and we actually dealt with this type of low probability, high consequence threat risk analysis all the time at San Diego National Laboratories. And the big issue is what you just brought up. The human in the loop, usually the engineered systems, you can engineer those precisely to account for some whatever probability or consequence of risk. But it's always the human making a decision or behavior action involved in the system that makes a mistake which causes some kind of catastrophic failure. Well, yeah, yeah.
- [34:16]
Host
I mean, yeah. So okay, I just was just interested. So then you say that they Eco alliance was compiling a library of these viruses. They'd be stored in one place?
- [34:28]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, yes, they had digital. A digital library at Eco Alliance. And then there's other systems that they, the U.S. or I should say not only the United States, but the global virologist community maintain of genetic information on viruses.
- [34:46]
Host
But the actual viruses, the living organisms that were they stored anywhere.
- [34:50]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Typically we were buying negative ADC centigrade freezers as fast as we could or as many as we could afford. And storing those at Columbia University and other laboratories where these things go in the freezer and they set up. And the one nice thing is if the freezer does fail, it usually destroys all the sample in the inside because they do have to be maintained cold.
- [35:09]
Host
We thought this through when we started this podcast a year ago and we decided we're never advertising anything that we or people on our staff don't use, period. We're only partnering with companies that we agree with and endorse actually in our personal lives. So we want to announce new partnership with a survival company we trust most. We Last Country Supply is the name of our collaboration. Last Country Supply. I have a big surplus of survival food from that great company. If you get a bucket of food with a 25 year shelf life, 2000 calories a day, potatoes, rice, bread, drinks, you feel a lot better. Let's say there's an EMP attack or civil disturbance and you don't know what could happen in the future. You are prepared and you are protecting your family with Last country supply products. So head to lastcountrysupply.com to shop for our new collection. Bulk up now. There is no scenario where you will regret being prepared.
- [36:08]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Every leap in American history has needed breakthrough energy. Ignition. Liftoff. Now. AI is here and Chevron is working to power it. We're aiming to develop multi gigawatt power plants near data centers designed with future pathways to lower carbon intensity. AI gets the power it needs, communities get the jobs and the grid stays strong. Powering AI today builds America's next superpower. What do you think makes the perfect snack? Hmm, it's gotta be when I'm really craving it and it's convenient. Could you be more specific when it's craving convenient? Okay. Like a freshly baked cookie made with real butter, available right down the street at a.m. p.m. Or a savory breakfast sandwich I can grab in just a second at a.m. p.m. I'm seeing a pattern here. Well yeah, we're talking about what I crave which is anything from AM pm what more could you want? Stop by AM PM where the snacks and drinks are perfectly craveable and convenient. That's cravenience AM PM too much good stuff.
- [37:09]
Host
What's the security like at a lab like that?
- [37:12]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I in my opinion I tend to think that it's. It's laughable and I've actually laughable at most most university laboratories if you were to do a red team or penetration test and me coming on the national security, being a biosecurity biosafety expert, you could get into most university laboratories. They would. I heard arguments from other scientists who worked in these laboratories. Well, you know we have good physical security. We have card scanners. We have this good physical.
- [37:37]
Host
I'd love to know what that actually what those guys actually look like. Who the the good physical security.
- [37:42]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Oh I mean if you are a motivated attacker and you're well trained, you can get into one of these laboratories. It would, it would not be overly difficult. Now, has this improved and hasn't changed? Change. Are all the laboratories the same? I mean I think many of the BSL 3 or 4 which are the higher level or highest level laboratories in the United States now have pretty good or strong physical security. But when you look at what's actually happened in terms of accidents and lab leaks throughout history, in recent history. I mean speaking of this, you know Ralph Barrick in His laboratory. He's had a series of leaks at his laboratory over years, you know, where people, their employees have gotten sick. And typically it's one of the people working in the laboratory is accidentally exposing because it's a virus that you can't see. And the way that disease incubates inside a person and how the bio event timeline, as we call it, the amount of time it takes for a person to become sick, they leave the lab and then they become sick at home, and then that's when the disease becomes a transmission risk to the community. So that's just the very nature of how people behave, how people work in the laboratory, how human biology and physiology works. I mean, this is the nature of the beast. And it's very difficult to prevent those types of risks, I guess to the community and the greater population.
- [39:04]
Host
No, this is why we have Lyme disease. Yeah, which I got. So, yes, no, I'm very aware of that and I think everyone's aware of that. So with that in mind, gain of function is inherently dangerous. Correct.
- [39:16]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I've always been against it. It actually divides the scientific community, or it used to pre cover it. I think there's probably more, more scientists and experts against gain of function. It seems like certainly the general population is against it. Not all gain of function technology is bad. For example, insulin is made from a form of gain of function and there are many diabetic people and they require insulin. Now if we're talking about gain of function research on pathogens which have pandemic potential, it's, it's a no brainer. It's a, it's a stupid idea and this is why it splits the scientific community. So one, one camp says there's no use to this. I don't understand why we're doing it in the first place, therefore we shouldn't do it. The other camp argues, well, if we can predict how these viruses will mutate, then we can develop countermeasures, vaccines or drugs to counter the threat before it emerges. And that opinion, and I've always held this belief that, that the people who have that opinion are wrong. And the reason why they're wrong is that you have to be like God and you have to know and be able to predict how something will genetically evolve over time.
- [40:26]
Host
Yeah.
- [40:27]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And if you look back through human history, it's always humans trying to correct nature which have failed. The introduction of the brain, brown snake and Guam. I mean, there's all these things where they've, that was a hitchhiker scenario, but where they try to Introduce some kind of predator to eliminate some kind of bad, bad past. Yeah, you see this repeatedly throughout history. That we can correct a complex system which is nature.
- [40:47]
Host
That's what geoengineering is. And that's why it's like destroying our forests. Because they're spraying, you know, particulate matter into the air to counteract global warming and they can't, they're not God, so they're not doing it right. And it's.
- [41:00]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, that's interesting that you bring that up. So I used to work with the geoengineers and I wonder how much scale it's actually occurring. So. And you know, people talk about contrails and you know that's that being geoengineering, it's not. And most of these, these stations are ground based, but it's very expensive from a scientific and engineering perspective. You were going to launch a large scale geo engineering project that was earth based. It takes a lot of material and the material costs a lot of money. So I don't think it's happening at largest scale. That people believe the more effective geoengineering technology exists are actually satellite deployed systems which act as solar shades. And I don't think any of that exists. But we are putting more things into space all the time. And a lot of this is either not classified or secret, but it's not exactly visible either. So you know, who knows what people are shooting at.
- [41:55]
Host
Exactly. And there's a massive disinformation campaign against anyone who asks questions about it, which tells you it is real. Yes, like UAPs. But anyway, without getting into all of that stuff. So you are asked like, hey Dr. Huff, would you like to go to China? And you say no, I say no.
- [42:14]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And it's two reasons. One, to protect the company and also because I wanted to maintain my security clearance in good standing. And when it's not that you can't have foreign relationships, but it becomes more complicated. Complicated for your reinvestigation. The future if you have relationships with a country like China. And I've, you know, from a national security perspective, I've always been against what the Chinese have been doing. That's lie, lying, cheating and stealing from us. And we never get anything out of the relationship. It seems it's been a very abusive one way relationship from the Chinese. And, and, and I knew this going back to my military days and I had actually been invited to do other collaborative work with the Chinese at other institutions and places I've worked sort of tied to national security and I, I always stayed away from it. Because I never saw any benefit to it. And well, if the government wants to, the US government wants to, to fund this or this entity wants to fund, that's fine. I can protest by just not being a part of it.
- [43:09]
Host
So you leave EcoHealth alliance after a few years, then Covid happens.
- [43:17]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes. And when it happens, everyone thinks I'm sort of the crazy one. And how this actually transpires is I was working at Juul Labs E Cigarette company as the senior director of population health, living in the Bay Area. And because of what I did for a living in my expertise, you know, I catch wind of this virus spreading around the planet. It was very obvious that people in on the west coast were becoming sick in, I want to say, late November, December 2019. You know, another really weird thing happens. So I'm making more money than I've ever made in my life at this company and I was very grateful for that, was able to pay off all my debt. But I received a phone call from a woman by the name of Dr. Amy Jenkins who works at ARPA H now. I think she's the assistant director there for deputy Director. I don't, I can't remember what her title is, but, but I know Amy from years back. I actually met her while I was a PhD student at the University of Minnesota at a DH Department of Homeland Security center of Excellence. She had shown up to a few meetings of ours. She was working with the Department of Defense at that time and the intelligence services. And she's a great scientist and very friendly relationship with her. And she contacts me and she informs me that she's now working with DARPA and offers me a position as a program manager in the Biological Programs Directorate. And you know, I thought it was sort of odd that she had contacted me on my brand new San Francisco area phone, cell phone. So I had a new phone number because they relocated and I wanted San Francisco area code. And I didn't think too much of it. And I couldn't figure out the why she wanted me to come be the director of this biological program. I'd been trying to get away from national security intelligence type work for several years and I kept on, keep on getting dragged back into it, it seemed. And I said, you know, thanks, Amy. I'm not really interested in this right now. I'm making a lot of money. This pays far more than what, you know, DARPA can pay me. I want to keep what I'm doing. She's like, well, you know, go home and speak with your, your wife Emily. If you change your mind, we'd like to both bring you on. We'll find a home for Emily too, because she's a scientist and that's very, you know, common in, in the scientific community, the two body problem. And go, go home, talk, speak with Emily about, and you know, give me a call back tomorrow and let me know what you think. Said, okay, Amy, I'll do that. So went home, had a conversation with my wife. Hey, do you want to move back to the Beltway or move to D.C. to have, you know, fed jobs and go work in that environment? And my wife had previously worked at USDA and she didn't want to go back to it and like call up Amy the next day, you know, thank you, you know, for, for contacting me. I mean, at one point, this was in my career, this was actually my dream job to be running a, a have a blank check from the Department of Defense to go develop all the coolest biotechnology world. I mean, seriously, I had dreamed of that job at one point in my life. I didn't want it.
