Saturday, August 23, 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…

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.

Comet from another solar system approaches Earth

Published 12 August 2025
– By Editorial Staff
The comet has not yet developed a tail, but has a "teardrop-shaped cocoon of dust".
2 minute read

A rare comet is approaching our solar system – but it will pass at a safe distance. In September, it may become visible to amateur telescopes.

The comet was discovered on July 1 this year by the Atlas telescope in Chile and was given the name 3I/Atlas. It is the third interstellar object ever observed passing through our solar system – hence the number three in its name. The two previous objects are 1I/’Oumuamua, discovered in 2017, and 2I/Borisov, discovered in 2019. The letter “I” stands for interstellar.

When NASA photographed the comet with the Hubble telescope on July 21, it was located approximately 447 million kilometers from Earth. Although it had not yet developed a typical tail, observers could see that the process was underway.

“Hubble shows that the comet has a teardrop-shaped cocoon of dust coming off its solid, icy nucleus. Because Hubble was tracking the comet moving along a hyperbolic trajectory, the stationary background stars are streaked in the exposure”, writes NASA.

Unknown origin

The comet is currently traveling through space at a speed of approximately 210,000 kilometers per hour. It will pass closer to Mars than to Earth, but at a safe distance from both planets and therefore poses no threat. Astronomers initially estimated that the icy nucleus was several kilometers in diameter, but Hubble’s observations have refined the estimate to at most 5.6 kilometers – possibly as small as 320 meters.

3I/Atlas is expected to become visible even to amateur telescopes in September, according to CBS News. It will pass closest to the sun in October, but will not be visible from Earth at that time. In early December, it is expected to reappear on the other side of the sun, enabling new observations.

Which solar system the comet originates from is still unknown. As it approaches the sun, it will melt more and release gases that telescopes can analyze – gases that may provide clues about the comet’s origin.

Women’s pelvises becoming narrower

Published 4 August 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Midwives and cesarean sections may have played a role in evolutionary change, researchers suggest.
3 minute read

Over the past century, women’s pelvises have shrunk, according to a study that examined women in three different countries. Researchers see possible explanations in evolutionary development, where increased use of midwives and cesarean sections may have played a role.

In the study, researchers examined a total of 8,866 women in Australia, Poland and Mexico between 1880 and 1980. Researchers from the University of Łódź in Poland and the University of Adelaide in Australia looked at women’s bodies and how these have changed during that time period.

During this century-long period, they found that women’s pelvises in all three countries had shrunk by an average of 4.5 centimeters. At the same time, women’s height had increased by an average of 10 centimeters. Shoulder width had not changed noticeably.

The study is still a so-called preprint, which means it has not yet been reviewed by other researchers, but it nevertheless generates great interest.

The dataset is fantastic, says researcher Lia Betti at University College London to The New Scientist.

More difficult deliveries

With narrower pelvises, vaginal deliveries can become more complicated, while it can also reduce women’s risk of pelvic floor problems after delivery. In all three countries, approximately 40 percent of all births are assisted, meaning cesarean sections, forceps or vacuum extraction are used during deliveries.

The researchers believe that a reduced pelvis may partly be an evolutionary development since pelvic width is hereditary. Previously, birth canals that were too narrow could be life-threatening for both mother and child. But today, many difficult deliveries are resolved surgically or in other ways. In this way, genetic variants are passed on that previously could have led to fatal complications for mother and child. It is also more advantageous for humans to have smaller pelvises to more easily walk on two legs, but at the same time it becomes a dilemma since humans give birth to children with very large heads compared to other species.

Researcher Philipp Mitteroecker at the University of Vienna in Austria has studied women’s pelvises in a 2024 study, which also points out that narrower pelvises for women have more advantages than just being able to walk more easily on two legs. If the pelvis is wider, the load becomes greater and the pressure on the pelvic floor increases. The risk of urinary incontinence and what is called prolapse therefore becomes greater.

The unique midwife

Mitteroecker also points to the development of midwives, that is, the unique aspect that women for hundreds of thousands of years have received help from others during delivery. This may also have contributed to weakening the natural evolutionary pressure to give women wider pelvises.

C-section is, in a way, an extreme form of that, Mitteroecker tells The New Scientist.

At the same time, Betti is skeptical that assisted deliveries and especially cesarean sections – as well as heredity and evolution – alone can explain the increasing narrowing of women’s pelvises. She points out that humans have also become significantly taller during the same period. But this increased height is probably largely due to better nutrition – not genetic changes.

When nutrition is scarce, our developing bodies tend to allocate more nutrients to certain organs, including the brain, at the expense of others. But now we have ample nutrition, so our bodies may have reallocated nutrients. So we end up with different body proportions, she says.

Researchers: Gut bacteria may protect against PFAS

Published 4 August 2025
– By Editorial Staff
2 minute read

Certain gut bacteria can absorb PFAS substances, according to new research from Cambridge University. An increase in these bacteria could contribute to better protection against the harmful effects of so-called forever chemicals.

In the study, which was published in Nature Microbiology, researchers identified a family of bacterial species that can absorb various PFAS molecules. These bacteria are naturally found in the human gut flora.

The researchers then added nine of these human bacteria to mice to “humanize” their microbiome and fed them food containing PFAS substances. They could then observe that the bacteria accumulated the chemicals, which were subsequently excreted in feces.

Furthermore, the researchers discovered that when the mice were exposed to increasing levels of PFAS, the bacteria worked harder and removed a consistent proportion of the toxic substances. Within minutes of exposure, the bacteria absorbed between 25 and 74 percent of PFAS.

“Slow poison”

PFAS are now found virtually everywhere – in everyday products, drinking water, food, and even in human blood. They are extremely difficult to break down, which has earned them the nickname “forever chemicals,” and can cause damage to both the environment and human health.

We’re all being exposed to PFAS through our water and food – these chemicals are so widespread that they’re in all of us., says researcher Dr Anna Lindell at Cambridge University, first author of the study, in a press release and continues:

PFAS were once considered safe, but it’s now clear that they’re not. It’s taken a long time for PFAS to become noticed because at low levels they’re not acutely toxic. But they’re like a slow poison.

Opens possibilities

The study’s results are promising and show for the first time that gut bacteria can help remove PFAS from the body. However, it has not yet been tested on humans, the researchers emphasize.

The goal is now to develop probiotic supplements that increase the amount of these beneficial bacteria in the gut and thereby protect against PFAS effects. The researchers point out that despite the documented health risks, very little is still being done to actively remove PFAS from the body.

The reality is that PFAS are already in the environment and in our bodies, and we need to try and mitigate their impact on our health now. We haven’t found a way to destroy PFAS, but our findings open the possibility of developing ways to get them out of our bodies where they do the most harm, says Dr Indra Roux, co-author of the study.

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.