What Really Happened in Wuhan: The Cover-Ups, the Conspiracies and the Classified Research

by Sharri Markson

A VIRUS

MORE THAN 109 MILLION INFECTIONS

MORE THAN 2.7 MILLION DEATHS

HOW DID IT HAPPEN?

The origins of COVID-19 are shrouded in mystery and conspiracy theories. Some say it started in a lab when scientists fell sick after manipulating a bat-coronavirus. Others say the team was working on a bioweapon for the Chinese military.

After multiple global inquiries, after economies have been decimated and millions of lives lost, we still need answers.

Part-thriller, part-expose, What Really Happened in Wuhan is a ground-breaking investigation into the origins of COVID-19, the cover-ups, the conspiracies and the classified research, from Walkley Award-winning journalist Sharri Markson.

It features never-before-seen primary documents exposing China's early cover-up of the virus.

There are fresh interviews with whistleblower doctors in Wuhan - the eyewitness accounts dismantling what we thought we knew about when the outbreak hit.

Plus, the book takes you inside the White House, with senior Trump officials revealing first-hand accounts of fiery Oval Office clashes and new stories of near-miss disasters in the Situation Room.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Politics, China, Science, Health, Audiobook

517 pages, Kindle Edition

Published October 1, 2021

Reviews

[Roger · Rating 5 out of 5]

The most descriptive word as a reaction to this book is infuriating. It's infuriating because an Australian journalist published it in Australia. I don't begrudge an Australian for doing such good work. I begrudge the media in the United States for not doing its job. Markson has presented so much evidence that is muted or simply ignored in the United States it's alarming.

Two main points come across in the book. First, people didn't want to tell the truth because it would've helped Donald Trump. That is by no means a defense of Donald Trump, but politics ought not trump (no pun intended) the truth. Second, people didn't want to tell the truth because they were afraid it would piss off China. That's just plain scary.

Set aside any ideological presuppositions you might have and read this book. There's much more going on than any of us probably realize.

[Mark · Rating 2 out of 5]

I gave up after a dozen chapters. So many factual errors. But this is what you get when the author is an apologist for Donald Trump (and the Trump administration).

Donald Trump DIDN’T 'ban' travel from China. He merely imposed (very) porous restrictions. Nor was he the first to do so (despite what he claimed). Dozens of countries took similar steps to control travel from China and other COVID-19 hot spots BEFORE the US did on 2 February, 2020. The measures that the Trump administration implemented couldn't be described as a “ban” because it didn't apply to US citizens, nor did they apply to travel from Hong Kong or Macao. By the time Trump expanded travel restrictions to Iran on 28 February and to European nations on 12 March, it was largely too late. Yet Markson is content to parrot the discredited Trump narrative w.r.t. the travel 'ban' from China.

Additionally, Markson relies heavily on testimony from Peter Navarro. And who is Peter Navarro? Besides been the White House trade adviser, Navarro was a fruitcake who was more convinced about the apparent healing properties of hydroxychloroquine than even Trump was!

The final straw was when Markson regurgitated Trump talking points to excuse him from his culpability in mishandling the pandemic in the US.

I'm still interested in whether there was a lab leak from the WIV, but I'll find a better book than this.

[Glenn Franco Simmons · Rating 5 out of 5]

An amazing account of the Covid pandemic and the malevolent response by Chinese Communist Party functionaries. Nothing against the Chinese people, but the CCP is one of the most-evil organizations on Earth. The USA is also indicted in this book for its shocking complicity in funding the very dangerous gain-of-function work. If we really had an international health organization that could enforce compliance with safety standards, the unprofessional Wuhan Virology Lab and its associated biowarfare research would be stopped in its tracks. But, we don't. Expect a future pandemic, whether planned or accidental, to become a calamity never before seen in world history. And, it may not be the Chinese. It could be any country without moral fiber that allows such research to put all of us, Chinese citizens included, in danger.

[Sharon Orlopp · Rating 4 out of 5]

With many things---history, politics, natural and man-made disasters, legislation, leadership, controversial topics---it helps to try to read as many different points of view as possible.

When COVID first hit, I immediately read The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History to try to understand historical approaches and impact.

The first book I read about the COVID pandemic was The Premonition: A Pandemic Story. It was fascinating to see the various individuals who came together to provide leadership, direction, and possible solutions to the pandemic.

I just finished reading What Really Happened in Wuhan: The Cover-Ups, the Conspiracies and the Classified Research. The basic premise of the book is that the Chinese and the US covered up and/or largely ignored the question about the origin of the virus---was it caused naturally (possibly via a bat or an animal) or was it caused by an accidental or intentional leak from a virology lab in Wuhan.

I won't give away any spoiler alerts. During highly unusual, fluid events, it is often hard to tell the difference between facts and myths, especially in the early stages and the pandemic is no exception.

However, censorship is something that should always ring alarm bells---particularly when science is censored.

