Wednesday, October 8, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Researcher accused of being “bought” by Fauci

Published 22 March 2023
– By Editorial Staff
Anthony Fauci and Kristian Andersen.
4 minute read

Early on during the covid crisis, researcher Kristian Andersen stuck his neck out when he pointed out that the coronavirus did not seem to be of natural origin – but rather gave the impression of being artificially created.

However, after talks with the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Anthony Fauci, the scientist quickly came out and condemned speculation about human involvement as “conspiracy theories”, leading Andersen to be accused of being “bought out” – partly because government funding for his research increased after he changed his mind on the issue.

Kristian Andersen, a researcher and professor in the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at the Scripps Research Institute in San Diego, emailed US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Anthony Fauci on the 31st of January 2020, warning that there were many indications that the virus did not come from any animal at all.

“You have to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) appear to be engineered… Eddie (Holmes), Bob (Garry), Mike (Ferguson) and myself all believe that the genome is inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory,” he wrote at the time.

The next day, Fauci organized a conference call with 11 virologists from across the world – including Kristian Andersen, who less than 24 hours earlier had sent the email stating that the virus appeared to be engineered. However, Fauci’s boss, health department head Robert Kadlec, was not invited to the conference.

It is not known what was said during the conversation, but four days after the conference took place, Mr Andersen suddenly made a 180-degree turn and went public to warn against conspiracy theories about man-made covid – despite the fact that he himself had just warned about the same thing.

“The main conspiracy theories circulating at the moment are that the virus is somehow engineered … and that is demonstrably false,” Mr Andersen declared at the time.

In four days, Andersen changed his mind about the origin of the virus. Photo: Prachatai/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Financial motives?

A few weeks later, Kristian Andersen and three other participants from the video conference with Fauci authored a scientific article published in Nature Medicine, claiming, among other things, that “our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory product”. According to The Federalist, Andersen also offered Fauci to edit the article before publication.

In their 2021 article, The Federalist points out that the information from Fauci’s email indicates that he was aware of scientists’ concerns about man-made covid as early as 1 February 2020. Yet he chose to keep this information secret from his superiors and the American people, people who speculated that the virus had leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan were dismissed as conspiracy theorists and were subjected to character assassination.

In an interview with the New York Times, Mr Andersen explains his reversal by saying that his internal warnings to Mr Fauci were based on “limited data” and “preliminary analyses” – which he soon revised as more information became available.

However, a report by researcher and epidemiologist Andrew G Huff – former vice-president of the EcoHealth Alliance, a New York-based group that has worked closely with the notorious Wuhan lab – suggests that it may have been purely financial motives that caused Andersen to change his mind on the issue.

“Kristian Andersen, who in late January wrote to Fauci expressing his concern that SARS-Co-V-2 contained sequences that appeared to be man-made, led a group that published an article in Nature on 17 March 2020, supporting the theory that the virus is transmitted from animals to humans. Following this, Andersen received a generous grant from the National Institutes of Health. “At this point, we have no way of knowing whether this was a form of quid pro quo, but it can at least be concluded that this does not pass the ‘smell test'”, he writes.

He emphasizes that the National Institutes of Health, which funds medical research in the US, “dramatically increased” its funding for Andersen’s research after he changed his mind on the origin of COVID-19 and started arguing for a natural origin instead of an artificial one.

Kristian Andersen’s funding, according to Huff.

Renewed attention

Huff’s report was released in September 2022 – but the issue of whether there may have been financial incentives for scientists to revise their position on the origin of the virus has been widely publicised again. This is due to the fact that an account belonging to the Libertarian Party in the US has drawn attention to the issue and refers to documents that support the theory.

The man on the left is Kristian Andersen, a British scientist who emailed Fauci 1/31/20, saying the virus looks lab-made. The man on the right is Kristian Andersen, the guy who Fauci called on 2/1/20 and ordered to publicly say it wasn’t lab-made, which he did. Fauci then gave… https://t.co/UDzIhNb37k pic.twitter.com/LY7ttS23kJ

— Mises Caucus (@LPMisesCaucus) March 1, 2023

Many interpret these findings as an example of the fact that researchers are primarily loyal to their financiers – and that Fauci’s behaviour is a further indication that the US was directly involved in the development of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. At the same time, Huff’s compilation is also questioned as sloppy, pointing out that Andersen is presented as a British researcher – even though he is Danish, and that it cannot currently be proven that his change of opinion is a result of increased funding.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Study: Divorce harms young children’s development

Published 2 October 2025
– By Editorial Staff
According to a Chinese study, children of divorced parents risk falling behind in a range of different developmental areas.
2 minute read

Children whose parents divorce risk falling behind in their development – particularly in social skills, reading ability and physical health. The results come from a major study that followed 62,000 preschool children and compared children from divorced and intact families.

