The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is under renewed scrutiny after internal documents revealed that thousands of viral samples were transferred to the Wuhan Institute of Virology—without a formal agreement in place and with minimal oversight.
The revelations, obtained through a FOIA lawsuit by nonprofit newsroom U.S. Right to Know, show that USAID funded the export of over 11,000 samples from Yunnan Province to Wuhan as part of its $210 million PREDICT program. Yunnan is notable for being home to some of the closest known relatives of the COVID-19 virus, making the sample transfers particularly concerning in light of the global pandemic that later erupted in Wuhan.
Intelligence pointing to a lab leak based on the viral genome (furin cleavage site) was suppressed, ostensibly for being too technical. But how else would you determine the origin of a virus? https://t.co/pA7tx2MF5H pic.twitter.com/5Gj7ugu9xN
— Emily Kopp (@emilyakopp) July 9, 2025
The program, managed by the University of California-Davis, operated globally but lacked a long-term storage strategy after funding gaps in 2019. A sparse internal memo notes that samples collected with the help of Yunnan labs—which were not official PREDICT partners—were simply “sent to, tested, and stored in Wuhan.” No documentation appears to exist to confirm that samples were protected from misuse or that they remain accessible to U.S. investigators.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), the receiving lab, has long faced accusations of poor biosafety practices and connections to China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Its collaboration with EcoHealth Alliance—a USAID contractor later debarred from federal funding—has drawn particular scrutiny from federal investigators and members of Congress.
Today marks the first day of the State Department’s America First foreign assistance rebranding initiative, led by @SecRubio.
Consistent branding will ensure contributions made by the the United States will be immediately recognized as American.
“The redesign is very simple,… pic.twitter.com/HZnbOxU0Sq
— Department of State (@StateDept) July 2, 2025
Among the viral materials shipped to Wuhan were live viruses preserved in virus-transport media (VTM). These allow for long-term storage and later laboratory manipulation, raising flags about potential misuse or loss of sample traceability.
“The USAID $210 million contract for PREDICT should have included terms requiring all samples—or at least copies—to be stored by a U.S. government facility,” said Rutgers molecular biologist Richard Ebright. “The PREDICT grift did none of this.”
Perhaps most troubling, the documents show that two individuals supervising the sample transfers were virologist Ben Hu, who reportedly fell ill in 2019 with COVID-like symptoms, and Peter Daszak, now debarred from federal funding due to failures in oversight related to his work in Wuhan. Neither responded to requests for comment.
In a statement, a senior State Department official acknowledged that investigations into USAID’s past global health funding remain active, and that “under the Trump Administration, we will not be funding these controversial programs.”
USAID was officially shut down this week, following a broader effort to consolidate international aid programs. Its closure has sparked intense debate. While The Lancet projected 14 million potential global deaths due to declining U.S. aid, lawmakers like Sen. Marco Rubio dismissed such forecasts, stating:
“Beyond creating a globe-spanning NGO industrial complex at taxpayer expense, USAID has little to show since the Cold War. Development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened, and anti-American sentiment has only grown.”
What’s now clear is that critical virological materials funded by American taxpayers were exported to a Chinese lab with documented security risks, no oversight, and no enforceable agreement governing their handling. This lack of chain-of-custody documentation—despite the risks—may now hinder efforts to investigate the true origins of COVID-19.
“It’s not rocket science to require a contract and paperwork when transferring lab samples,” said government program integrity expert Reuben Guttman. “In any scientific endeavor, you need confidence in your results. That requires a sound methodology—and proof of it.”