Other books regarding the COVID pandemic I plan on reading include:
* Virus: Vaccinations, the CDC, and the Hijacking of America's Response to the Pandemic

* How to Prevent the Next Pandemic

* Preventable: The Inside Story of How Leadership Failures, Politics, and Selfishness Doomed the U.S. Coronavirus Response

* Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns: Part 1: Introduction and Death Counts and Estimates

* Wuhan Diary: Dispatches from the Original Epicenter

[Ringo · Rating 1 out of 5]

A book to debunk conspiracy theories but instead proposing its own conspiracies based upon loose evidence

Not sure why idiots in the comment thought I did not read the book

[F.E. Beyer · Rating 4 out of 5]

“It began in the autumn of 2019. Months before the first reported case of human-to-human contact, the Wuhan Institute of Virology began to go dark. Publicly available information was wiped from the internet. Staff connected with the Institute disappeared as the scientists fiercely criticised its safety practices and standards. At the same time, there were burgeoning social media mentions of a new respiratory illness.”

This is an impressive book. Whether Sharri Markson has got everything right I’m not knowledgeable enough to know. Don’t fall for the critical reviews here which dismiss her out-of-hand as a Trump apologist. Yes, she works for Sky News Australia and the channel has a bias to the right. But at the same time, ABC Australia and CNN have a bias to the left. There is no fair and impartial network. To be a high profile journalist, you have to work for someone – and if she wasn’t high profile, the book wouldn’t get much play.

Markson puts forward the case for an accidental lab leak of a genetically manipulated virus rather than one which came out of nature. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence for the lab leak – and very little for the ‘zoonosis’ or out of nature theory. However, the lab leak was long seen as a conspiracy theory – largely because it was touted by Donald Trump who the mainstream media hated so. Also, it’s nigh on impossible to get any concrete evidence when the Chinese government is covering everything up.

It’s hard to sum up this book packed with science. In a nutshell, the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been doing ‘gain of function’ research on bat viruses for years. Gain of function is where – basically – you manipulate a virus to make it more deadly. The Coivd-19 virus has a spike protein suited to infect human rather than bat cells. The wet market in Wuhan did not even sell bats – let alone pangolins, the apparent intermediate host of the virus between the bats and humans.

Then there was the WHO and the wider science community afraid of contradicting China, not to mention American intelligence services failing to investigate. Any local who tried to report on the virus in China, and some did, disappeared. Even more sinister is that the Chinese military was involved in the Institute in researching biological weapons. The major twist in the story for me was around the role of Fauci – the guy CNN etc. loved to paint as the good guy.

I can’t give this book five stars because 1) a big book like this needs an index, 2) the science is a headache to read for the laymen, but I don’t see how the author could have avoided this. Give it a read and decide for yourself.

F.E. Beyer is the author of Buenos Aires Triad Buenos Aires Triad

[Weitao Zhao · Rating 1 out of 5]

Yeah, I am pretty sure the best way to know 'what really happened in Wuhan' is through a journalist from Sky News who 'happens' to be a Donald Trump apologist. And she did her diligent research by talking to..... Peter Navarro.

It's like you expand and tone down your hysterical rants on Sky News or Fox News a little, to make it a 'well-researched and well-argued' book.

I am not sure I can call this book anything but 'garbage'.

[Lawrence Nah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gist - The book postulates the following:
1) SARS-Cov2's origin is within the confines walls of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) through gain of function research, versus zoonosis (nature) which is the widely accepted narrative.
2) As genetically modified viruses do not need to have a distinguishable signature from naturally occurred ones, no one can disprove the claim that 1) is not possible.
3) CCP covered up 1).
4) The Virus was either 1) an accidental leak or 2) a deliberate move by the CCP.
6) The US is complicit in this, given that the NIH has funded WIV over the years for the purposes of gain of function research.
7) 1 -6 are condemmed and ruled as conspiracy theories.

There, this will save you a good few hours of repetitive chapters harping on points 1-7.

[Reese Copeland · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed the book. It leaves little doubt that China was up to their nuts in this whole thing. Presents a great argument with people who were in China at the time. Some where "shut up" and others simply "disappeared" which is quite reminiscent of Joseph Stalin. The fact that a government can hide something like this, and another current government expresses no interest in getting to the bottom of this, likely due to a conflict of interest with our president, is truly alarming.

[Wolfgang Kasper · Rating 5 out of 5]

Terrific page turner

This reads in long sections like a crime novel. Clearly argued and documented as best as a journalist can when faced with Chinese intransigence, the opportunism of US and other health research organisations and a corrupted WHO. This book inspires hope that eventually the truth comes out. It inspires fear, however, that gain-of-function research on viruses will lead to bio weapons of a potential ten times as disruptive as Covid-19. The book should be a clarion call to Western governments to focus on this new danger.

[Anne · Rating 1 out of 5]

The biggest load of ultra-rightwing tripe written by an ultra-rightwing conspiracy theorist masquerading as a journalist. If you believe delusional,dangerous conspiracy theories, if you think that Nazis were dudded, if you worship Trump then I guess this book is for you. If you like good journalism, honesty, truth, logic and rational thinking then I strongly advise you to give this utter load of tripe a miss.

[B. Cheng · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is just total conspiracy theory tosh, with incredible anti-Chinese sentiment and an undercurrent of flat out racism. The author ignores reality and bends the truth in ways to fit her narrative far worse than anything done by those she attacks like the WHO and Daszak. It's a rush for a "solution" and a party to blame while ignoring the complexity of tracing origins of a virus, but the author is just about her own attempt at a COVID payday.

[Chrissie]

I have struggled with this book. It was not made better by praise for Trump's handling of the pandemic...

I may just not be in the right frame of mind for it at the moment.