The research, published in the journal BMJ Paediatrics Open, is one of the largest studies conducted on younger children and shows that divorce can slow young children’s development in several areas.

Divorces don’t just affect adults but also have a significant impact on children. However, previous research has often been based on small groups of voluntary participants and produced conflicting results. Additionally, studies have primarily focused on older children, which has left knowledge about how the youngest children are affected inadequate.

The new study fills this knowledge gap by examining children between 3 and 5 years old – a critical age period where development progresses particularly rapidly and where important foundations are laid for the child’s future social, emotional and cognitive abilities.

The researchers used the so-called Human Capability Index, which measures children’s development across nine areas: reading, speech, writing, learning, persistence, language comprehension, cultural knowledge, social and emotional abilities, and physical health.

Worse at almost everything

Of the more than 62,000 children in the study, 2,409 (just under 4 percent) had parents who had divorced. When researchers compared these children with children from intact families, the differences became clear: children whose parents had divorced scored lower on almost all developmental areas.

The largest differences were in social and emotional skills, physical health and reading ability, while medium-sized differences were seen for verbal communication, persistence, language comprehension and cultural knowledge. The least impact was noticed in the areas of writing and general learning ability.

Overall, the study showed that children from divorced families had a greater risk of falling behind in their development compared to peers whose parents still lived together.

The researchers emphasize that the results highlight the need for more research on how society can support this vulnerable group. Parents, relatives and friends, healthcare services and society as a whole need to find better ways to help children through divorce processes so that their development is not negatively affected.

AI-created viruses can kill bacteria

The future of AI

Published 28 September 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Bacteriophages attach to bacteria, inject their DNA and multiply until the bacteria burst. AI can now design new variants from scratch.
2 minute read

Researchers in California have used artificial intelligence to design viruses that can reproduce and kill bacteria.

The breakthrough opens up new medical treatments – but also risks becoming a dangerous weapon in the wrong hands.

Researchers at Stanford University and the Arc Institute have for the first time succeeded in creating complete genomes using artificial intelligence. Their AI-designed viruses can actually reproduce and kill bacteria.

— That was pretty striking, just actually seeing, like, this AI-generated sphere, says Brian Hie, who leads the laboratory at the Arc Institute where the work was carried out.

The team used an AI called Evo, trained on genomes from around 2 million bacteriophages (viruses that attack bacteria). They chose to work with phiX174, a simple virus with just 11 genes and 5,000 DNA letters.

16 of 302 worked

The researchers let the AI design 302 different genome variants, which were then chemically manufactured as DNA strands. When they mixed these with E. coli bacteria, they achieved a breakthrough: 16 of the designs worked and created viruses that could reproduce.

— They saw viruses with new genes, with truncated genes, and even different gene orders and arrangements, says Jef Boeke, biologist at NYU Langone Health who was given advance access to the study.

Since viruses are not considered living organisms, this is not yet truly AI-designed life – but it is an important first step toward that technology.

Major medical potential

The technology has great potential in medicine. “Most gene therapy uses viruses to shuttle genes into patients’ bodies, and AI might develop more effective ones”, explains Samuel King, the student who led the project.

Doctors have previously tried so-called phage therapy to combat serious bacterial infections, something that AI-designed viruses could improve.

“Grave concerns”

But the technology’s development also raises strong concerns. The researchers have deliberately avoided training their AI on viruses that infect humans, but others could misuse the method.

— One area where I urge extreme caution is any viral enhancement research, especially when it’s random so you don’t know what you are getting. If someone did this with smallpox or anthrax, I would have grave concerns, warns J. Craig Venter, a pioneer in synthetic biology.

