AMERICAN BIOWARFARE PATHOGEN SARS COV-2, CREATED AT FORT DETRICK, MARYLAND NOW WREAKING HAVOC GLOBALLY

I wanted to add it into the timeline actually. Can't exactly remember why I chose not to.

I have a theory about it though. The Obama Administration knew exactly what was going on and they placed this moratorium for plausible deniability later when the pandemic happened. You know, basically, "We can't be blamed, we told them to stop."

Simple press of a button and half the population will be immobilized without a shot (from a gun) being fired

[link to www.brighteon.com (secure)]

You china dildos are used and abused. We already know parts of our government were involved, but you were the ones that blasted your load on the world...

Now you need to slurp it up, gulp it down, and deal with the consequences of your actions....

Your country is done. A footnote in history.

Thread: Interesting tweet about coronavirus on 11/06.2019

Thread: Interesting tweet about coronavirus on 11/06.2019 (Page 8)

China Wuhan Virus released from Wuhan lab now wreaking havoc globally.

You china dildos are used and abused. We already know parts of our government were involved, but you were the ones that blasted your load on the world...

Now you need to slurp it up, gulp it down, and deal with the consequences of your actions....

Your country is done. A footnote in history.

It's 100% spot on.


[link to www.bitchute.com (secure)]

I guess I lied. I apologize. I'm making another thread. I've been doing research and I beat Yahoo News to the story, so I figured I'd make a complete thread for y'all and pin it for air time.

A chronological timeline I put together of events from as far as 20 years ago leading up to COVID-19. GLP won't allow me to post the blog site I used, but I'll share my research here with you anyway. I think I got all that matters in this timeline.

EDIT: Title edited for people to find later.

The Antidote [Part 1]
September 07, 2021

THE ANTIDOTE
A COVID-19 research project by Jon

Author's Note: I have compiled this information for research. I have removed all bias in order to present only facts from legitimate sources as well as the testimony of doctors and experts. I have done the hard work, now please read and inform yourself before some "fact-checker" dismisses it without you having read it for yourself. You are free to draw your own conclusions about the information provided.



January 28, 2000, Pfizer files patent number 6372224: Canine coronavirus S gene and uses therefore. It's abstract states: The present invention provides the amino acid and nucleotide sequences of a CCV spike gene, and compositions containing one or more fragments of the spike gene and encoded polypeptide for prophylaxis, diagnostic purposes and treatment of CCV infections.

Patent 6372224: [link to patft.uspto.gov (secure)]


In 2003, China experiences SARS outbreak. This virus is later designated SARS-COV.

SARS/WHO: [link to www.cdc.gov (secure)]



September 1, 2003, Ralph Baric was attempting to create an infectious clone of the urbani strain of the SARS coronavirus. By July he had successfully tested — at the Army’s top bio-level three labs in Maryland — his cloning approach, which could lead to a SARS vaccine and less of the deadly disease.

“It is nice to be positioned to respond to a potentially important human problem,” Baric says. His SARS clone will allow other researchers around the world to produce other mutated SARS coronaviruses in an attempt to find one that the human body could tolerate enough to produce antibodies.

Baric is the only U.S. researcher who’s been able to clone any of the coronaviruses, which had eluded laboratory manipulation for many years. He and his students, including Boyd Yount and Kristopher Curtis, developed a method to reproduce multiple viruses, break their genomes into fragments that could be genetically manipulated, and then patch pieces of each into a full-length clone from which molecularly cloned viruses could be recreated in the laboratory.

The global focus on SARS, and the scientific community’s interest in Baric’s work, meant he was able to persuade university officials to convert an unused bio-level three laboratory into a coronavirus lab. And this summer, the National Institutes of Health shoved money Baric’s way to support his efforts to produce the infectious SARS coronavirus clone.

Stalking SARS, Endeavors UNC: [link to endeavors.unc.edu]



April 25, 2004, the CDC, on the authority of the United States government, patents SARS-COV virus.

Coronavirus Isolated from Humans patents:

Patent US7776521B1: [link to patents.google.com (secure)]

Patent US7220852B1: [link to patents.google.com (secure)]



On October 31, 2005, Dr. Shi Zhengli co-authors Bats Are Natural Reservoirs of SARS-Like Coronaviruses.