[Holly · Rating 3 out of 5]

With hot take nonfiction books like this, you really want to check the author's background. I saw a couple Goodreads reviews mentioning Markson is a far right Trump apologist so I researched her a bit. She is Australian and works for Sky News Australia and The Australian. Rupert Murdoch owns Sky News Australia and The Australian's parent company, News Corp. News Corp also owns the publisher of the book, HarperCollins and the Fox Corporation. I am assuming this means that Shaari Markson has to toe some type of company line at some level. Think your own thoughts on that. I enjoyed reading her book. She raises some important questions; the most interesting to me being the laboratory association hypotheses. A lot of people have a lot of questions, there is no denying that. This weekend on a Face the Nation interview, even Anthony Fauci mentioned how he thinks some future commission should examine the coronavirus once we are through with it.

What Really Happened in Wuhan? is an interesting book that totally has me thinking about many things. As a descendant of Nazi party members, I have not been able to ignore China's whole thing with the Uighur population. Because of this, China was just not so cool in my book before the pandemic. Camps do exist there, and it makes total sense that their government would "disappear" political dissidents to such places...never to be heard from again. That's kind of the point of camps, historically speaking. Even if you believe the virus to be natural, you have to at least consider the human rights abuses taking place in China on a regular basis. What do we think of that? Like I said, the book raises a lot of questions. It's worth a read I would say. Maybe you don't agree with it but it's still worth a read.

[Linda]

These are some excerpts from my article about this book in the Saturday Paper (16-22 October 2021):

'This is a tale of bad decision-making, political infighting and ideological extremism, and that’s just the part that deals with the Trump administration. Then there’s the China story: how China’s ruling Communist Party did its authoritarian best to control the spread of the narrative of Covid-19 along with the virus itself. Sharri Markson’s What Really Happened in Wuhan is the account of one pandemic, two cover-ups and the global hunt for clarity on the virus’s origins...'

She tries hard to convince that the virus leaked from a lab in Wuhan despite acknowledging ' that, as one scientist put it to her: “There are no – absolutely no – scientific data that permit a choice between a natural-accident origin and a laboratory-accident origin.”

'The answer, she contends, lies in the weight of circumstantial evidence. She presents a mountain of it, from unusual traffic patterns to database deletions, rumoured disappearances and mysterious illnesses, and even bats on hats. But the most valuable revelations of What Really Happened in Wuhan are about the politics behind and surrounding the search for the virus’s origins.

She's highly amusing when it comes to the chaos and backstabbing within the Trump White House, and as a hardcore right-wing commentator who has even been on Tucker Carlson's show, she had access to many fellow travellers on that particular clown car. She's much less useful on the subject of China, about which she is over-reliant on some rather unreliable narrators and 'China explainers'.

In the end, she isn't able to tell us much about what really happened in Wuhan at all. There were definitely cover-ups and conspiracies (to some of which she gives oxygen). As for 'classified research' - don't hold your breath for revelations that prove anything much at all. The politics are in. The science is still out.

[Eden Prosper · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is my third book on the origins of COVID-19 this year, following David Quammen’s Breathless (which argues for natural spillover) and Chan and Ridley’s Viral (which explores the lab leak theory). Piecing together these minute clues spread across three perspectives has been fascinating; each author uncovers a different fragment of a highly complex riddle, though the ultimate origin of the virus still remains elusive. It’s a captivating subject, but after this, I am officially COVID-ed out!

What Really Happened in Wuhan traces the early days of the outbreak in Wuhan by scrutinizing claims of government secrecy and censorship by Chinese authorities, and discusses the roles of scientists, international organizations, and governments in shaping public understanding of the virus’s origins. Markson provides interviews, documents, and reporting intended to support the lab-leak hypothesis and to argue that important information was concealed or ignored during the early stages of the pandemic.

Prior to reading this, I knew nothing about Sharri Markson’s political views, however, I did know this was the more controversial of the three books. Her approach was more political and felt heavily biased, clearly reflecting her conservative, China-hawkish worldview. Her perspective on the early pandemic emerged almost immediately, and left no doubt that the book's title is a declaration, not a question.

And, yes, while examining conflicts of interest is valid journalism, using personal motives to dismiss scientific arguments altogether is a classic rhetorical tactic designed to induce skepticism rather than prove a fact, which Markson unapologetically does.

This is not to dismiss her findings entirely; several points were highly concerning and warranted scrutiny; such as the below quote from the chapter “The Cables”:

Disturbingly, [US career diplomat] Switzer and [US Consul-General] Fouss discovered the laboratory [BSL-4 at the WIV] was setting up its very own database identifying all deadly viruses with pandemic potential. It would be its own version of a concept called the Global Virome Project (GVP), the cable stated. "The GVP aims to launch this year as an international collaborative effort to identify within 10 years, virtually all of the planets, viruses that have pandemic or epidemic potential and the ability to jump to humans," the cable read. -page 129

We don’t get to the science-y chapters until nearly half way through the book with the sections covering pre-2020 research at the WIV. These parts closely examine gain-of-function experiments, humanized mice, and the genetic modification of SARS-like coronaviruses via splicing and recombination, which were all subjects covered respectively in Chan/Ridley’s Viral.