Venter believes that the technology is fundamentally based on the same trial-and-error principle that he himself used two decades ago, just much faster.

Future challenges

Creating larger organisms is significantly more difficult. E. coli has a thousand times more DNA than phiX174. “The complexity would rocket from staggering to way way more than the number of subatomic particles in the universe”. explains Boeke.

Jason Kelly, CEO of biotech company Ginkgo Bioworks, believes that automated laboratories where AI continuously improves its genome designs will be needed for future breakthroughs.

— This would be a nation-scale scientific milestone, as cells are the building blocks of all life. The US should make sure we get to it first, says Kelly.

Sweden first to use psychedelics to treat anorexia

Published 22 September 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Psilocybin has been used successfully on patients with depression and PTSD. The hope is that it will also help patients with anorexia.
2 minute read

Researchers at Lund University in Sweden are now starting the world’s first study testing psychedelic drugs on young patients with anorexia nervosa. The pilot study includes 40 patients between 16 and 35 years old and begins this autumn.

Anorexia nervosa is one of the psychiatric diagnoses with the highest mortality rate. Each year, approximately 8,300 young people are diagnosed with eating disorders in Sweden, where anorexia nervosa is most common among girls aged 11–17 years. The disease is characterized by restricted food intake, intense fear of weight gain, and distorted body perception.

— Anorexia has a hereditary component and also occurs more frequently in people who have autism or obsessive-compulsive disorder. There are two clear age peaks for onset. The first is at 14 years of age and the next comes around 18 years, says Pouya Movahed Rad, associate professor at Lund University and senior physician at Psychiatry Skåne.

The study is primarily a safety study where researchers will evaluate risks and side effects of psilocybin compared to conventional treatment. Participants, who are recruited from throughout Region Skåne (the southernmost region of Sweden), must have had at least one relapse in their illness and will receive psilocybin on two occasions during carefully monitored sessions.

— Anorexia is a serious disease and there is no existing pharmacological treatment for the condition. It is therefore important to try new methods that can target the disease’s core symptoms, without solely focusing on weight, says Olea Schau Rybäck, doctoral student at Lund University and resident physician in psychiatry at Skåne.

“The brain is fantastic”

Psilocybin is a psychedelic substance found in certain mushrooms. Previous research on depression and PTSD has shown that the substance can break rigid thought and behavioral patterns. The hypothesis is that psilocybin can affect brain synaptic plasticity also in anorexia patients.

— The brain is fantastic and unpredictable. Psilocybin can open up a therapeutic window to create new functional patterns. If the treatment is successful, I see no obstacle to psychedelic drugs becoming an established treatment for anorexia nervosa in the future, says Pouya Movahed Rad.

Results from the study, which is funded by Norrsken Mind (a Swedish venture capital firm), are expected to be ready by the end of 2027. If researchers find promising results, a larger study focusing on treatment effects is planned.

New mini-moon discovered orbiting Uranus

Published 21 August 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Uranus captured in 2023 by the James Webb Space Telescope. Illustration of some of Uranus' moons as well as the new one.
1 minute read

NASA has discovered a new mini-moon orbiting the planet Uranus. The moon is only 10 kilometers wide.

The new moon was discovered in February using the James Webb Space Telescope. Researchers believe the moon previously went unnoticed due to its small size and faint brightness – so much so that even the Voyager 2 spacecraft missed it when it passed by Uranus 40 years ago.

This becomes the 29th moon discovered around Uranus, and it’s not the first time a smaller moon has been found. About half of the planet’s moons are small, which is unusual for a planet.

No other planet has as many small inner moons as Uranus, and their complex inter-relationships with the rings hint at a chaotic history that blurs the boundary between a ring system and a system of moons, says Matthew Tiscareno from the SETI Institute in Mountain View, California, who is part of NASA’s research team and continues:

Moreover, the new moon is smaller and much fainter than the smallest of the previously known inner moons, making it likely that even more complexity remains to be discovered.

May receive name from Shakespeare

The moon has not yet been given a name, but all other moons are named after characters from Shakespeare and Alexander Pope, such as Miranda, Ariel, Umbriel, Titania and Oberon.

Before it can receive an official name, the discovery must be approved by the International Astronomical Union (IAU), which is the leading authority for assigning official names and designations to astronomical objects.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.