US scientists say non-peer reviewed research backs nearby wet market as COVID source, not Wuhan lab

Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE

Another day, another COVID study …

Last Monday, researchers formally published a peer-reviewed study showing that some of the genetic material found in COVID-19 perfectly matches the genetic material in a nucleotide sequence patented by Moderna six years ago.

The researchers concluded that such a match “may occur randomly but other possibilities must be considered.” To proponents of the lab leak theory, the study’s findings seemed like more evidence that COVID-19 was man-made.

This study received virtually zero mainstream media attention.

Exactly five days later, another set of researchers “released a pair of extensive studies that point to a market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the coronavirus pandemic,” as eagerly reported by The New York Times.

Unlike the previous study, this “pair” of studies has received widespread media attention. This despite the new “pair” of studies thus far being neither peer-reviewed nor formally published in any journal of note.

“The two reports have not yet been published in a scientific journal that would require undergoing peer review,” the Times admits.

This fact has led quite a few individuals to wonder why the Times chose to even report on these studies in the first place:

Despite these issues, the left-wing paper nevertheless eagerly reports that the researchers have “concluded that the coronavirus was very likely present in live mammals sold in the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in late 2019 and suggested that the virus twice spilled over into people working or shopping there.”

“They said they found no support for an alternate theory that the coronavirus escaped from a laboratory in Wuhan,” according to the Times.

The paper even obtained a quote from Michael Worobey, an evolutionary biologist who it turns out co-authored both studies.

“When you look at all of the evidence together, it’s an extraordinarily clear picture that the pandemic started at the Huanan market,” Worobey told the Times.

These findings have been met with a great deal of skepticism, including even from the Times’ own notoriously left-wing readers, stunningly enough:

(Source: The New York Times)

The same sentiment can be seen on Twitter.


What the last Twitter use seen above wrote is true. Last week the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ostensibly the most credible scientific agency in the United States, admitted to having covered up some of the truth about COVID.

A CDC spokesperson said that the agency had been concerned that the data might be misused to breed distrust against the COVID vaccines. But by getting caught withholding data, the CDC itself managed to breed the most distrust.

Similarly, critics say that the Times’ decision to uncritically report on the latest two studies, all while ignoring last week’s study, has done the same thing …


( Note: Olympic Media is helping truckers meet their financial needs)


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Vivek Saxena


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.


Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Latest Articles