Science operates in shades of gray, constantly calculating probabilities and acknowledging limitations in data. Political rhetoric thrives on absolute, high-stakes binaries; good versus evil, truth versus a cover-up, patriots versus a corrupt establishment. Markson framed the origin debate as a definitive battle against a deceptive Chinese Communist Party and a complicit global elite. I felt that this left very little room for the messy, uncertain reality of viral evolution and the genuine scientific difficulty of tracing zoonotic spillovers, which Quammen did a truly phenomenal and beautiful job explaining.

The book also pieced together timelines of events, (researchers falling ill or database removals), and presented them as a seamless chain of custody for a conspiracy. In rigorous science, correlation is not causation; a timeline can suggest a hypothesis, but it does not replace the hard, physical evidence required to prove it. By treating the pandemic primarily as a national security breach and a media cover-up, the book adopted the language of conflict, blame, and geopolitical warfare which is the very definition of political rhetoric.

And so, for me, the primary shortcoming, was its prosecutorial tone. This unearned certainty felt somewhat condescending given the ongoing uncertainty of the evidence. Structurally, the author's emphasis on suspense and dramatic revelation often sidelined nuance and scientific complexity in contrast, to Quammen and Chan/Ridley, who offer a more detached, balanced analysis that aligns closer to objective reportage.

Comparing the three: Quammen is almost the opposite stylistically. Markson writes like a documentary filmmaker, while Quammen writes like a literary naturalist. His prose is patient, elegant, and deeply interested in the process of science itself. While Alina Chan and Matt Ridley occupy more of a middle ground. Their book was more technical and detailed but more tightly focused and argumentative than Quammen’s.

So, my thoughts after finishing this COVID triumvirate…

I’m firmly leaning toward the lab leak theory. What really clinched it for me were Chan and Ridley’s revelations. The Wuhan Institute of Virology BSL-4 lab was built for research and development of highly contagious and infectious diseases, this includes gain-of-function research. Research that was specifically put on pause in 2014 by the Obama Administration because of the risks of causing a pandemic.

Admitting to a laboratory leak carried severe consequences for the scientific community. Because gain-of-function research was already heavily scrutinized and had only recently emerged from a funding moratorium, confirming that a pandemic stemmed from this very work would have dealt a devastating blow to the field and the researchers involved.

Combine that with a history of SARS lab leaks in the past. Among other biosecurity accidents, and it’s a pretty bad look.

Add in the highly unusual genetic code, the precise location of the furin cleavage site and ACE2 receptors, and the massive geographical gap (the Mojiang mine where the natural origin theory is rooted is roughly 1,000 miles away from where the outbreak actually began in Wuhan). Combined with the heavy secrecy, conflicts of interest and cover-ups, the evidence makes the lab leak hypothesis incredibly compelling. That’s not to say natural spillover doesn’t happen and isn’t infinitely more terrifying.

[Elizabeth Stolar · Rating 3 out of 5]

4/7. This is a difficult one to review. I expected to love this book. I thought after I read it I'd thrust it into my husband's hands and exclaim that he must read it right now so we could discuss it. It was recommended to me by someone I trust -- a member of my book club who is an epidemiologist who has written textbooks on epidemiology and is respected in the field. Last year, I heard some scientists on Bill Maher's show explain that they were certain the virus had leaked from a lab. I wondered at the time whether this was plausible -- they raised some interesting points, and I asked this friend about it. At the time, he was very dismissive of the idea, and kind of shook his head and said there was no evidence to support it and it was very unlikely. Then, at our most recent meeting, he said he was reading this book and that we should all read it so we could discuss it in our book club and that he was convinced now that the virus did originate in the Wuhan lab. So, I rushed to purchase it.

I am not a scientist. I will disclose that I'm a proud lefty and I utterly despise Donald Trump. I'm not much inclined to believe anything he says, and will assume that the opposite is usually more likely to be true. But, understanding that he has few original thoughts, and essentially just parrots back recent things he has been told, I didn't place a whole lot of significance to his statements that the virus came from a lab. What I found annoying about his statements was that they were, at the time, focusing on the wrong thing. We were in the midst of an urgent crisis and the focus had to be on containing the virus and lowering the rates of death and hospitalization. Fixing the blame on where it came from or who was most responsible for its origination was a back burner issue, that is important, but the primary focus had to be first putting out the fire.

What did puzzle me, though, was the immense push-back and insistence that the lab theory was nothing but a conspiracy theory by crackpots. As a layperson who has generally paid attention to the news over the last half-century, and has some general understanding of how humans behave. I already know or learned in the last few years several things:

1) China has an authoritarian government whose first priority is making itself look good.
2) Covid-19 is a virus that belongs to a family of viruses known as coronaviruses.
3) There exists in Wuhan, China a lab called the Wuhan Institute of Virology and they specifically study coronaviruses.
4) This outbreak started in Wuhan, China.
5) The Chinese government has not been cooperative or forthcoming with information about the initial outbreak of the virus.

Knowing just these things, I don't see how anyone can rule out the possibility that the Covid-19 virus escaped from the lab. Why such vehemence? Why such an emotional, knee jerk reaction that no, this idea is impossible, and it is nothing more than a crazy conspiracy theory? Part of it may be due to the fact that Trump had stated it as a possibility. But, even a broken clock is right twice a day, so the mere fact that Trump said it doesn't really explain the depth of conviction that this issue elicits.