Bats Are Natural Reservoirs of SARS-Like Coronaviruses: [link to zenodo.org (secure)]



October 26, 2006, Ralph Baric patents US 20060240530A1: Methods and Compositions for Infectious CDNA of SARS Coronavirus. The assignee was The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC (US).

Abstract of patent: The present invention provides a cDNA of a severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) conoravirus, recombinant SARS coronavirus vectors, and SARS coronavirus replicon particles. Also provided are methods of making the compositions of this invention and methods of using the compositions as immunogens and/or vaccines and/or to express heterologous nucleic acids.

Patent US20060240530A1: [link to patentimages.storage.googleapis.com (secure)]



October 9, 2007, Ralph Baric patents US 7279327B2: Methods for Producing Recombinant Coronavirus. The assignee was The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC (US). This patented coronavirus target initially was pigs, but the aim of the work was to create a helper cell for producing an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus.

Methods for Producing Recombinant Coronavirus: [link to patentimages.storage.googleapis.com (secure)]



October 9, 2012, Dr. Anthony Fauci publishes a paper in which he states:

"Putting aside the specter of bioterrorism for the moment, consider this hypothetical scenario: an important gain-of-function experiment involving a virus with serious pandemic potential is performed in a well-regulated, world-class laboratory by experienced investigators, but the information from the experiment is then used by another scientist who does not have the same training and facilities and is not subject to the same regulations. In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic? Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario—however remote—should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?

Scientists working in this field might say—as indeed I have said—that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks."

Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward: [link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]



On May 27th, 2014, a grant from the NIH (NIAID), directed by Tony Fauci, was awarded to ECOHEALTH ALLIANCE, INC., headed by Project Leader and President Peter Daszak. ECOHEALTH ALLIANCE, INC. partnered with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China where they carried out their study. The grant was called Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence. It's public health relevance statement is as follows: "Most emerging human viruses come from wildlife, and these represent a significant threat to global public health and biosecurity - as demonstrated by the SARS coronavirus pandemic of 2002-03 and an ongoing SARS-like epidemic in the Middle East. This project seeks to understand what factors allow animal Coronaviruses to evolve and jump into the human population by studying virus diversity in a critical group of animals (bats), a sites of high risk for emergence (wildlife markets) in an emerging disease hotspot (China)."

Of its three goals, its third goal was to: "Test predictions of CoV inter-species transmission. Predictive models of host range (i.e. emergence potential) will be tested experimentally using reverse genetics, pseudovirus and receptor binding assays, and virus infection experiments across a range of cell cultures from different species and humanized mice."

For six years, ECOHEALTH ALLIANCE, INC., continued to receive yearly payments totaling around $3.75m towards their Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence grant.

In 2019, the grant aims changed to: "This project seeks to understand what factors allow coronaviruses, including close relatives to SARS, to evolve and jump into the human population by studying viral diversity in their animal reservoirs (bats), surveying people that live in high-risk communities in China for evidence of bat-coronavirus infection, and conducting laboratory experiments to analyze and predict which newly-discovered viruses pose the greatest threat to human health."

[If you follow the link and scroll down to History, you can see the yearly grant rewards.]

NIH Grant Reporter Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence: [link to reporter.nih.gov (secure)]



November 9, 2015, a collaboration paper was published written by Dr. Ralph Baric and Dr. Shi Zhengli of the Wuhan Institue of Virology titled: A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence. Key excerpts from the paper include: "Here we examine the disease potential of a SARS-like virus, SHC014-CoV, which is currently circulating in Chinese horseshoe bat populations. Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system, we generated and characterized a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone. The results indicate that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV...On the basis of these findings, we synthetically re-derived an infectious full-length SHC014 recombinant virus and demonstrate robust viral replication both in vitro and in vivo.

.... Therefore, we synthesized the SHC014 spike in the context of the replication-competent, mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone (we hereafter refer to the chimeric CoV as SHC014-MA15) to maximize the opportunity for pathogenesis and vaccine studies in mice.