- [46:14]
Host
Yeah.
- [46:14]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And so I told her no. And she's like, well, you know, if you change your mind in the next few weeks, we'd really like to have you, you call me anytime. And that was it. Well, okay. That. That phone call took place late September, early October 2019. Fast forward today with what we know is that DARPA had held a. A contest, or I want to say not so much a contest, but put out a RFP request for proposals related to something called preempt, which was preventing emerging infectious disease threats. And one of the proposals was something called diffuse from my former employer called EcoHealth alliance, which was basically the recipe for SARS COV2, which was done in partnership with the Wuhan Institute Virology. So, you know, I'm sort of hopping around here, but the reason why this is important is now I believe that DARPA was actually trying to recruit me back into the program. So I wouldn't have done any of the things that I've done over the last four years, essentially, and which is.
- [47:30]
Host
Tell the truth in public.
- [47:31]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Tell the truth in public about what the origin of SARS cov2is. But going back on your timeline here, so I had limited information back then, and I knew a pandemic was coming. So I told my wife, we need to get the heck out of the Bay Area as fast as possible. This could go off the rails. I actually believed the information I was seeing, which I think was a psyop potentially targeted at me that this disease would be much more severe than it was. I'm not saying that, that it wasn't a severe disease. I mean it wasn't as bad as they're making it seem.
- [48:01]
Host
Meaning. Oh, I believed it too. Oh, absolutely.
- [48:03]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, they, they portrayed it though that something that in Epidemic.
- [48:06]
Host
You mean in like January, February of 2020.
- [48:08]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Correct.
- [48:09]
Host
Oh yeah.
- [48:10]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So the, they're painting a portrayal and scientifically in epidemiology we have something called the case fatality rate. So of how many people get sick, how many die? Like this thing is going to kill everyone, like 80, 90% of the population could die from this disease. That' were portraying this.
- [48:25]
Host
Right.
- [48:25]
Dr. Andrew Huff
It turns out that, that that number was much lower and somewhere in the, you know, in the percentage category, not the 70, 80 or 90%. So I went real quick from thinking that this was going to be the thing that could, you know, cripple society to being. I'm not wearing a mask in public, right. But, but my behavior in action in earlier, early 2020, the first weeks I started looking for a place in a remote area. So I'm look considering Alaska, Maine, northern Maine, western Wyoming or the UP of Michigan. My search criteria based on what I knew as an expert, you want to have access to an airport, transportation, high speed Internet, an hour drive from a major city center that's not too populated because if it's going to end the planet, it's going to kill everyone. You want distance from other people to break transmission cycles at least so you can isolate yourself. So I bought a year supply worth of MREs, I start stockpiling other things, you know, some ammunition, make a plan, and my wife and I land in the U.P. of Michigan. Everyone, you know, sort of thought I was crazy for doing this. And next thing you know, everybody wants to come visit me during the lockdowns. They said, they said you were right about everything. And you know, I live this too.
- [49:39]
Host
Yes.
- [49:41]
Dr. Andrew Huff
In the back of my mind though, I'm thinking about constantly that and I know that Eco alliance had been engaged in this gain of function work at Eco Health or excuse me, at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And I'm like a bad coronavirus emerging in Wuhan. And you know, I'm watching this, these, watching the News and the TV at, you know, through 2020 and they're like, oh, it was a, you know, a pangolin or it was the wet market. And I'm arguing on social media that that's not possible. That doesn't make sense from an emerging infectious situation. Disease standpoint because a wet market in this specific wet market in China is a seafood market.
- [50:20]
Host
That's why it's called a wet market.
- [50:21]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes, but you know, western Americans, it's.
- [50:24]
Host
Not for mammals, it's for creatures from the sea.
- [50:27]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah, People in the United States have a very myopic view of, you know, the world typically. And oh, I know I'm sitting here arguing, I'm like, this is a fish market. And in fact I'm looking at the pictures of it and my assessment is like, this is the kind of place I'd go buy groceries. You know, I live in New York City, a very nice, very nice place. So I'm like, none of this is adding up. And you know, you're watching the story evolve and next thing you know, My former boss, Dr. Peter Dask, is put on the, the committee that's sent over by the World Health Organization to go investigate the origin of the disease. And this is getting weirder and weirder and weirder. And I know all the players involved. I mean I had met and worked with not Dr. Anthony Fauci himself, but his deputy, Dr. Morens. I had been out to dinner with him. I mean, I knew all the players in this big thing. I mean I had been groomed since I was a PhD stud to be a doctor Anthony Fauci replacement or that type of person. So I mean I, I knew all the people in, in, in, in the system and, and working on these things and the program managers, the officers, the different branches of the government. So I'm watching this all play out and I just can't believe it. And it's the kind of thing where I'm yelling at my computer screen in private. Like they put, you know, they put fucking Dr. Dasic in charge of like investigating the orig. He's probably the one that caused it. And little did I know that this was all part of the psychological operation and cover up. And I just start becoming more callous, entrenched about really, really going on.
- [51:50]
Host
So how can you explain that a little bit? What does that mean? Well, why would putting the guy who had a hand in the creation of the virus in charge of investigating the origin of the virus be part of a psyop?
- [52:03]
Dr. Andrew Huff
To give the perception that it's an independent person that's well trusted within the wildlife community and the scientific community that we know you're doing. You can trust what we're saying because if you look at how, yeah, the psychological, psychological operation was waged, and I'm not just saying the US government, but Multiple enemies, the pharmaceutical industry, the big companies that back all these different things, special interests, just generally, you take the guy who's responsible, you put him in charge of the investigation, he's really, you know that he's not going to tie it back to himself, but he's already been branding himself for years and decades as being a person that cares, you know, a crunchy NGO person. And he has the relationships in wealthy communities on the west coast and east coast, the elite, to convince them that this is, you know, a naturally emerging disease from the wet market. So, you know, he's already the point man. He's already sold everyone all this bullshit related to we're going to go and forecast pandemics. And really, he's the guy who caused one. It's, it's really. Yeah.
- [53:05]
Host
Thank you for saying. I just wanted you to explain that a little more fully. I've again lived this, seen it, and it is effective because it's so shocking that someone would do that. It's so brazen, the chutzpah required to do something like that. You take not just some random guy, but the guy who's responsible and you start telling everyone he's the savior. Wow, man. The human brain, a normal person is bewildered by that, is thrown off balance by that.
- [53:34]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, at least in my life. And we were discussing this a little bit at breakfast. The more you see of this trickery, the more that you're exposed. And they actually talk about this in the psychological research. Oftentimes the more aware you become of a phenomenon, the more you see it. And then once you start seeing it, you can't stop seeing it. And that's how they say, you know, people become conspiracy theorists because they see, see the conspiracy theorists. And.
- [53:55]
Host
Well, that's why very few young people. I think this is changing fast. But my whole life, like young people, always bought the story. And then you meet guys in their 70s, particularly people who'd work for the government. And I've known a lot of those who would get more conspiracy minded as they aged. You've ever noticed this?
- [54:13]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Oh, absolutely, yeah. And that's just.
- [54:15]
Host
Why is that?
- [54:16]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, experience living life. And, and I do that now, I'm 43. And you see someone in their, their 20s or 19, they have a very idealistic view of the world. And I used to be one of those people.
- [54:27]
Host
Oh, yeah. Oh, tell me about it. I made it to my late 30s with that, you know, but mid-30s, but anyway. Wow, that's wild. So you're sitting up at the up with your Scientist wife watching this stuff on CNN going, you must be like going bonkers watching this.
- [54:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, internally and I was working on a startup company and I was distracted by other things and because I was in the up, this was only via social media or the news. So I'm pretty detached from it. What happens is in late 2021 the Operation Trends focus towards me because then, now I'm being I think, viewed as a threat based on some of the things I put on LinkedIn at the time and other social media posts that I could, I needed to be contained in some way.
- [55:17]
Host
And what sort of things were you saying?
- [55:19]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I. So it was really Dr. Malone and I and a few other people who were trying to remain anonymous. I know who they are. We're just telling the truth. So first of all around, around the disease that this is not a naturally emerging pathogen. And I could tell that it was not based on a number of facts based how this disease was spreading, the type of agent. It was the coincidence that we had been funding this exact type of work and I had the original documents at this laboratory. It was just that their story and, and how the people involved were saying things about the disease just which weren't true and how specifically how this type of disease would emerge. I mean that's what my PhD is in. I mean I've worked in this field and I knew, I knew that these people knew that they were lying because these people were qualified experts as well. So why are these people lying about how this disease would emerge?
- [56:18]
Host
Great question.
- [56:18]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And so they, you. It. It drives more questions, right? Every time you have something that's weird, it doesn't fit the pattern or isn't the thing that it's supposed to be, you ask more questions. And as this, you know, the timeline of COVID is, is. Is happening or occurring. You know, so we're going through the lockdowns. They're trying to get the, the vaccine operation warp speed. They're trying to do all these things that's all distracting everyone from the origin question and the people involved in the origin discussions and the psychological operation of it was that in, in my opinion is that they were actually trying to get society bogged down in the technical details of very sophisticated scientific jargon which very few people were qualified to understand or argue or debate and then label it as those people were the only people who were qualified experts to be able to debate. So therefore there was no debate allowed. And I wasn't buying. I was, I wasn't having it. I was driving me nuts because you.
- [57:17]
Host
Were a qualified expert, so you didn't have to buy it.
- [57:20]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, and I'm highly competitive and those so called qualified experts, I thought I was better than them.