So, I was eager to read the book. As soon as amazon delivered it, I abandoned my prior book to sit down with this one. The first thing I noticed was that this book does not contain an index. That struck me as odd. I read a lot of nonfiction, and particularly when nonfiction books contain a scientific bent, there is usually an extensive index. Not just an index, but there is also usually an extensive notes section -- often the index and notes sections combined comprise an even higher number of pages than does the narrative of the book. So this was strange. And there was no glossary or index of terms. Or list of important people. Those last three items aren't in every nonfiction book, but they are frequently helpful. In a book like this, which discusses a lot of governmental entitites from multiple countries, and lots of scientific terms, these items would have been immensely helpful in keeping everything clear. A map of China would have been a nice addition, as well. But, I didn't think too much about it and started in.

Almost immediately, I found the narrative flow disrupted because something was not clear. I was shocked by unusual and vague references -- for example, early on there is a discussion of someone who she says went to schools in Pennsylvania and California. Huh? Which schools? I assume, but cannot be certain that she meant this person attended an undergraduate program at one school and a graduate/Ph.D. program at a different school. But, again, which schools? There are lots of universities and colleges in Pennsylvania and in California -- why not state which ones? Was it just sloppiness and laziness, of not wanting to bother to find out? Or, more nefariously, was it obfuscation? I chose to believe it was merely laziness, but that's pretty bad. For all I know the person attended two community colleges. I wondered whether I had an Australian copy of the book and didn't Australians understand the American university system? Do they not understand the different levels of secondary education in the United States? And there were no periods after "Dr." or "Ph.D." Weird. I thought Australian English used the same grammar as American English.

But it continued throughout. There are references to the University of California without specifying which campus. There is a reference to "University of Carolina." What is that? I'm guessing it is UNC-Chapel Hill, but is it? Am I supposed to think it is UNC Chapel Hill but it actually is some school, maybe even a for profit propaganda institute that the author wouldn't mind me thinking is actually UNC Chapel HIll? Is it just a sloppy mistake? And if it is, where TF are the editors? This book was published by Harper Collins. They're a major publishing house. It wasn't self published. Did they fire all their editors? Do they no longer have editors? What's going on here?

Then I see all kinds of Trump apologist stuff. What is this doing in here? Oh, his defunding the WHO was just because he was so upset at their botched investigation and he wanted them to be more above board! [Insert eye roll]. And the constant references to people being afraid to agree with Trump. I can understand that may have played a part, but we really need to dig deeper. But, there are lots of citations to "news" sources like the Daily Mail and the New York Post. That's not helping me here. And I don't know enough about Australian media outlets to know which ones are reputable, but I'm wondering here just who is this author? And then I see she works for News Corp. Fuck! But I'm too far in. But I plunge ahead because maybe she does have some valid sources here. I'm really hoping she's engaging in some real journalism and gives some information that is incontrovertibly true. But her credibility is low, and I'm having trouble weighing just how trustworthy her sources are. Many of them are folks with whom I am not familiar. I don't know if they're upright and honest or if they're corrupt charlatans. It doesn't help that she pulls some tricks that propagandists use -- such as merely quoting large sections of reports, via an apparent cut and paste, and then asserting that those quotes prove something. Many of them are very scientific and as a nonscientist, it's hard for me to assess their validity. In a book of higher journalistic integrity, these reports would be explained and summarized, and their full text and a proper citation would appear in the notes. But the notes in this book are only citations (which is better than nothing) but no actual notes with any sort of explanation. I'm not sure the author herself understands what some of these reports said.

She also engages in some argumentative slight of hand, when she spends a lot of time "proving" things that aren't really relevant. When I came to the section about Anthony Fauci, I kind of braced myself, because I wondered what she was going to say. I was expecting a vitriolic diatribe, but was relieved when there wasn't one. Not that she treats Fauci well -- she still blames him for parts of the inept response and even for the viruses' origins, but this is largely due to NIH funding of organizations that provided funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. But given the numbers she provides, it doesn't strike me that they were particularly large amounts (and actually seem rather low to me). It seems that there were plenty of reasons why this funding might occur. She also tries to play 'gotcha' by showing Chinese military links to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but given China's form of government, I did not find this the least bit surprising. The U.S. military has direct links to labs in the U.S., and that doesn't mean that they're producing bioweapons (although it doesn't mean that they aren't, either). The only real fault I can find here with Dr. Fauci is perhaps too much of a willingness to trust scientists and believe that they are engaging in legitimate research and use the highest methods of safety.

Getting to what is worthwhile about the book -- there does seem to be some solid evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other labs that are in close proximity did not adhere to proper safety protocols. It does appear that there were people who became ill with what sounds like Covid-19 in September and October 2019. There was a spark of activity to enact security measures in October 2019, and a mobile phone blackout and traffic blockade in early Fall, 2019. There are many people who were trying to get information out about the virus who have mysteriously disappeared. There is a whole lot of circumstantial evidence that seems verifiable and coupled with the Chinese government's refusal to cooperate and give full disclosures about the lab, the virus, and early victims of the epidemic sure makes it seem like a lab leak is the more likely origin.