...To test the ability of the SHC014 spike to mediate infection of the human airway, we examined the sensitivity of the human epithelial airway cell line Calu-3 2B4 to infection and found robust SHC014-MA15 replication, comparable to that of SARS-CoV Urbani. To extend these findings, primary human airway epithelial (HAE) cultures were infected and showed robust replication of both viruses. Together, the data confirm the ability of viruses with the SHC014 spike to infect human airway cells and underscore the potential threat of cross-species transmission of SHC014-CoV.

A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses showspotential for human emergence: [link to www.nature.com (secure)]



November 12, 2015 an article in Nature is published titled Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research which stated this in response to Baric and Zhengli's publication:

Creation of a chimaera

The argument is essentially a rerun of the debate over whether to allow lab research that increases the virulence, ease of spread or host range of dangerous pathogens — what is known as ‘gain-of-function’ research. In October 2014, the US government imposed a moratorium on federal funding of such research on the viruses that cause SARS, influenza and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome, a deadly disease caused by a virus that sporadically jumps from camels to people).

The latest study was already under way before the US moratorium began, and the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) allowed it to proceed while it was under review by the agency, says Ralph Baric, an infectious-disease researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a co-author of the study. The NIH eventually concluded that the work was not so risky as to fall under the moratorium, he says.

But Wain-Hobson disapproves of the study because, he says, it provides little benefit, and reveals little about the risk that the wild SHC014 virus in bats poses to humans.

Other experiments in the study show that the virus in wild bats would need to evolve to pose any threat to humans — a change that may never happen, although it cannot be ruled out. Baric and his team reconstructed the wild virus from its genome sequence and found that it grew poorly in human cell cultures and caused no significant disease in mice.

“The only impact of this work is the creation, in a lab, of a new, non-natural risk,” agrees Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist and biodefence expert at Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey. Both Ebright and Wain-Hobson are long-standing critics of gain-of-function research.

In their paper, the study authors also concede that funders may think twice about allowing such experiments in the future. "Scientific review panels may deem similar studies building chimeric viruses based on circulating strains too risky to pursue," they write, adding that discussion is needed as to "whether these types of chimeric virus studies warrant further investigation versus the inherent risks involved”.

Useful research

But Baric and others say the research did have benefits. The study findings “move this virus from a candidate emerging pathogen to a clear and present danger”, says Peter Daszak, who co-authored the 2013 paper. Daszak is president of the EcoHealth Alliance, an international network of scientists, headquartered in New York City, that samples viruses from animals and people in emerging-diseases hotspots across the globe.

Studies testing hybrid viruses in human cell culture and animal models are limited in what they can say about the threat posed by a wild virus, Daszak agrees. But he argues that they can help indicate which pathogens should be prioritized for further research attention.

Without the experiments, says Baric, the SHC014 virus would still be seen as not a threat. Previously, scientists had believed, on the basis of molecular modelling and other studies, that it should not be able to infect human cells. The latest work shows that the virus has already overcome critical barriers, such as being able to latch onto human receptors and efficiently infect human airway cells, he says. “I don't think you can ignore that.” He plans to do further studies with the virus in non-human primates, which may yield data more relevant to humans.

Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research: [link to www.nature.com (secure)]



February 2016, the book Rapid Medical Countermeasure Response to Infectious Diseases is published with these statements from Dr. Peter Daszak about how to exploit the media to profit from an infectious disease outbreak:

"Investors are interested at the height of a crisis, Daszak said. He pointed out that the share value for Roche Holding, a Swiss global health care company, increased during the H1N1 influenza pandemic. Unfortunately, as discussed, the interest and hype are short lived and focused around the outbreak. Daszak shared a story of a publication in Nature describing SARS in China and work done with colleagues from China's government-funded laboratory. The publication garnered no interest from the Chinese government, he said, and no one they talked with from the live animal markets seemed concerned about the findings. What was surprising for Daszak was how little interest was shown in the article from outside governments and the general public. Based on his experience and understanding, significant attention and interest should have come out of that article, but instead only a few virologists were interested in the paper for academic purposes—again showing the strong influence the media can have on public perception of threats.