- [57:23]
Host
Yeah.
- [57:24]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And I look at that where we're sitting today. I'm sitting here in this chair speaking with you, telling you the truth. And I think my argument, the psychological operation I wage back against the population via social media and other channels and how I did has been completely successful. I was the, I mean from day one I had been saying that this was a laboratory leak. And you look at most of the population today, everyone I think globally believes that it came out of the laboratory. I think the people are tied to it, you know, are still trying to make the pangolin or natural emergency.
- [57:53]
Host
Eco. I went on the Eco Health. I think Eco Health alliance is gone or sort of gone now.
- [57:58]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Defunct.
- [57:58]
Host
Yeah, defunct.
- [57:59]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah.
- [57:59]
Host
But on their website, which still exists, I looked at it last night. They have an attack on you. Of course, lacking all specifics, you're familiar with all this. But on it they say, you know, Dr. Huff makes the totally unsubstantiated claim that this virus escaped from a lab when we know in the scientific consensus states that it emerged naturally out of an animal population.
- [58:23]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, the.
- [58:24]
Host
So when they wrote that they knew that wasn't true.
- [58:26]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Oh, absolutely. And they put out other weird smear tactics and they had work with the, the media to smear me. The, the best. My favorite smear. So the, the day that my, my publication came out, there was a story, I think that ran in the New York Post and it claimed that I was wrong, that I had never worked in the, the Wuhan lab. Well, that was attribution error. I, I never, I never had claimed that I worked.
- [58:52]
Host
No. In fact, you just explained you didn't want to work in China.
- [58:55]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Correct. But they, they, they, they, that's how they were trying to scope the argument that I was a liar.
- [58:59]
Host
The New York Post. That would not surprise me. And I just want to say for the record, the New York Post is one of the most dishonest publications in the world and is very often used by the intel agencies and other bad actors to lie to the public. It's also hilarious. It's a great newspaper in certain ways. And so it's the. And same with Daily Mail. Exactly the same. And they sort of lull you into believing them because they've got a sense of humor and they cover great stories and they're sort of vaguely right wing, but actually the, it's a vector for, for disinformation and for lying on behalf of the intel agencies. That's just what it is.
- [59:34]
Dr. Andrew Huff
That's most mainstream media. I think it is. It is.
- [59:36]
Host
But I think the New York Post and Daily Mail are at Wall Street Journal, also Fox News, for sure. But they're more sinister because people believe them. Because, hey, it's Fox News. It's the deal. It's the Daily Mail, it's the New York Post, especially the New York Post. Like everyone, headless body and topless bar, man, it's the coolest paper in the world. They wouldn't do that. They do it constantly.
- [59:59]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I agree. I mean, what do you do about it when you're little, man?
- [60:03]
Host
I mean, you tell the truth about it. That's all you can do.
- [60:06]
Dr. Andrew Huff
But.
- [60:07]
Host
And they'll, I mean, they'll. All those companies are failing and they'll all be gone soon. And I won't lament their passing. But anyway, so tell me what they did to contain, control, and punish you once you started telling the truth.
- [60:19]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So in late, the timeline starting to get a little foggy. It's, you know, know this, this has been ongoing saga. I think I was in late 2021 or mid to late 2021, I was contacted by some journalists. So journalists start trying to contact me and ask me questions because they figure they're probably wondering, who's this tough guy? Does he know he's talking about? They're probably trying to frame me as a crazy. Miranda Divine contacts me, a pretty prominent journal journalist, and asks me on, on the telephone where she should look for more records related to the scan of function research. And because I had worked in this, this field for a year and knew all the players, I'm like, I don't know know, you know, my gut tells me I'd go look at darpa. And I believe that conversation was being listened into. I, I think I, I believe they were already watching me, obviously, going back into October 2019. That's when it triggers something within the intel community where I had found out now secondhand, that there was a false allegation that someone had leaked classified information to me. Nobody's ever leaked classified information to me because one, they don't typically target the person that was leaked to. They target the leaker. Okay? And I would be arrested and be in jail if. And that were true. And when I told that to Miranda Divine, this is based on my expert opinion. I knew the people who were finding the work pre, the preempt, all these different things. I knew, knew the players. So you go look at the funding sources to identify proposals and things that had been submitted. And I don't know if this is related or not, but a week or two after I had that conversation, Major Murphy from the US Marine Corps puts out a whistleblower disclosure that there's this thing called the Diffuse Proposal which is basically the recipe of how to make SARS cov2 and it was done in partnership with the Chinese and a number of scientists in, in the US and the primary sponsor, the primary company engaging this work was Ecological Alliance. So every name on the, the Diffuse proposal, I know all, I know those people or I know of them and what work they were doing and everyone discredited this Diffuse proposal because this is not a real proposal. This looks like a joke. It's, it's two pages, it looks very haphazard and, and I started making the arguments. People know this is very real. DARPA does business differently than other government agencies. They, they use this thing called Myers Catechism. You have to answer a series of questions, proposals. They only want a page or two. They don't want a big NIH proposal which is very technical, could be full length, 100, 200 pages of material. They only typically want a one or two page proposal. And I, I tell people like this is how DARPA does business. But since nobody in the real world knows how the business works in, in these areas.
- [63:05]
Host
Not a lot of people you run into at Starbucks have done business with darpa.
- [63:08]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Exactly. And that's how they then start the psychological operation around the Diffuse Proposals.
- [63:14]
Host
For those who aren't familiar, we just tell viewers what DARPA is.
- [63:19]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah. So DARPA is the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Used to be ARPA before they added the D before it's an Advanced Research Projects Agency. It, it's actually made most of the coolest technology that we have or one of the companies or entities that's federally funded that has the Internet, So everything on the Internet was developed by ARPA then arpanet. And if you are a tech nerd like me and you start digging down the DNS queries of how you search for information, you dig down, you start pulling up the tables information. Eventually you get to something that says ARPANET in every communication that we do. So they make the most sophisticated, sophisticated stuff in the world.
- [63:56]
Host
So it's a Pentagon funded research lab? Basically.
- [63:58]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes. Well not necessarily just a research lab. It I'd call it more of it covers a program area or series of program areas where some of the research is done by, by private contractors FFRDCs basically anybody who can, who can do the work and they, they fund high risk, high, high value scientific R and D on short timelines. So you don't receive 10, 10 years of funding the, the Department of Defense. Rightfully so. What capability will this give us within a year or two? Yeah, three years. They have a short, short horizon. It's no nonsense. And they want results and they, they achieve them.
- [64:37]
Host
Interesting. That's a great description from someone who's worked with them. So anyway, you have this conversation with Miranda Devine and you now believe that conversation was monitored and what happens next?
- [64:51]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well then I start because my, my profile is increasing and I'm starting to be actually followed by people out in the UP when I like go to the grocery store. Very, very strange. Right.
- [65:03]
Host
If you live up is the upper peninsula of Michigan. It's not actually near the state of Michigan really. It's very, it's a geographic anomaly. But it is very lightly populated and extremely rural. It's one of the most rural places east of the Mississippi if this is a fair description.
- [65:20]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes, it's actually the, the most rural place in the lower 48. By 48. Yes, by population density.
- [65:27]
Host
So when you're getting followed in the U.P. you know it.
- [65:30]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Oh absolutely. I mean so the house, the, the pandemic, you know, prepper house that we, that we purchased, it's 180 acres. It's off, completely off grid. Our driveway is a mile long and it's basically like a moat. There's natural dense swamp on, on all four sides. Because the driveway is an old railroad grade. Yeah. So it's very isolated. I joke I could throw a hand grenade off my step and nobody would notice. And because there are mines in the area, there's blasting and stuff going on. Nobody would care. So that's, that's where I live. So when you go to the gas station or you go into town, you know, 40, 40 minute drive and you have someone follow you, have a couple of vehicles follow you. It's very strange and I get on it was Twitter then before X and my profile becoming elevated. So one of the first people to get in contact me was Brett, Brett Weinstein. Dr. Brett Weinstein. Another Yan Yak. They start reaching out to me. So the people who were outspoken and skeptics around all things start contacting me and I have a four hour conversation with Brett Weinstein and I walk them through the whole, whole thing even through the vaccine technology and I think I'll cause cancer. And look today where we are. It's these MRNA vaccines are causing cancer. So anyways, I have this great conversation and all of a sudden all the. I feel the. I can sense the pressure, you know, being applied in, mounting, you know, from being followed, you know, as weird as that is. And because I'm a former top secret clearance holder, I decided to go report this to the FBI. So I go to my local FBI field office and I say, you know, I'm Dr. Andrew Huff. I'm a former top secret clearance holder that worked at this environment. I'm being tailed because you're supposed to. You sign documents saying that, you know, if you report any, if you have any strange behavior, the rest of your life of being tailed or, you know, hacking surveillance, report it to the FBI. So I did. My wife and I go in there. They seem like they're taking it very seriously. And I then actually hire a private investigator to then cross check what the FBI is doing. And there's a vehicle that's following me and I report it to the FBI. The FBI tells me it's nothing. The private eye tells me that vehicle is registered to the Secretary of State in Michigan. And that's how they have undercover vehicles.
- [67:46]
Host
What?
- [67:47]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes.
- [67:49]
Host
So that's how the FBI is. Undercover vehicles.