Mike Pompeo is a huge source of info in this book, and unfortunately, I don't find him to be very trustworthy. I want to trust him, but he's a Tea Party member who sacrificed the integrity of the State Department by allowing Trumpism to infect the department, forcing out career officials whose loyalty was not to Trump but to the country. He was a terrible and corrupt leader who forced State department employees to perform personal errands for him and his wife. He was not well qualified for the job, and it's hard for me to accept that perhaps the one area where he did have some intellectual integrity was on the origin of Covid. But, well... maybe. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt here. If he was so adamant on the Chinese cover-up of a bioweapons plan and shoddy enforcement of safety standards, I'm not sure why we haven't been hearing a lot more from him. Surely, he'd have an audience. And as far as the other sources the authors cites, I really don't know anything about them, so I can't assess their trustworthiness. Ordinarily, I would trust sources I read in a nonfiction narrative by an investigative journalist. But given what I know of the other sources, and what I see in terms of the sloppy writing and low journalistic standards, I am left in the odd position of really not knowing whether I can trust what is reported in this book.

Best case scenario is that this author is just not a very good writer and has poor journalistic skills. There are a lot of awkward sentences and self-insertion into the narrative where it doesn't belong. There's too much reliance on cut and paste from other sources, and frequent unexplained acronyms and references to last names of people who I don't remember being introduced. Again, this is where an index or even a list of people (a sort of "cast of characters" for the nonfiction narrative) would have been very helpful and would have made the story she is telling more clear. (And perhaps it is not meant to be clear, as people are afraid to admit that they don't understand something and just go along with it. If you think the problem is that you are too stupid to understand, many folks are reluctant to admit that and that leads to problems -- sometimes big problems, like the Enron implosion and mortgage backed securities meltdown, but those are major tangents.).

In the end, gosh, I want this whole subject to be covered in another book by a more capable writer and more experienced journalist. I am choosing to believe this is an earnest attempt to get information out to the public, and that the failings are unintentional. I hope that the author is simply not a very good writer and just doesn't know a whole lot about many things. Because the alternative would really be a disservice to humanity. We have to know what happened at the Wuhan lab. I hope we find out one day. I hope we get a better book about this subject.

[CK Yau · Rating 5 out of 5]

6-star!!

I had thought doctors would be in a better position to write on pandemic because it's a medical issue. But as the pandemic is unfolded, it's clearly more than a medical issue: the scientists and even the US intelligence community have been infiltrated by CCP, making outrageously groundless statements.

This book is a shocking revelation of what has really happened, supported by Sharri's in-depth researches, meticulous uncoverings and well-documented interviews. She has done a great job of unearthing the truths. Thank you Sharri, deeply appreciate!

[David Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a great book. If the book is even 80% accurate then people should sit up and ask how and why we allowed these facts not point us to the guilty party. Lots of people are covering up here to protect themselves. It would be great to have a second book on the arguments AGAINST the cover up with facts to back up the arguments.

[Acqeel · Rating 4 out of 5]

No matter what your opinions on COVID-19 are, I think this book is every bit worth reading. Excellent investigative journalism and detail into the origins and background of the pandemic, with anecdotes provided by researchers, scientists, and intelligence experts who were at the forefront of it all.

[Clare Snow · Rating 1 out of 5]

I read a review of this book in The Australian newspaper. This newspaper and the publisher of the book, HarperCollins, are owned by News Corp. The author of the book writes for The Australian newspaper and has a show on Sky News Australia (owned by News Corp). The book has a companion documentary shown on Sky News Australia. Do you see a theme?

Markson's sources spoke on and off the record. One on-the-record source said:

"I started hearing stories ... that there were lots of body bags outside of the lab."

I wouldn't say that's evidence for her thesis, but it sounds a lot like the kind of thing a certain (ex) public figure says. Oh, did Markson secure an "exclusive" interview with Donald Trump? Why yes, he's at a loose end these days. The above is Trump's golden sound bite.

With that as an example of Markson's "evidence" for Covid-19 being manufactured by the Wuhan Institute of Virology, I won't believe anything she writes. Fyi Markson, Trump is famously unreliable in the twaddle he spouts.

Since Rupert Murdoch did a 180 on the truth of climate change, he has to look for "truth" elsewhere. Luckily he has journalists like Markson the payroll.

[Michele with Book Nook Buzz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such an eye opening book! EVERYONE should be reading this! Covid affects so many people!

[Richard Dahnke · Rating 5 out of 5]

…….Truth…….

This should be required reading! Not only for the virus but for government and political involvement. Where was our news media?

[Alex Mahon · Rating 3 out of 5]

What is really sad, everyone who has given a terrible rating, they all seem to have on thing in common, they don't like Trump. There is so much more in this book than Trump. That said. I did have a couple of issues with this book, but more along the lines of I hated how the book was written. Way too flowery, when the book reads like a novel, it is hard to take the facts seriously. Secondly and the absolute worst part about this was the audiobook. Seriously I bought it, but couldn't listen to it. The narrator read it like she was reading a steamy romance novel.

All and all, I was a little let down by the book, not the content, I think the exposé was fantastic, just not a fan of the fluff that surrounded it.

[Kim · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is mostly interesting (sometimes tedious) but I learned scientifically that Covid 19 has a high probability of having been made in a lab (genetically modified to be more transmissible to humans) and was not naturally occurring (jumping from bat to human) It’s really quite tragic because that means Covid 19 could have been prevented.

[Chloe · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just read it. It confirmed many thoughts I have had in the last two+ years. Written.b y a non-American author lends credibility and some different viewpoints. Well documented and well annotated. And very scary! The scariest part is its plausibility. No the scariest part of the idea of "gain of function". And that planeload of infected folks who deplaned at LAX and who got the ball rolling. Blaming the bats 1000 miles away worked pretty well - cashing in on our fear of bats. But if you don't bother bats, they don't really hang out like stray dogs and cats. So leave the bats alone. I think this is a worthwhile look at the Pandemic of 2019 amd absolutely a cautionary tale.