Daszak also shared that during the recent Ebola outbreak, EcoHealth Alliance issued a press release and an analysis predicting which countries would be the first to be infected as a result of global air travel. The United States was predicted to be one of the top three countries that would receive infected individuals from countries with EVD, and it was predicted the patient would arrive into Dulles, Boston Logan, Newark, and/or JFK airport. They anticipated a lot of attention and coverage, but instead, again, there was very minimal pickup by the media. Daszak reiterated that, until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process", Daszak stated.

RapidMedical Countermeasure Response to Infectious Diseases: [link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]



January 2017, Dr. Anthony Fauci addresses the Trump Administration during President Trump's first month in office, "I thought I would bring that perspective to the topic today is the issue of pandemic preparedness. If there is one message that I want to leave with you today based on my experience, and you'll see that in a moment, is that there is no question that there will be a challenge to the coming administration in the arena of infectious diseases, both chronic infectious diseases in the sense of already ongoing disease – and we certainly have a large burden of that – but also there will be a surprise outbreak. I hope by the end of my relatively short presentation, you'll understand why history, the history of the last 32 years that I've been the Director of the NIAID, will tell the next administration that there is no doubt in anyone's mind that they will be faced with the challenges their predecessors were faced with."

Youtube video of Fauci: [link to www.youtube.com (secure)]



July 2017, Dr. Moncef M. Slaoui, former head of vaccines department for GlaxoSmithKline and lobbyist for Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), joins Moderna's Board of Directors.

Moderna Press Release: [link to www.modernatx.com (secure)]



September 27, 2017, China opens its first biosafety level 4, also known as a BSL-4 or P4 lab, at the Wuhan Institute for Virology. Biosafety level 4 (BSL-4) is the highest level of biosafety precautions, and is appropriate for work with agents that could easily be aerosol-transmitted within the laboratory and cause severe to fatal disease in humans for which there are no available vaccines or treatments.

Sixth One News (News from China): [link to www.sixthtone.com (secure)]



April 2018, Ralph Baric lectures about profiting off a future pandemic:

"During the Ebola outbreak, there was about a 8-10% drop in the market, but then quickly recovered. I wanted to give you good news, there are winners out there, right? So if you're looking at whatever you want to be prepared to make money in the next pandemic - if that's what you want to do - buy stock in hazmat suit makers and protected clothing or companies that make antiviral drugs of that particular pandemic. You'll probably do pretty well there. Actually mutual funds for pandemic preparedness. You can bet on anything in this country [laughs]. Some products do well [such as in] 1918, including masks. Same thing today. Pandemics really are times of opportunity. I like George RR Martin's quote in Chaos Is A Ladder, uhm, "there's an opportunity for people to have political gain, financial gain, personal gain during times of social upheaval." And that will probably occur, there will be misleading stories on social media, miracle cures that will be touted, conspiracy theories. One thing that is kind of new: you can probably buy and order your own vaccine on the internet for about 200 bucks now. So you can buy your own vaccine and probably vaccinate yourself. If you have a little bit of knowledge and most likely, somebody will come up with a scheme to sell that and is safe...and not...[or rather] in a legal way..."

Video of Ralph Baric making these statements: [link to rumble.com (secure)]



October 18, 2019, The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise in New York, NY. The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences.

Event 201: [link to www.centerforhealthsecurity.org (secure)]



October 17-28, 2019, almost 10,000 international athletes from more than 100 countries traveled to Wuhan, China for the 2019 Military World Games – and many of them later got sick with COVID-19-like symptoms. Some became so ill, that in hindsight, they attributed their illness to a possible COVID infection calling it a "very bad cold".

Washington Post Wuhan 2019: [link to www.washingtonpost.com (secure)]



December 16, 2019, NIH-Moderna Confidential Agreements. On page 105, there is a discussion of a Material Transfer Agreement. The providers are NIAID, NIH, and Moderna. The recipient is The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. It states the providers agree to transfer to the Recipient's Investigator the following Research Material: mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates developed and jointly-owned by NIAID and Moderna.

NIH-Moderna Agreements pg105: [link to www.documentcloud.org (secure)]

Moderna's representative, Andrea Carfi signed this document on December 16th, 2019 as evidenced on page 85.

NIH-Moderna Agreements pg85: [link to www.documentcloud.org (secure)]



On 31 December 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology (unknown cause) detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China. This is considered the official date of the first cases of COVID-19.