- [67:51]
Dr. Andrew Huff
That or any other undercover entity. So some federal entity, government agency. Government agency could be there. The state police, the sheriff's department. I now know for a fact that it was the state police, my sheriff's department in Marquette county, and the FBI all working together in hindsight, and probably also with the Department of Defense and the CIA, which is more difficult to prove. But you can sort of see ties and tendrils into that. So that aside, so I'm being followed. They're listening to my communications. All this is, you know, sort of easy to detect if you're a person who worked in intelligence and defense, you know how they, they operate. And so I just started collecting evidence of all the, the terrible crap. And my devices were getting hacked weekly. I mean, I'd have to wipe the operating systems reinstall. And it's this cat and mouse game as technology is involving and I'm an engineer, so I just start increasing my security all the time. And it, it, the, the sad reality is with consumer grade electronics that you buy from, you know, Amazon or wherever you get them these days, it's difficult to defend against those, the advanced persistent threat. So you're basically. I spent a lot of time doing network engineering and restoring programs and software because it, once I get to the point where I'm writing my Book the hacks intensify and it's definitely coming from the government, probably the pharmaceutical industry or other, you know, entities and organizations. And I try to investigate myself, the source of those hacks and actually know I. You follow the IP addresses of their VPN that they backdoor in your system, you can find out who the attacker is. So I, I do this and I, I sit on it and it's gotten to the point where I'm ready to file a large federal lawsuit against the federal government. Kash Patel, who's supposedly my ally for $50 million because I've identified the FBI agents and everyone involved all the way to the top. I basically ran a counterintelligence operation back against the US government with my training and collected the evidence to prove it. I even have fingerprints that I was obtained in my house of people who broke into my house. They tased my dog. What? Yeah, they taste my dog during one of the break ins. What else did they do actually? Yeah.
- [70:00]
Host
How do you know that?
- [70:01]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I mean, it leaves a big mark and a burn on the, the dog's neck. It was hiding, cowering in the counter. It changed the one of my bird dogs. And so this dog was actually one.
- [70:10]
Host
Of the German short hair pointer.
- [70:11]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes, a large female, about 70 pounds large for that breed.
- [70:15]
Host
They attacked your dog.
- [70:17]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Okay, that's when, yeah, they taste the dog. And it changed her behavior. She became more timid. She actually used to be sort of aggressive for a gsp. And so anyways, yeah, they taste my dog. They tampered with my vehicles on numerous occasions. And this just didn't happen in the up. This would happen when I go other places. Places. So if I travel for work, say I'd go to, you know, Wisconsin, Green Bay, California. They'd tamper with my vehicles there and, and do, you know, really silly stuff like psychologically. So they might just like buckle your seatbelt before you. So you leave the car and then you come back to your car and everything's all skewed and they mess with stuff in it. So I mean, it was more of a psychological operation, not like trying to, to kill me, you know, but they're, they were trying to apply all the pressure that they could to, to make my life miserable. I have times, periods where my credit cards might not work. You show up to a gas station, try to run at the pump, it won't be at work. So is that the bank screwing with me? The payment system, I had the controls on my vehicle on. I don't want to say what type of car I have on your show but a newer vehicle that has like automated driving, like assisted driving capabilities that had been taken over at low speed where I couldn't, couldn't control it. And now I'm sort of of the mindset, I'm like oh geez, should we have self driving cars? And they would actually it always.
- [71:35]
Host
Let me answer that question. No. Yeah, it's the end of human autonomy.
- [71:39]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Right.
- [71:40]
Host
And so you should have 1987 Chevrolet Silverados with the five speed manual transmission.
- [71:45]
Dr. Andrew Huff
You'll have to take me for a ride later.
- [71:46]
Host
That's what I drive. Okay. Sorry.
- [71:49]
Dr. Andrew Huff
No, and I've thought about that. And so it's always this battle whether or not we should have these technologies. And here's the thing I want to point out. They didn't do these things. When I was driving in high speed speed. It happened at the same place in, in my driveway systematically where they were doing it to mess with me at a low speed. There, there. And I actually brought one of the vehicles into the manufacturer to have it looked at. And they took a look at it, their corporate mechanic came in and corporate mechanics are special mechanics that look for I guess manufacturing errors in, in the production of the vehicle so that the corporation can and correct the either software or physical problem with the vehicle. And they gave me free repairs based on what they found and they wouldn't tell me exactly what they found. So.
- [72:37]
Host
Well, this is all pretty distressing. And to think that you're a patriotic American, serve your country, fought and was wounded in Iraq, you know, and for your government to be doing this to you because you're telling the truth is, is really kind of like the, the end. I mean that, that could happen.
- [72:57]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah, well, I, I took the attitude of I can beat these guys and I'm, I'm better than they are and I'm smarter than they are. So it just became a game to me and I just went, played the game and I played the game and I outsmarted them every step of the way because their ultimate goal was to prevent me from this story getting out to the, the global audience. And I knew that's what their objective was. And their other objective was to skew me as a crazy. Right. So we're either going to paint this person as a crazy and we're going to prevent them. So at least my word or my voice has no impact. And they failed on both accounts. Because the main thing is I had, I had documented everything that was happening. The license plates, the people following me, the fingerprints in my house they're not my fingerprints. And the best part is I brought those fingerprints to the Marquette County Sheriff's Department, brought them to the FBI and I even had a referral from Sandia National Laboratories Counterintelligence eventually to the FBI telling them to investigate this and they refused to. To run the Prince.
- [74:01]
Host
Have they ever run the Prince?
- [74:02]
Dr. Andrew Huff
No. And this is where it gets really interesting. So to this day, to this day. And I still have them.
- [74:08]
Host
Why?
- [74:10]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I mean, I guess it's probably someone from law enforcement. That's. That's what. It's probably a sheriff's department employee. It could be someone politically that they used in the operation. I mean if you look at how, when, when they want to target someone or individual and I'm not the first US government scientist to go through this. It's well documented that the person they blamed for the bacillus anthracis attacks after 9 11. So you remember the anthrax mailings?
- [74:39]
Host
Do I remember? Yeah.
- [74:40]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah. So they pinned that to a guy by the name of Dr. Bill Bruce Ivins.
- [74:43]
Host
Well first it was Dr. Stephen Hatfill.
- [74:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes. Yeah. And then it was Dr. Bruce Ivins and they ran a operation on him which was like Cointelpro to, to make him crack and eventually he kills himself. He can't, he can't handle the pressure. Well, they ran the same type of operation on me. I didn't crack.
- [75:03]
Host
I, I hate to go far afield because this is an amazing story, but you brought it up so I'm going to have to ask you give me the Cliff's note. Cliff notes version of what those anthrax attacks actually were which for people who were not around then killed a number of people, media employees. Anthrax packed envelopes were sent to a. You know, to the newsrooms of bunch of media organizations. I actually got one at my house. So it was, it was a big deal. This was right after that.
- [75:33]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes. So someone, someone who had access to USAMMER Laboratory, which laboratory? You samrid, I forget what the net the acronym stands for. It's the bioweapons laboratory or biodefense laboratory in Maryland. Correct?
- [75:45]
Host
Yeah.
- [75:46]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And so Dr. Bruce Ivan worked in that laboratory. He worked on vaccine technology. And the spores which are weaponized to be dispersed and the anthrax spores. Correct. And what's unique about these spores is that when they're weaponized they go through a process called tinning. And what that tinning does, it makes them so that they stay aerosolized because if you have bacillus anthracis, it's too big of a agent. It just, it falls to the ground. It sits. So to weaponize it, you want to make it so it stays dispersed and light fluffy. Exactly. And so Dr. Bruce Ivins was a specialist in, in that. Okay. Making these things stay aerosolized and then also developing the countermeasures to it. So if you're a real conspiracy theorist, you'd say that someone engaged in the false flagging of the anthrax attacks to promote the anthrax vaccine. Potentially. I mean that's just potential. That's one theory that's out there. I, I personally believe from analyzing all the different evidence that Dr. Bruce Ivins is not the person that did it. From my professional network, I know several person who work direct people that work directly with him. He's very much a very soft, loving kind of person. I don't see this person all of a sudden taking the spores out of his laboratory and then mailing, mailing, mailing them to people. They, this could have been done to continue the biodefense program around Bacillus anthracis as one possible scenario. So anyways, I mean we're sort of off track here, but.
- [77:22]
Host
So there is no. Because no one was ever charged with it. And he. As I remember. Or was he charged?
- [77:29]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I. I think they were in the process of charging.
- [77:31]
Host
Well, certainly no one was convicted of it.
- [77:32]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes.
- [77:32]
Host
Right, right. And he killed himself. Well, they say he killed himself. He's dead in any case. But has any other like sus meaningful suspect ever emerged that you're aware of?
- [77:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, I have my opinions of who was likely involved and I don't want to defame those people. So.
- [77:51]
Host
And I hope you won't use names, but can you just give, can you characterize who these people were and what their motive might have been in your view?
- [77:58]
Dr. Andrew Huff
In my opinion, they're likely associated with the biodefense complex and their motive could have been to create more fear hostility after 911 in the population. It could have been financial. Those are probably the two leading motives of. As to why that happened. My, my expert opinion. And then actually, you know, in private afterward, they'll tell you, you know, who I think, think probably is involved. But, but these. Me being an expert in biodefense. I mean this is something of one of the first things I did deep dives on even in fact, in my PhD coursework it was talked by, taught by Dr. Mike Osterholm and who and I. He and I do not see eye to eye and a lot of things he taught this in his course, this was a case study around biodefense.
- [78:46]
Host
There's a. Yeah, there are a lot of biolabs outside this country, I've noticed, run by the US Government work.
- [78:52]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, they're not really run by the US government. So there's this thing called the Cooperative Biological Engagement Program, CBEP and there's a few other programs. And the idea is we engage in scientific diplomacy with foreign laboratories so our enemies do not become allied with them. So, for example, the Ukraine labs, I actually was involved in writing some of the proposals for those laboratories and I can't say with who. I'm under NDA. But here's the, here's the issue. If we don't engage in those Cooperative Biological Engage Engagement programs with a laboratory like in Ukraine, there's a very real possibility that the Chinese will or the Russians will.
- [79:28]
Host
I get it, I get it.