[PJ · Rating 2 out of 5]

Read like propaganda for Trump and Morrison. Forced myself to finish it to see if it ever came up with a well supported argument but it relies entirely on shonky, selective data, mostly based on speculation and opinion and conspiracy. What passes for journalism in NewsCorp.

[Jo · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a book all people should read all governments are at fault

[Sajith Kumar · Rating 2 out of 5]

The sudden onslaught and quick global spread of the Covid 19 virus undermined the global society’s safety and security in myriad ways. Millions perished, with thousands not getting basic medical care even in first-world countries. Harsh lockdowns crippled the economies of many nations. The spread of the disease was so fast that large chunks of people suddenly fell ill that imposed a heavy cost on businesses. The virus originated in China but that country tried to hide the occurrence of this mysterious disease in its midst. By the time evasion was out of the question, the virus had already spread to other parts of the world. Even then, it was thought to have originated naturally and diffused through a wet seafood market in Wuhan. China was believed to be complicit in suppressing information on the outbreak for obvious reasons. As a few months went by, scientists were alarmed by the rapid proliferation capacity of the virus. This was found to be due to a protein that appeared to be perfectly designed to attack the human respiratory tract. Doubts arose, because the disease originated near the premises of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) which specializes in studying different corona viruses and was known to be involved in increasing the ferocity of pathogens in order to produce effective vaccines. This book addresses the question whether the virus had accidentally leaked out of the lab due to incompetent safety protocols. Sharri Markson is an Australian journalist and talk show host. She has been at the forefront of breaking news regarding the origins of Covid 19 pandemic since early 2020. She lives in Sydney, Australia.

It must be accepted that China was literally overwhelmed by the early growth rate of patients. Non-disclosure of the true reason for casualties was enforced on health workers who were demanded not to talk to media or to express their opinion on social media platforms. Automated detection systems wiped objectionable content clean within minutes of their posting. People who steadfastly insisted on bringing out the truth were taken into custody and detained. In the meanwhile, dead bodies were piling up, left to decay for days in hospital corridors because Chinese authorities refused to officially record any deaths. The bodies were nothing more than a logistical problem for them. After the initial onslaught was endured, China denied human-to-human transmission of Covid 19 even though it was known to them for a month.

Markson narrates the invidious suppression methods unleashed by the Chinese state to keep the secret under wraps. China shut down domestic travel from Wuhan for medical concerns, but still allowed international flights to leave the city. Neither did it advise foreign governments to be aware of the risk of people returning from Wuhan. News of the virus was first broken by the Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases (ProMED) only on Dec 30, 2019. This is galling as we now know that the outbreak began a full two months back in October of that year. China had to reluctantly confirm the news and switched on a massive cover up operation. All mentions of terms such as ‘unknown Wuhan pneumonia’ or ‘Wuhan seafood market’ were removed from social media. What made this operation so effective was the readiness with which many western scientists and health professionals endorsed the Chinese stand. Scholars who had professional links to virus research in China did not disclose their conflict of interest and acted like impartial arbiters.

The author accuses Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) as the institution from which the virus inadvertently escaped. After some tentative suggestions of biological warfare and deliberate release, she finally concedes that the escape was due to some accident. This institute was comparatively new and boasted of Biosafety Level 4 (BSL 4) protocols in place. The institute was set up with French collaboration and technical support. But after the entity began its operation, the French experts were unceremoniously kicked out. For an institute doing research work on corona viruses, it observed substandard and negligent biosafety practices. US scientists also took part in the research for another reason. Obama administration banned gain-of-function research on viruses. This refers to a genetic technique of multiplying a pathogen’s virility many times by tweaking its genome. So they outsourced their research to China and specifically to WIV, where lax standards applied. The author confirms that US public money was funding dangerous projects at WIV which was having no biosafety standards for handling deadly pathogens. This book also alleges that the Covid virus, which is exquisitely matched to humans, might be a product of this collective effort and had been worked on in a lab using humanized mice.

Markson makes a seething attack on the World Health Organisation (WHO) whose involvement was lukewarm and partisan to China. It accepted the Chinese arguments without demur even when they flew in the face of common logic. Unnerved by procrastination from China, the US, Australia and New Zealand effected a travel ban on China, but WHO rebuffed them, sanctimoniously advising the nations to take decisions that are ‘evidence-based’ and ‘consistent’. This book is a good effort of journalism, but it does not always follow the time-tested methods in science to ascertain the truth of a proposition. An Australian virus researcher named Petrovsky found a lab origin for the Covid virus. However, his paper did not pass the mandatory peer review process which returned the paper as conspiracy theory. The scientific dictum is that if you can’t convince your peers that your theory is at least plausible, it probably isn’t. However, the scholar and the author accuse the scientific community of cover up. Eventually, he released the paper directly to the general public who are not competent to evaluate the veracity of his claims. The author must understand that this is not valid research.