WHO China's First Cases: [link to www.who.int (secure)]



In a January 9, 2020 email, Dr. David Morens, Senior Scientific Advisor to Dr. Fauci, emailed Dr. Peter Daszak, President of EcoHealth Alliance, asking for “any inside info on this new coronavirus that isn’t yet in the public domain." In a January 27, 2020 reply, Dr. Daszak emailed Dr. Morens, with the subject line: “Wuhan novel coronavirus – NIAID’s role in bat-origin Covs” and stated: "Happy to have a phone call. re the Wuhan CoV, but just wanted to mention a few things for your information and hopefully to pass on to Tony Fauci for when he’s being interviewed re: the new CoV: NIAID has been funding coronavirus research for the past 5 years...Collaborators include Wuhan Institute of Virology (currently working on the nCoV) and Ralph Baric."

[Author's note: By Dr. Daszak's own admission, this email ties NIAID, Peter Daszak, Tony Fauci, and Ralph Baric together as collaborators with Ecohealth Alliance in partnership with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. WIV is home to China's only public BSL-4 lab located at the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak where they had been for years genetically manipulating coronaviruses to determine if they could make them more transmissible to humans.]

Senator Johnson's Files: [link to www.ronjohnson.senate.gov (secure)]



January 19, 2020, the first case of 2019 novel coronavirus is reported in the United States from a man who had recently returned to Washington State from China.

New England Journal of Medicine: USA's first case: [link to www.nejm.org (secure)]



May 15, 2020, Trump announces Operation Warp Speed (OPWASP) and appoints Moderna Board Director, Dr Moncef M. Slaoui as project leader.

AP News President Trump appoints Dr Slaoui: [link to apnews.com (secure)]



July 1, 2020, This new coronavirus is similar to SARS-CoV, so it was named SARS-CoV-2.

CDC SARS-COV2: [link to www.cdc.gov (secure)]



November 17, 2020, scientists Rossana Segreto and Yuri Deigin conducted studies and determined the genetic structure of SARS-COV2 does not rule out a laboratory origin. SARS-COV2 chimeric structure and furin cleavage site might be the result of genetic manipulation.

The brunt of their paper's conclusion stated: "On the basis of our analysis, an artificial origin of SARS-COV2 is not a baseless conspiracy theory that is to be condemned and researchers have the responsibility to consider all possible causes for SARS-COV2 emergence. The insertion of human-adapted pangolin CoV RBD obtained by cell/animal serial passage and furin cleavage site could arise from site-directed mutagenesis experiments, in a context of evolutionary studies or development of pan-CoV vaccines or drugs. A recent article in Nature affirms that a laboratory origin for SARS-COV2 cannot be ruled out, as researchers could have been infected accidentally, and that gain-of-function experiments resulting in SARS-COV2 could have been performed at WIV. Genetic manipulation of SARS-COV2 may have been carried out in any laboratory in the world with access to the backbone sequence and the necessary equipment and it would not leave any trace. Modern technologies based on synthetic genetics platforms allow the reconstruction of viruses based on their genomic sequence, without the need of a natural isolate."


The genetic structure of SARS-COV2 does not rule out a laboratory origin: [link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]



My original posted thread: [link to www.godlikeproductions.com]

Indeed small dick cock sucker. Damn shills need to burn in hell.

Yuuuuge butt hurt.

Integrating Digital Technologies and Public Health to Fight Covid-19 Pandemic: Key Technologies, Applications, Challenges and Outlook of Digital Healthcare
[link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]

1. Introduction
The global Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread with the increasing number of infection cases [1,2]. Studies have shown that the global pandemic is likely to start a second outbreak in autumn and winter [3,4]. The most severely affected country in the world is the United States, where the death toll caused by COVID-19 accounts for about 20% of the total global death toll from the pandemic [5,6]. According to the statistics, its single-day newly confirmed cases have been hovering at a high level, and the pandemic situation has become increasingly severe [7,8].