- [79:30]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So it's better that we're working with them.
- [79:32]
Host
I understand. No, I don't. But that's not crazy. Yeah, I don't think it's. Or certainly I understand how people talk themselves into that. And I don't. It's not prima facie insane or evil. What I find, and obviously insane and evil is the lying about it. And so, you know, the under Secretary of State said in a Senate hearing a few years ago when after the Ukraine war broke out on camera under oath, this is Victoria Newland, architect of the current disaster in Ukraine, that she was worried about the biolabs there. So she said that on camera.
- [80:07]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So.
- [80:07]
Host
Okay, all right, you said it, it, honey. And I played the tape and was immediately attacked by everybody, all the other, you know, CNN and all the other intel community controlled news outlets as like a conspiracy wacko. And there are no, there are no biolabs in Ukraine. What are you talking about?
- [80:26]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Same.
- [80:27]
Host
What is that?
- [80:29]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I don't understand how the Biden administration handled the, the messaging and the communications around that. So I don't know why Ms. Newland and actually said the things or said the things the way that she did.
- [80:40]
Host
She's stupid. That's one of her deepest secrets. She's an idiot.
- [80:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
It would have been so much easier to come out and tell the truth. We have this thing called the Chemical Biological Engagement Program and we had relationship with these, these laboratories in Ukraine. And actually this is published information by the Department of Defense and other, the State Department, other agencies involved. And you can go look at CBET maps and see where we have these, this, this information or you can play the, the game where you go look at Awarded proposals which are not classified. So there, there's ways to find this, this, this information. It's, it's not secret. And they're using private companies to and universities to have these relationships with these different laboratories and that's, that's what scientific diplomacy is about.
- [81:19]
Host
Why would you lie about it? And why would news organizations collaborate in those lies? Like to me as a non scientist but a student of human nature, that's a tell that something's bad going on. Like why would you lie about that?
- [81:32]
Dr. Andrew Huff
That. Well, I think the Biden administration was completely incompetent on all these areas and I think it was looking at Ms. Newland specifically. I believe that she didn't know what she didn't know. It was a case of that. And so, so that is one of.
- [81:46]
Host
The huge problems with being dumb.
- [81:47]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yeah.
- [81:47]
Host
Is you don't know what you don't know. Right.
- [81:50]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And so she probably couldn't articulate anything other that would be the truth without putting herself in risks of. Risk of being perjuring herself.
- [81:58]
Host
Right.
- [81:58]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So, so I think she gave the answer to not purge yourself not knowing what she didn't know.
- [82:04]
Host
Stupidity is often often the real explanation for a lot of things.
- [82:09]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, the truthful answer could have been well Senator, so and so I don't know. My office will look into that and we'll give you a written response within a week. And that's how they trained us.
- [82:20]
Host
Yeah, of course. Well that's what honest people do is just tell the truth. But I just thought it was interesting that the media cooperated with the COVID up in that's and many a million others of course. But like why what is that?
- [82:34]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well that was all part of the psychological operation because remember this, this didn't happen in a vacuum. They probably didn't want to undermine the public perception of the government related to the COVID origin story. Some more of these conspiracy theories that turn out to be true. It undermines the credibility of the main narrative that they're trying to set which was covered Covid emerged from.
- [82:53]
Host
Can I ask like an even bigger and dumber question which is like why would the US government have an interest in lying about that? Why not? China is our rival on many levels, economic and military primarily. And we're often told that, you know, we're in a war against China, fight with China, race against China. Why would the the same people telling us that go out of their way to cover up the fact that the virus came from a Chinese bioweapons lab?
- [83:20]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, the, the government's people first of all, you know, we always refer to it as the government. But you work in Washington, D.C. and in this, this space, and any program area that a person could be affiliated with has people running it.
- [83:32]
Host
Yes.
- [83:32]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Those people don't want to be held accountable.
- [83:33]
Host
No, that's right.
- [83:35]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And they, they obviously are living in a state of fear of what could happen if there were, if they were held accountable. So they make decisions to protect themselves out of their self interest, and they happen to hold some power or leverage or have the relationships to execute on, on that operation plan.
- [83:54]
Host
Totally. Right. Yeah. I mean, clearly true. So you start telling the truth, they start tailing you, tased your dog, trying to drive you insane. All that is very, very familiar to me. You don't feel like they're going to want to kill you, but they want you to shut up.
- [84:14]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Up.
- [84:14]
Host
Or at least become a fringe figure that nobody pays attention to.
- [84:17]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes, absolutely. And here's just a quick story, and maybe I'll cut this in differently, but one of the funny things that they did was that it had been a sort of really stressful summer of working on my book, writing it because of the hacks, and I had deadlines and I'm not able to meet the deadlines because of the hacking, being tailed, all these different things. Well, my wife and I decided to go to a music festival in Chicago. And it's a decent drive, you know, six, seven hours down to Chicago. And while we're staying at the hotel, someone is hovering. A drone outside the window of our hotel room.
- [84:55]
Host
Yeah.
- [84:56]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And the funny thing is, you know.
- [84:59]
Host
I hope you flashed them.
- [85:01]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I walk around probably naked all the time because I'm, you know, former army infantryman. I don't care who sees me naked, so. And I live out in the middle of nowhere, so I'll just go outside naked sometimes. But anyways, we're, we're in Chicago and you know, the thing is, the, the FBI or these federal agents or maybe state agents operating illegally weren't very smart. So our room faced an alley in Chicago and there was a tall glass building next to us. So I look at the glass building across from us and I can see the people operating the drone in the room above us.
- [85:34]
Host
No way.
- [85:35]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes. So what I do, I actually put on my pants, go upstairs, and I, I pound on the door and come out of this room. I caught you. And I'm screaming this in the hotel room in Chicago. And I'm excited, you know, because this is the first time where I've actually been able to, you know, Confront these people. And the room goes dead silent. So what do I do? I go over to the fire door, which is right next to this hotel room, was up against the stairwell. And we're on the third floor, they're on the fourth. And I make a quick decision to sort of trick these guys. So I open up the. This door, this heavy fire door, and I allow it to slam. And I make the noise with my feet that I'm going down the stairs. Actually, I went upstairs quietly and above the room to the fifth floor. And I'm standing there listening to the floor, and I hear cases closing, things snapping, and you know which way they're exit. They're obviously not going to go down the fire escape or at the end of the building. The only other way they go, they're going to go down the hallway to the next stairway or elevator. So I start running down the fifth floor ahead of these guys, and I hear footsteps and cases and things. The. Well, I hear the case of clothing. I hear the footsteps coming down the hallway, and I get to the next stairway and I open up the door and they pop out right in front of me. So I said, no way. But I'm up on the fifth floor and they're coming out on the fourth, and I'm looking down at them, and they go running down the stairs to the first floor. And I'm laughing. So I go over the elevator. I go down the elevator casually. I come on the lobby like there's nothing wrong. And the two guys are sitting in chairs. And I walk over to him and say, hey, guys, did you see two guys come running down the stairs? And they have, like, wristbands on from drinking at the music festival or bars, wherever. They were following us around all day and. And they said, no, we haven't seen anyone. They're. You know, it looks sort of like they're sweating. Then I go over to the. I sort of laugh, and I go over to the desk of the lobby and say, hey, what's your name? Can I get your phone number? I'm gonna have my attorneys call you. We're gonna get a copy of the surveillance footage of these guys. And I'm like, I'm gonna come back and I'm gonna buy you dinner next year. And she said, okay. She gave me my information. She's like, why? I'm like, oh, it's not a big deal. So anyways, that happens. Then a week goes by. The next week we're back at home. Home. And I had trespassers on my property. And these. Sometimes the. The state police and federal agents would come onto my property and just like run around the bushes around my house, you know, to like, you know, freak me out and. Or thinking that they were freaking me out. I laughed at most of this. So I call 911 to report the stress passers. And I'm working in my garage on some, you know, project and they're playing music and sounds from their phone, like trying to like get me to come out and like run after him or something. So anyways, 45 minutes go by, the police haven't arrived. And sometimes that's not uncommon, probably for a trespassing claim in the U.P. of Michigan. So I call back and the dispatcher or the 911 operator gives me the phone number of the state police officer that is responding to the call and I'm supposed to call him on the cell phone. Well, I go call the phone number on my cell phone and the phone rings in the bushes. No way. I'm not kidding. And I start laughing and. And they know because you could hear it like you get shut off real quick. And. And I'm just like, I just caught these guys. Like this is concrete evidence you can obtain from the location of a person's cell phone and the phone calls made. I mean, I know many of these people.
- [89:09]
Host
Ever punished the drone operators, the state cops?
- [89:11]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Cop. No. So these people have. Haven't been published. The. The state cop, his name is Deputy Bray. I know who he is. And he has actually a family in Iron Mountain, Michigan. So I don't know how to what extent. There was another person. I actually witnessed one of the state police officers in my house through a black. Through a plate glass window. I was out working on the property. He was on my computer trying to destroy evidence. I think he lives in the town in. The rest of. Much of this came from the state police, which is the Governor, Governor Whitmer administration. Totally corrupt history of working with the FBI to truly corrupt person.
- [89:50]
Host
Yes.
- [89:51]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And so I don't know if they, they've ever been held accountable. I know for a fact that the FBI office in the state of Michigan had been spreading rumors with state and local law enforcement, excuse me, county and local law enforcement, that I was dangerous. That's. I mean this is.
- [90:10]
Host
And no one was ever held accountable. What about your former co workers at Eagle Health Alliance? Where are they now?
- [90:16]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I haven't checked in a while. So Dr. Billy Kash, who I actually really liked, he was the executive vice president. He was second to Peter. He wound up at The Aspen Institute. Good.