The book is unnecessarily large for the point it wanted to convey. In spite of this big arsenal, the author has not been able to convincingly make out the case for a lab leak and also Chinese military’s involvement in the Wuhan lab for developing deadly biological weapons. The WIV was built, tested and run with input and funding from European and American agencies and it is highly improbable that the institution can do military research without awakening suspicion in them. It may indeed be probable that the virus leaked out of the lab but what Markson offers as evidence in support of the claim is just hyperbole and conjecture. The undue length of the book exhausts the readers, especially because she could have served her purpose with a volume that is half this size.

The book is recommended.

[Megan · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5, rounded up.
I gave it a four at first but realized as I started writing this review that I’m more torn than I’d originally thought.

Okay, so I definitely understand where many of the reviewers are coming from who have been a bit more critical of this book. While the entire COVID issue has been idiotically politicized, it doesn’t exactly help the author much to basically state that Trump handled this all the right way. Come on. You can write a book about the virus’s possible origins, explore both sides, and keep the critique of politicians to a minimum.

But as other reviewers have mentioned, her primary US government sources for this book seem to be Mike Pompeo and Peter Navarro. On top of that, while she doesn’t say he handled it well or handled it badly, it is pretty clear that she’s making excuses for him. He handled it badly. I don’t care what side of the political spectrum you’re on. I don’t care if you think the outbreak was of a natural origin or a lab leak (deliberate or accidental). It’s just idiocy to claim that “no one would listen to Trump because he would just be deemed a racist” or “he took the whole thing very seriously from the beginning.”

That’s certainly news to me. If you don’t want to be deemed a racist, perhaps it would be in your best interest not to call all Mexicans violent criminals and rapists? Not to ban Arabs from entering the country (well, unless of course it’s Saudi Arabia, because then your son-in-law needs access to his pal MBS, the Crown Prince and de facto leader. Yet he accuses BIDEN of nepotism... Biden doesn’t have his kids serving in the administration, I don’t think?). And if he took it all seriously from the beginning, why did he keep lying about the seriousness of it, saying it would go away by spring?! I mean, then the book even goes on to say “many members of the administration agreed that Trump didn’t promote wearing masks because he hated wearing one personally, and thought they made him and leaders around him look weak.”

Now if she had said, “Trump only insisted that face masks weren’t necessary under the advice of Anthony Fauci”, that would be fair - IF, in fact, he was lied to by medical experts initially, and got it wrong. But you simply can’t make a case for that - because whether health officials were against masks at the very beginning or not is irrelevant. Trump refused to support them at ANY stage of his presidency/the pandemic. On the basis that he didn’t “like how they looked on him/they made people look weak.” THAT is making something political and for an incredibly moronic, immature, and vain reason at that.

So while the liberal media and scientists who wanted the liberal media to support their agenda may have been incredibly irresponsible and untruthful in their analyses, to pretend Trump was ever responsible or had control over the situation or didn’t turn it all into an “us vs. them” issue... yeah, that’s just laughable.

Moving on... yes, I certainly took issue with the fact that the author complained about it being overtly political... but then only really talked seriously to right wing government figures. So... complains about how it was too politicized, then proceeds to politicize it. 🤦🏼‍♀️

Also, there were many people she had introduced a first time, and maybe a reminder of that person way later in the book (if they need to be discussed again) is in order, but am I the only one who feels as though she’d mention the same name and state their occupation and credentials not just twice, but sometimes 3, maybe on occasion even 4x? I don’t know. It just seemed extremely repetitive.

What I DID like about the book is that she did at least do some serious research and talk to many renowned scientists who gave their opinion as to why it was more likely to have been a lab leak than of natural origin. She talks extensively about how many people who had either worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology or reported on it as a possible source of the outbreak (scientists, doctors, lawyers, journalists) who went “missing” immediately upon questioning WIV’s possible role in the outbreak.

So yes, there was some compelling new evidence in there. Unfortunately when an author starts with a bias (she’s clearly convinced it’s a lab leak, and seems to believe it was a deliberate one, too) the book will not carry as much weight as if she examines both sides more fairly. Obviously if you favor one side of the argument, then only talk to scientists who support this side (and then discredit the ones who don’t by bringing up conflicts of interest in those not agreeing with “your” side) it’s going to paint a very nice picture that you got it right all along.

And this may be true. There’s certainly compelling evidence to suggest this. Also, after what Japan did with Unit 731 and their bioweapons laboratory research on humans, it’s very reasonable to ascertain that China might begin building similar programs to be certain they were never caught off guard like that again.

It’s just that her argument becomes less persuasive when you realize just how badly she wants it to be true. Who knows if we’ll ever know the truth, 100%? No, it certainly wouldn’t be shocking to find out it was leaked from the lab, accidentally or deliberately, given our adversarial relationship with China and the insane measures they undertake to maintain secrecy and coverup operations. But it would have been much better if it had been more balanced. Give the best arguments for both sides and let readers decide for themselves.

A lot of the book was very science heavy too - something I wasn’t quite expecting. Of course I expected it; after all, you do have to explain science when you’re trying to advance a scientific argument, lol. But again - a lot of it was just repetitive info - and it didn’t always fit the book’s narrative of this being a man made virus. Not that it worked against the argument. It just didn’t point to one side or another.

I wish I’d read the reviews more, to be honest. Would I recommend this book? Maybe. But as I’ve said in my updates, it is not 352 pages, but 402 pages. If you’re a quick reader and really want to know all of the arguments for it being a lab leak, go for it. But if you don’t want to be bogged down with often minute details and one-sided arguments, maybe try looking elsewhere.