China was the first country in the world to experience the COVID-19 pandemic, and also the first country that controlled the pandemic in the shortest time [9,10]. During the first wave of COVID-19, China timely adopted strict non-pharmaceutical intervention measures, which effectively contained the spread of the pandemic and reduced the scale of the outbreak [11,12]. Research shows that without non-pharmacological interventions, by February 19, the 50th day of the outbreak, the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases outside Wuhan will reach 744,000 (±156,000). On February 19, 29,839 confirmed cases were reported outside Wuhan, that is to say, the total number of cases actually occurred was reduced by 96% compared with the situation without intervention measures [13]. In the second wave of COVID-19, small-scale pandemics occurred in some areas in China, such as Beijing [14], Dalian city in northeast China, Qingdao city in east China [15], and Kashgar of Xinjiang in west China [16,17]. Through non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), these localized pandemics were quickly brought under control and hardly affected normal economic activities across China [18].

Existing studies equated China’s successful NPIs to control COVID-19 with obvious measures such as “city lockdown” [19,20,21], and even discuss this issue from a political or ideological perspective, but few systematically and comprehensively investigate the technical factors behind it. In order to make up for the gaps in this research, this work will systematically analyze the technical measures supporting China’s NPIs from the perspective of digital technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and 5G. This research will not only investigate the reasons for China’s successful control of COVID-19, but also discuss the challenges and future trends of these digital technologies. Our findings can provide references for other countries that are fighting against COVID-19 and can also provide theoretical support for preventing the second wave of global pandemic rebound.

The rest is arranged as follows: Section 2 describes the origin and evolution of digital health; Section 3 is the bibliometric analysis of digital medical research; Section 4 provides evidence that digital technologies are applied to combat COVID-19 in China; Section 5 reveals the limitations of digital technologies in fighting against the pandemic; Section 6 discusses the future development trend of digital technologies in the future and puts forward policy implications [MORE AT LINK] [link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]

Integrating Digital Technologies and Public Health to Fight Covid-19 Pandemic: Key Technologies, Applications, Challenges and Outlook of Digital Healthcare
[link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]

1. Introduction
The global Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread with the increasing number of infection cases [1,2]. Studies have shown that the global pandemic is likely to start a second outbreak in autumn and winter [3,4]. The most severely affected country in the world is the United States, where the death toll caused by COVID-19 accounts for about 20% of the total global death toll from the pandemic [5,6]. According to the statistics, its single-day newly confirmed cases have been hovering at a high level, and the pandemic situation has become increasingly severe [7,8].

China was the first country in the world to experience the COVID-19 pandemic, and also the first country that controlled the pandemic in the shortest time [9,10]. During the first wave of COVID-19, China timely adopted strict non-pharmaceutical intervention measures, which effectively contained the spread of the pandemic and reduced the scale of the outbreak [11,12]. Research shows that without non-pharmacological interventions, by February 19, the 50th day of the outbreak, the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases outside Wuhan will reach 744,000 (±156,000). On February 19, 29,839 confirmed cases were reported outside Wuhan, that is to say, the total number of cases actually occurred was reduced by 96% compared with the situation without intervention measures [13]. In the second wave of COVID-19, small-scale pandemics occurred in some areas in China, such as Beijing [14], Dalian city in northeast China, Qingdao city in east China [15], and Kashgar of Xinjiang in west China [16,17]. Through non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), these localized pandemics were quickly brought under control and hardly affected normal economic activities across China [18].

Existing studies equated China’s successful NPIs to control COVID-19 with obvious measures such as “city lockdown” [19,20,21], and even discuss this issue from a political or ideological perspective, but few systematically and comprehensively investigate the technical factors behind it. In order to make up for the gaps in this research, this work will systematically analyze the technical measures supporting China’s NPIs from the perspective of digital technologies such as big data, artificial intelligence, and 5G. This research will not only investigate the reasons for China’s successful control of COVID-19, but also discuss the challenges and future trends of these digital technologies. Our findings can provide references for other countries that are fighting against COVID-19 and can also provide theoretical support for preventing the second wave of global pandemic rebound.

The rest is arranged as follows: Section 2 describes the origin and evolution of digital health; Section 3 is the bibliometric analysis of digital medical research; Section 4 provides evidence that digital technologies are applied to combat COVID-19 in China; Section 5 reveals the limitations of digital technologies in fighting against the pandemic; Section 6 discusses the future development trend of digital technologies in the future and puts forward policy implications [MORE AT LINK] [link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (secure)]