- [90:30]
Host
That's the most perfect thing I've ever heard. Okay. It was either that of the Atlantic Council or Georgetown University. I knew it was one of the three.
- [90:36]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Okay, funny. So the, the other vice presidents, Dr. Epstein or Dr. Oval, I'm not sure where they are. I know Dr. Das trying to get something new going, which is basically. It sounds like sort of the same thing. And you know, I understand why. There have been a series.
- [90:53]
Host
Dr. Dasica ever faced any penalty at all for participating in this?
- [90:56]
Dr. Andrew Huff
No. And the best part is the, the. What's crazy about all this, I should say, is that I attended a number of the hearings in the COVID Select Committee in person. And I was there for Dr. Dasick's grilling. And they have the part where they go through, basically he's denying that any of this is gain of function, his involvement, and he's fighting back. And then, you know, it gets to the end of the congressional hearings where council for both the Democrats and Republicans get the chance to examine the witness. And during that questioning, they actually asked Dr. Dasak whether or not he is working with the intelligence community. And at first he lies. He says no, that, that he wasn't. And then they had actually obtained records that he was, which was apparent. I didn't know that at the time. And they pushed him on it and then he came clean that he was. So it's not, it's on the official record that he was working with the intelligence.
- [91:47]
Host
That's craziness.
- [91:48]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And nobody talks about that. You know, this is. Was. That wasn't in the news, but that came out at the end of the hearing.
- [91:55]
Host
I guess you would have no way to know whether CIA ever gathered meaningful intelligence from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- [92:04]
Dr. Andrew Huff
In my opinion, probably not. Probably not so often. And I get this question. It's like when I worked at the national Laboratory, if we had anyone who was foreign to the lab, and I mean anyone external to Sandia.
- [92:14]
Host
Yeah.
- [92:14]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Come to the laboratory, we would give them the. Give them what I call the special tour. So they would have their Sandia minder and we'd take them to an area which we had bug swept before. And then, you know, we'd show them whenever we wanted to show the dog and pony show. And the second we left, that area would be bug checked before or after they left. So if that's what we do in the United States, and that's our standard protocol for top secret secret environments, we. We don't think the Chinese are doing the same thing. So you have all these U.S. government officials and, and Dr. Dasick visiting that laboratory. They, you know, would just take them around to them like, oh, this is our microbiology laboratory. This is our, you know, this is our ventilation hood where we do sample work. I mean, just looking at the equipment in a laboratory sometimes doesn't actually tell you what they're working on either because, you know, you're dealing with viruses, you can't see these things, or bacteria, pathogens.
- [93:06]
Host
Right. I can see someone's kitchen stove. I don't know what they're making for dinner.
- [93:09]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Exactly. Yeah.
- [93:10]
Host
So you've told a remarkable story. And, you know, it's remarkable because of the lengths they went to keep you from telling it. But with the benefit of several years, five years really, of hindsight and thinking about this, what do you think this was? Was this an accidental leak from the Wuhan lab? And they sort of backfilled after that. Was this something else? Like what, what's your view?
- [93:37]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So the, the way that I'm trained and the way that I've worked in this type of intelligence aspect of science is you look at scenarios. So you come up with every possible scenario and then you use hypothesis testing evidence to eliminate hypothesis or scenarios. So we're now at the, the stage where this could be a few different things. One, it could have been a pure accident, accidental release from the Wuhan laboratory. And if, if it's that scenario, it looks like it was a laboratory employee pot graduate student who had been working in that laboratory. It could have been who became infected.
- [94:14]
Host
Then spread it unknowingly.
- [94:15]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Correct.
- [94:16]
Host
To the world.
- [94:17]
Dr. Andrew Huff
So that, that is, I think, the, the scenario which has the most favor publicly and among experts who are now committed, the fact that this is a laboratory leak. It could have been an intentional release that still hasn't been eliminated. One or multiple groups could have intentionally released the agent there. There's one troubling aspect of this, is that there are types of studies or scientific studies which we could have ran to conclusively identify the origin of the disease in space and time. And this is a classic epidemiological method. There are blood banks and historical records of disease through blood donation programs globally. So what we do is we go, go to those blood banks, look at old samples, or we look at other tissues or samples that have been collected with hiv. And then you look through, okay, is in this location here, what time, when. And then now with modern technology, you can actually use more genetic applications to look at the. So because SARS CoV2 evolves so rapidly you can actually look at the FI phylogenetic tree to see, you know, where in time was the sample and you'd follow that back than with the location information you're obtaining of positive hits where the sample, positive samples were found to eventually, eventually trace you back to the origin. And that study has never been done at scale. And I don't know why. It's another one of those questions like why haven't we done this? And there's a number of, of organizations and the US Military that could look at their own genetic blood bank samples to sort of figure out where this came from and when. Maybe they've already done that. Right. Because that would happen behind closed doors and the Department of Defense or the Defense medical agencies would, would, would do that. So these are questions that, that could be answered and they haven't been answered. And I have more thoughts and opinions to what has transpired related to the origin of this disease. And I'm now at the position of that if this investigation were to take place because the world is in such a tenuous position in terms of the potential for World War iii, that should happen in a classified setting and that investigation should be in the form of using the UCMJ process through the Department of defense. Because yes, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Dasick, Ralph Barrick, all these people are essentially working on a defense program. They're working with dod. It falls under UCMJ authority legally. Not many people know that. It's not just people.
- [97:05]
Host
Uniform Code of Military.
- [97:06]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Yes. So people who are working with the DoD, whether they're a civilian or government employee on a project, Project Defuse, are subject to ucmj. That's where the investigation should happen. It shouldn't happen at the Department of Justice. I believe that that Secretary Hegseth has the leadership to execute this properly. And if the investigation warrants, then criminal charges could be brought under UCMG in a classified setting. So basically a classified trial which exists then set a time period of 5 to 10 years to re release the results of that criminal criminal trial publicly. Obviously if someone's found guilty and they're imprisoned, you'll, you'll know that there are some wrongdoing. But I don't think that we're. My greatest concern is that if there were more nefarious components of this, now is not the time to really release that information publicly.
- [98:01]
Host
Because the world sits on the cusp of a global war.
- [98:04]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Exactly. And, and I'm actually sort of following, following the, our leaders here. There have been a series, a very.
- [98:11]
Host
Balanced view Let me just say, well, thank you for those who would dismiss you as a wacko. I don't know what I think of that. I haven't thought of it until you said it. But that, I think that's a kind of a window into the way that you think, which is in a restrained and responsible way.
- [98:28]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, thank you. And the, that opinion or that belief and that process sort of just came to me in the last week. And that's from looking at the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsa Gabbard, in her office declining some FOIA requests from several groups related to the origin of COVID in the story. And I firmly believe that Director Gabbard is on the right side of humanity and history. I'm a huge fan of hers and I've had some conversation with her back and forth on social media, direct messages, and we have some friends that are, you know, friends of a friend kind of thing. So I believe her heart's in the right place.
- [99:10]
Host
I can, I can ver, I can verify that through, you know, a decade of knowing her well. And she's one of the only famous people I've ever met, maybe the only famous person I've ever met who not only didn't get, you know, doesn't own a home because she's never made any money at all because that's the last thing on her mind. So who else can you say that about?
- [99:30]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Not many people.
- [99:31]
Host
That's right.
- [99:32]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And, and so looking at her leadership right now and her office's leadership and their response to these FOIA requests and their, the nature of these FOIA requests would actually get at some of these root issues and they're, they're objecting to them and they're not releasing the information. She's in the position now where she knows a lot more about what happened or what really happened than she did before President Trump was elected and she was nominated into that position and eventually became the director. Sure. So looking at that, I think they're making the same kind of assessment that I am. Yeah.
- [100:10]
Host
That of course it was a lab leak.
- [100:13]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I mean, I, I, I don't really.
- [100:14]
Host
When you said the portion of the scientific community, so called that ascribes to the lab leak theory, that suggests that there are people who are still pushing the pangolin lie.
- [100:25]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Absolutely. Are there? Yes. Well, if you go over to the other Twitter, blue, whatever it's called, Blue sky, or I think, I can't remember the name of it, but on social media, there are other groups of scientists in publicly saying that this was still A laboratory leak. In fact, they haven't retracted that.
- [100:43]
Host
It was not a laboratory leak.
- [100:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
That was not a laboratory leak. They still haven't retracted the proximal origins paper, which is a complete fraud.
- [100:49]
Host
Are you serious?
- [100:51]
Dr. Andrew Huff
No. And Dr. Ebright from Rutgers University, who I admire and respect, he. He's fighting this, the good fight, every day on. On social media, as an old, old seasoned professor should. So the. The whole complex of either the. The pharmaceutical industry, the scientific community that works tightly with the pharmaceutical industry, or are funded by the agencies involved in this, are all opposing the natural. Or, excuse me, the lab. They're all opposing the lab leak.
- [101:27]
Host
The vaccine manufacturers are opposed?
- [101:30]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I. I would believe so. Well, not them directly because they're not making public statements on this. But if you look at, you know, you follow the money. So if you look at the scientists. Okay, and where they get their money from. Many of the people who are involved in MRNA technology development associated with SARS CoV2 vaccines are in the camp of this was a naturally emerging disease.
- [101:51]
Host
And I'm using air quotes around the word doctor, but Dr. Peter Hotez, for example, a vax pusher of long standing, is. Is he just to name one name, is he pushing the penguin lie still.
- [102:05]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I don't know if he's pushing. So. But I mean, he was. He was pushing the natural emergency theory quite profoundly every. Everywhere he went for a period of time.
- [102:13]
Host
Why would. That's such an interesting nexus. Why would people who are promoting vaccines want to lie about the origin of.
- [102:24]
Dr. Andrew Huff
COVID Well, Dr. Hotes is actually a more interesting specific person that you name because he actually has connections to the Wuhan Institute of Virology as well. So he's more directly linked back to the origin story than other scientists in the vaccine. Yes.
- [102:39]
Host
In what way?
- [102:41]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I forget that he has some kind of either publication record with scientists there or collaboration of research, I believe.
- [102:50]
Host
Yeah, well, he's. He. Yeah, it. It's interesting. You really feel like you don't know your country very well when. I mean, I knew people who believed Dr. Peter Hotez and I thought to myself, how could this. I mean, this is so clearly, you know, not true. I don't know how you could believe that it was really a divisive time in the country or a revealing time and those the truth led to division. I guess maybe it's a better way to put it, but anyway. But why in general, leaving Hotez out of it, why would a vax pusher not want to tell the truth about the origin of the virus?
- [103:23]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Simply that Gain of function technology is used for virology and vaccine development and MRNA is a huge portfolio of new vaccine technology development. And.
- [103:36]
Host
Thank you.
- [103:36]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Okay, that's the answer. And there's the funny thing is if you look at, at MRNA technology and its future, a lot of corporations have banked in the pharmaceutical or biotech industry and MRNA being the future vaccine technology. And I think if you look at the rise in cancers associated with MRNA technology in the SARS CoV2 vaccine, and there's a new study, a recent study that came out in Korea, which is a massive cohort study with a large, large, has much, has a lot of statistical power, found five or six cancers that were associated with the vaccine. Okay. And many of these other studies looked at one type of cancer, for example lymphoma in, in Sweden, they, they didn't find an association. But this Korean study looked at all types of cancers and they're now finding these associations. So the writings in the wall for MRNA technology, I don't, do not think that it's going to be the future vaccine technology. And, and frankly I'm not so concerned anymore with the old way of thinking that the emerging infectious, infectious disease threat that we should be concerned about are old world diseases. So Bacillus anthracis being weaponized, for example, a coronavirus being weaponized. Gain of function technology has evolved within the last two to three years at such a rapid pace. The future threat we need to be mitigating against and protecting against is actually synthetic pathogens in synthetic life. And I don't think, and I know for a fact that most of the world isn't aware that we've actually already created single cell life. It exists. The paper, the seminal paper on it came out three years ago. So we now have fully functioning synthetic cells which are created with nanotechnology. And some of those, and I could get in the weeds on what that nanotechnology is, which I can self replicate. And so what this means, if you sit back and what this means.
- [105:27]
Host
Wait, so man has created life?
- [105:29]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Technically synthetic, yes.
- [105:31]
Host
And by synthetic, what is it? So, but if it's, if it behaves independently and it's self replicating, then aren't those the criteria for life?
- [105:41]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, that's a whole philosophical debate.
- [105:43]
Host
And yeah, I don't want to believe it, so I'm happy to have the definition readjusted. But that would be the obvious definition of it.
- [105:52]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Right. And there's also synthetic cloning now, so you can have an agent if you know exactly, a pathogen or a cell. And some of this isn't, isn't, isn't advanced. So if it's more complicated, cell type, for example, you might not be able to replicate that, but you can now synthetically generate a virus to match the virus and you, so what that means is you don't have to have the actual virus. You don't have to collect a sample anymore. You can just have the code and you can generate it. That's where we are to now.
- [106:23]
Host
Right.
- [106:24]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And that's, that's for viruses. Now if we're talking text with code.
- [106:27]
Host
And, and I can make the virus.
- [106:28]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And I believe we'll be there in the near future. With bacteria and with synthetic life though, you can generate very radical things because what, what this means is we can make what would be defined as a single cell synthetic organism which does different things that don't exist. And it has massive potential good uses and bad uses. The good uses, you could use this and I could see this being popular, popular among scientists funded by the Borlaug program at USDA where they use this for pest control. And you could, you could target, make it so it was very specific, the synthetic cell or organism or bacteria to target something like a pest, like a grasshopper for example, or white people. Well, we're get to the other side of this. That would only target a specific species defined to a geographic region. So you might not worry of it spilling over into some other insect population. In theory. Okay, this is, this is, this is sort of on the, what I'm talking about here is the, the emerging future trend of this. Now on the nefarious side of this, how is it going to be used? First, we're no longer talking about living things. So you can engineer a synthetic pathogen to attack equipment. So you can have it, have that synthetic organism produce an acid that would eat metal. You could have it produce a biofilm which would attack metal underwater like a submarine. This technology is being developed right now at a handful of places. Some of it's in the United States. Much of it is, some of it is not. Most of the places it's being developed are friendly to the United States or our allies. But this synthetic threat is rapidly emerging. That, so that's the biotechnology side. Now if you take a look at, and I know I've been watching your show, recent episodes, AIs have been a big hot topic and there's tons of investment going into it. We're going to see a fusion between this synthetic biology technology and AI. And it's probably on the four to five year horizon and the AI will be programmed into the micro circuits systems of the, the nanotechnology. It's a fact. I mean like you're going to use the best software, the best programs. You can get onto a, basically a nano computer within that cell which does the programming. This might sound like crazy science fiction to a lot of people, people who say that's not possible.
- [109:16]
Host
I don't think anyone would say that's not possible.
- [109:17]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I can, I can point to a peer reviewed publication where they're doing all the components of this and it's just a matter of time before someone gets wise and assembles it. And there's going to be plenty of financial motive to do this. So there's no stopping it. And that, that's what I'm saying. There's no stopping where this is headed. And the reason why I say that there the Trump administration did some great work with Russia trying to, to negotiate a new biological treaty.
- [109:44]
Host
I just want to apologize in public for every moment I've defended like our economic system because like any system that allows something like this is a bad system.
- [109:54]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, I don't. So all technology is dual use, right? It's like firearms is a classic example. A firearm, a firearm in a good person's hand is a tool to defend and protect yourself, your family against tyranny. An evil person's hand, Nuclear power, nuclear.
- [110:08]
Host
Bombs, I get it. But you know, you just have to assess the downside risk realistically as compared to the upside benefit. And I think with the technology, well, nuclear technology, I believe this and certainly true with everything you're describing, downside risk way far outweighs any potential gain. You live to 110.
- [110:29]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Okay, so I'd argue this, I can completely agree with, with the upside and downside risk of this. But what I'm saying is there's no stopping it. No, I'm, and this is why the, what I was going to say related to, to President Trump and the Trump administration negotiating a new biological treaty with, with the international community. Well one looking at history back to the 70s, I don't think it's gonna be effective. So the existing Biological Weapons Convention we have is outdated. It focuses on, focuses on select agents, basically that which can be weaponized through gain of function technology. They baked a loophole into it to develop countermeasures, that's vaccine technologies and other prophylactics. And you can engage in the gain of function technology, bioweapon development if you're developing the countermeasures and they couldn't get anyone to go further past that with having inspections and I don't see that posture, especially today in today's climate.
- [111:29]
Host
Yeah.
- [111:30]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Changing.
- [111:31]
Host
So you blew up the Nordstream pipeline. There's no, I mean the basis of international treaty, of course is trust and there's none. So, like no more international treaties.
- [111:43]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, I, I hope, I hope I'm.
- [111:45]
Host
Wrong, but I just, just don't see it right now.
- [111:48]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, I think that there's a path forward and the path forward to.
- [111:52]
Host
Wait, before we get to the path forward, can we just get to a broader description, more precise description of what the marriage of nanotechnology to AI means? Like, what does that mean?
- [112:03]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Sure. So the marriage of, of nanotechnology to AI means that the AI, or excuse me, the nanotechnology will have swarm like capabilities. So people are the, the general world is probably more familiar with swarm technology around drones. They're using this in their testing this, and they're trying to field these rapid swarm technologies. And if you watch these large displays of drone shows that you see commonly in China, that's really them just openly testing drone swarm technology. And that's the civilian, this is cool tech application, but there's actually a much more sinister application of that same technology for defense, dual use technology. So imagine that these, these pathogens are like these drones and you see them operate. AI will control the swarm technology around the synthetic pathogen so that they can control their behavior. And then also that the, the machine inside the synthetic cell can adapt to its environment without any human construction or code or decision making. So what would that look like in terms of.
- [113:12]
Host
Well, I don't know. I can imagine a drone swarm. I've seen one. What would that mean? So you have synthetic cells that are controlled by a computer and then they do what?
- [113:24]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, they would use cases, always help define what that is. So in a weaponization scenario. Yes. You could use this to deploy a container, maybe it looks like a bomb into an ocean where. You know where a submarine is. The synthetic static, the synthetic light life could be magnetic and attract to the hull of a submarine. It would attach itself and then it would make decisions about where it should collect on the surface of the submarine independently to create a biofilm and self replicate to basically cause the sensors or to disable the submarine in some way, way in space. Use a similar type of maybe I'm not so sure what the delivery vehicle is, but say that you were to get this onto a satellite, you could use it then to eat and corrode the silicon and magnesium and the, the structure of that you could use it to basically disable the, the systems on board of the physical structure of the, the vessel or, or the, or the satellite. And that's just, I mean what, what's really so striking about this is this technology will be able to use to attack objects. But it's a synthetic living thing. There's also the life. So there, there's a new fork fork here. You can use it to attack objects or you can use it to attack life itself. And that's more what people would be familiar familiar with. You could use it to attack specific genetic populations, for example. So if a certain population had a genetic trait, you can make the synthetic pathogen specifically target name your niche of race or population of genetically related close.
- [115:16]
Host
Relations about the ones who were given fentanyl and denied jobs in the United States. So no, I'm just being super. But honest.
- [115:28]
Dr. Andrew Huff
More difficult probably. Well, unless they, they had some kind.
- [115:30]
Host
Of specific half kidding sort of. But you. So I remember Bobby Kennedy got into a great deal of trouble because he said at some event, of course the New York Post led the charge against him, of course, but that Covid could be tailored or in fact, what. For whatever reason, Covid had disparate effects on populations.
- [115:51]
Dr. Andrew Huff
That's absolutely true. I mean that's scientifically true. And I was quite familiar with that literature when he, he made.
- [115:55]
Host
What, what does that mean? Which population suffered most from COVID There.
- [116:00]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Was a, there was a finding in a scientific publication that two different populations of, well, two different populations of people of Jewish ancestry, depending which line they're from, where one was more heavily impacted than the other. And that was.
- [116:18]
Host
That was Sephardic Ashkenazi basically.
- [116:20]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And that was, that was the finding. And I think the point that he was trying to make or maybe didn't articulate well is that the agent can be tailored to have that effect. And that's absolutely true. And that's through, through old gain of function technology and with synthetic full synthetics. What I'm saying is you can make this so, so specific is that I could if I got your DNA like off a, you know, say that you threw a cup. I can tailor an agent just to you. You. And this is how it's changing. And if you're using AI behind that, I could then, and I say that I a DNA sample from two of your, a couple of your relatives. So I knew what your family tree partially look like. Machine learning is very good at actually random forest and tree decision making. You do a lot of complex AI behind this to figure out and make Predictions the AI could about what your family tree look like and have the disease travel through your family line. This is now this is is. Nobody has ever asked me that question. I just generated that answer based on what I know. But I think that that is a very real posibility use or application of this type of technology. It also could be used on the flip side of it, you could use it to target specific and rare cancers and it could be used to eliminate those cancers cleanly and self deactivate and decompose in a way that didn't harm your body. So this technology is going to go could go two different ways. But it's coming because the medical applications and healthcare applications of IT are there and they're going to be. They will be extremely profitable. Imagine that you said like I, you know, you have cancer, I don't have to give you a drug. I have to inject you with this synthetic which will seek out the cancer, the tumor in your body and contain it, kill it with no other harmful effects to your body. In theory. And like I say in theory because things always have side effects. Right? Of course.
- [118:12]
Host
And I just say in general I would much rather live in a world where I risked dying of tetanus and the common cold than live in a world with this technology. It's not even close. I have a million more questions to ask you. But that's what you just said is so upsetting that I think you've broken my spirit. It Dr. Huff.
- [118:30]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Oh, I think there, I think there's a better sol. Let me give you the upside of this though. So the, the solution to these problems and is typically better biosurveillance and this is what ecohealth was trying to do and the part of it that actually works is it you. You can't really understand what's circulating in the world in terms of pathogens life unless scientists and engineers are measuring it or trying to identify and look at. You can't find what you're not looking for. And it would be great to see an international team of scientists working on the technology to detect synthetic life when it emerges. Because if we all think it's a threat, we don't have to put our head in the sand and ostrich if we're all just looking for it and we can identify it. Early warnings of threats save lives. Livestocks, Livestock, animals. The early warning signal is the most important aspect of defending against future emerging threats. And if we develop that technology, we'll be safer. Yeah.
- [119:37]
Host
What you really need though to be safe is Good people, ethical people.
- [119:41]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And that's a huge problem in science. I mean there, there's. I could talk forever about that. They're not teaching ethics.
- [119:45]
Host
I haven't been to the doctor in five years as a result. Yeah, as corrupt as every other institution. Wow, what a heavy conversation that was. Thank you. Where can people, if people are interested in finding out? More people with a stronger stomach and stouter heart than I have. Want to know more about the last 10 minutes of our conversation. Do you write about this?
- [120:07]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, I've started to and I'm not sure how it's been received. I published it on Substack. I've done it, published a little bit on X and Then also on LinkedIn. And it's, it's not very. I don't, I don't think people are catching on, actually. I just solicited proposals to DARPA and a few other places saying, hey, we should be looking at this. And I already know for a fact that they've been thinking at it and they've been dabbling and they put a little money into it. So I'm working, I'm actually actively working on this. So if you want to, for the little, the limited time that I, or the, the few things that I do publish about this, I put it on X and, and Ag Huff is my, my Twitter account. But other than that, this is all very much evolving and it's a work in progress.
- [120:50]
Host
It's amazing. It's amazing. When you said gain of function research has changed so much in the. And I'm thinking, what time frame is he gonna lay out here? Because I think most normal people would assume after Covid there would be a dramatic reduction in gain of function research, considering that's what gave us Covid and wrecked our country. But that you said in the last.
- [121:11]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Two or three years, it's, it's now the, the building. So if you're in bio biomedical research in microbiology or virology or bioengineering, it's, it's something that you get trained on and you learn to now advance to. It's a building block to learn about synthetic biology. So there's going to be more research professors at leading universities within the next five years teaching this to PA and it's a trickle down.
- [121:39]
Host
I always knew science was bad. I just want to brag, I just want to lay my marker down. I just want to say I've always been opposed to science. I've always been opposed to technology. I'm not stupid. But I am convinced of that. And have been my whole life. So I think I'm being vindicated in real time.
- [121:54]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Well, maybe I can cheer you up a bit. It's not all evil. And to your point earlier, it's the people behind it.
- [122:03]
Host
Well, that's it.
- [122:04]
Dr. Andrew Huff
And maybe we need to do a better, My community, the scientific community needs to do a better job of training our students not to be evil. And that comes through how we select our students, how we mentor them and how we show them or teach them what the ultimate goals in life are. And that comes through mentorship. And that has really fallen off, at least during my academic and scientific career where everything is money driven, financially driven, I've noticed. And then on top of it, you have a lot of predatory professors and academics and scientists preying on their students. And it's a, it's a, it's a vicious cycle. And I mean, what do I mean by preying on them?
- [122:37]
Host
Well, yeah, not just sexually, not sexually.
- [122:40]
Dr. Andrew Huff
But that's the least of the problems in the PhD world. It's very common that research professors basically steal their, their students work and have them, you take credit for their work. And they're, the students aren't, aren't taught about ethics in science and research on top of it. I mean, it's not like it's required coursework. Most, most scientists don't train their students in ethics. So how do we become better as a community of creating better people as scientists so they're not just out chasing money and it's mentorship. And we have to break the cycle. I mean, we have to break the cycle.
- [123:19]
Host
It's going to take a radical religious revival to do that. Nothing short of that is going to work. That's my view. That's what I'm hoping for. Because I feel like we are on the cusp of like true darkness.
- [123:31]
Dr. Andrew Huff
I agree. And I, I, I, I think about these things a lot. And you know, scientists, we have people ask me what I do. I'm sitting there staring out the window and I'm like, I'm working. And they're like, you know what? I'm thinking through problems. And people often wonder, well, what do PhDs do? And we sit there and we think about these things and we try to come up with answers and we try not to waste any our brain power on, on things that don't matter. And I, I don't know if it's with a full religious, if it's a fully religious aspect, at least within the scientific community. I'm being real here that I know know many of these scientists are, are atheists. And I know that many of these scientists who are atheists are. Some of, some of them, I should say, are, are great and fantastic people, at least at a minimum for them to, to view themselves in, in the greater context of what it all means and try to have positive, I guess, a positive force on the world through what they're doing.
- [124:31]
Host
But there's no positive or negative for an atheist. I mean, it doesn't there, no, there's no hierarchy of value that rooted anything other than preference. So none of that's real. How can you say something's bad if you don't believe that there's a power higher than you?
- [124:44]
Dr. Andrew Huff
It's a great question.
- [124:45]
Host
You can't is the answer. So you should never allow atheists to have this kind of power. Not because they're evil. A lot of them are great people. I really like a lot of atheists. It's nothing personal, it's just that, that there's no check at all on the power if you think that you're God, you know, so that can't be allowed. Dr. Huff, thank you. Amazing conversation. It's going to affect my sleep. Thank you. We've got a new website we hope you will Visit. It's called Newcommissionnow.com and it refers to a new 911 Commission. So we spent months putting together our 911 documentary series. And if there's one thing we learned, it's that in fact there was foreknowledge of the attacks. People knew.
- [125:38]
Dr. Andrew Huff
The American public deserves to know.
- [125:40]
Host
We're shocked actually, to learn that, to have that confirmed. But it's true. The evidence is overwhelming. The CIA, for example, knew the hijackers were here in the United States. They knew they were planning an act of terror.
- [125:49]
Dr. Andrew Huff
In his passport is a visa to go to the United States of America.
- [125:54]
Host
A foreign national was caught celebrating as the World Trade center fell and later said he was in New York, quote, to document the event. How did he know there would be an event to document in the first place? Because he had foreknowledge. And maybe most amazingly, somebody, an unknown investor, shorted American Airlines and United Airlines, the companies whose planes the attackers used on 9 11, as well as the banks that were inside the Twin Towers just before the attacks. They made money on the 911 attacks because they knew they were coming. Who did that?
- [126:25]
Dr. Andrew Huff
You have to look at the evidence.
- [126:27]
Host
The US Government learned the name of that investor but never released it. Maybe there's an instant explanation for all this, but there isn't actually. And by the way, it doesn't matter whether there is or not, the public deserve to know what the hell that was. How did people know ahead of time? And why was no one ever punished for it? 911 Commission the original one was a fraud. It was fake. Its conclusions were written before the investigation. That's true and it's outrageous. This country needs a new 911 commission. One that actually tells the truth, that tries to get to the bottom. Bottom of the story. We can't just move on like nothing happened.
- [127:07]
Dr. Andrew Huff
911 Commission.
- [127:10]
Host
Something did happen. We need to force a new investigation into 9 11. Almost 25 years later. Sorry, justice demands it. And if you want that, go to NewcommissionNow.com to add your name to our petition. We're not getting paid for this. We're doing this because we really mean it. New commission now.
- [127:29]
Dr. Andrew Huff
Now, combined.