Did Dr. Fauci Actually Help to Fund the Chinese Virus Outbreak, aka Covid?
Jan 28, 2021 05:39:40 #
Is this possibly why the government other than Trump and a few of his supporters have been so mum on the destruction that China released onto the world? Because our own government was complicit in funding dangerous and unnecessary research?
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741
Dr. Anthony Fauci is an adviser to President Donald Trump and something of an American folk hero for his steady, calm leadership during the pandemic crisis. At least one poll shows that Americans trust Fauci more than Trump on the coronavirus pandemic—and few scientists are portrayed on TV by Brad Pitt.
But just last year, the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the organization led by Dr. Fauci, funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.
In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million.
Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.
SARS-CoV-2 , the virus now causing a global pandemic, is believed to have originated in bats. U.S. intelligence, after originally asserting that the coronavirus had occurred naturally, conceded last month that the pandemic may have originated in a leak from the Wuhan lab. (At this point most scientists say it's possible—but not likely—that the pandemic virus was engineered or manipulated.)
Dr. Fauci did not respond to Newsweek's requests for comment. NIH responded with a statement that said in part: "Most emerging human viruses come from wildlife, and these represent a significant threat to public health and biosecurity in the US and globally, as demonstrated by the SARS epidemic of 2002-03, and the current COVID-19 pandemic.... scientific research indicates that there is no evidence that suggests the virus was created in a laboratory."
The Controversial Experiments and Wuhan Lab Suspected of Starting PandemicREAD MORE The Controversial Experiments and Wuhan Lab Suspected of Starting Pandemic
The NIH research consisted of two parts. The first part began in 2014 and involved surveillance of bat coronaviruses, and had a budget of $3.7 million. The program funded Shi Zheng-Li, a virologist at the Wuhan lab, and other researchers to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses in the wild. This part of the project was completed in 2019.
A second phase of the project, beginning that year, included additional surveillance work but also gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit research group, under the direction of President Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. NIH canceled the project just this past Friday, April 24th, Politico reported. Daszak did not immediately respond to Newsweek requests for comment.
The project proposal states: "We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential."
In layman's terms, "spillover potential" refers to the ability of a virus to jump from animals to humans, which requires that the virus be able to attach to receptors in the cells of humans. SARS-CoV-2, for instance, is adept at binding to the ACE2 receptor in human lungs and other organs.
According to Richard Ebright, an infectious disease expert at Rutgers University, the project description refers to experiments that would enhance the ability of bat coronavirus to infect human cells and laboratory animals using techniques of genetic engineering. In the wake of the pandemic, that is a noteworthy detail.
Ebright, along with many other scientists, has been a vocal opponent of gain-of-function research because of the risk it presents of creating a pandemic through accidental release from a lab.
Dr. Fauci is renowned for his work on the HIV/AIDS crisis in the 1990s. Born in Brooklyn, he graduated first in his class from Cornell University Medical College in 1966. As head of NIAID since 1984, he has served as an adviser to every U.S. president since Ronald Reagan.
A decade ago, during a controversy over gain-of-function research on bird-flu viruses, Dr. Fauci played an important role in promoting the work. He argued that the research was worth the risk it entailed because it enables scientists to make preparations, such as investigating possible anti-viral medications, that could be useful if and when a pandemic occurred.
The work in question was a type of gain-of-function research that involved taking wild viruses and passing them through live animals until they mutate into a form that could pose a pandemic threat. Scientists used it to take a virus that was poorly transmitted among humans and make it into one that was highly transmissible—a hallmark of a pandemic virus. This work was done by infecting a series of ferrets, allowing the virus to mutate until a ferret that hadn't been deliberately infected contracted the disease.
The work entailed risks that worried even seasoned researchers. More than 200 scientists called for the work to be halted. The problem, they said, is that it increased the likelihood that a pandemic would occur through a laboratory accident.
Dr. Fauci defended the work. "[D]etermining the molecular Achilles' heel of these viruses can allow scientists to identify novel antiviral drug targets that could be used to prevent infection in those at risk or to better treat those who become infected," wrote Fauci and two co-authors in the Washington Post on December 30, 2011. "Decades of experience tells us that disseminating information gained through biomedical research to legitimate scientists and health officials provides a critical foundation for generating appropriate countermeasures and, ultimately, protecting the public health."
Nevertheless, in 2014, under pressure from the Obama administration, the National of Institutes of Health instituted a moratorium on the work, suspending 21 studies.
Three years later, though—in December 2017—the NIH ended the moratorium and the second phase of the NIAID project, which included the gain-of-function research, began. The NIH established a framework for determining how the research would go forward: scientists have to get approval from a panel of experts, who would decide whether the risks were justified.
The reviews were indeed conducted—but in secret, for which the NIH has drawn criticism. In early 2019, after a reporter for Science magazine discovered that the NIH had approved two influenza research projects that used gain of function methods, scientists who oppose this kind of research excoriated the NIH in an editorial in the Washington Post.
"We have serious doubts about whether these experiments should be conducted at all," wrote Tom Inglesby of Johns Hopkins University and Marc Lipsitch of Harvard. "[W]ith deliberations kept behind closed doors, none of us will have the opportunity to understand how the government arrived at these decisions or to judge the rigor and integrity of that process."
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741
Dr. Anthony Fauci is an adviser to President Donald Trump and something of an American folk hero for his steady, calm leadership during the pandemic crisis. At least one poll shows that Americans trust Fauci more than Trump on the coronavirus pandemic—and few scientists are portrayed on TV by Brad Pitt.
But just last year, the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the organization led by Dr. Fauci, funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.
In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million.
Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.
SARS-CoV-2 , the virus now causing a global pandemic, is believed to have originated in bats. U.S. intelligence, after originally asserting that the coronavirus had occurred naturally, conceded last month that the pandemic may have originated in a leak from the Wuhan lab. (At this point most scientists say it's possible—but not likely—that the pandemic virus was engineered or manipulated.)
Dr. Fauci did not respond to Newsweek's requests for comment. NIH responded with a statement that said in part: "Most emerging human viruses come from wildlife, and these represent a significant threat to public health and biosecurity in the US and globally, as demonstrated by the SARS epidemic of 2002-03, and the current COVID-19 pandemic.... scientific research indicates that there is no evidence that suggests the virus was created in a laboratory."
The Controversial Experiments and Wuhan Lab Suspected of Starting PandemicREAD MORE The Controversial Experiments and Wuhan Lab Suspected of Starting Pandemic
The NIH research consisted of two parts. The first part began in 2014 and involved surveillance of bat coronaviruses, and had a budget of $3.7 million. The program funded Shi Zheng-Li, a virologist at the Wuhan lab, and other researchers to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses in the wild. This part of the project was completed in 2019.
A second phase of the project, beginning that year, included additional surveillance work but also gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit research group, under the direction of President Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. NIH canceled the project just this past Friday, April 24th, Politico reported. Daszak did not immediately respond to Newsweek requests for comment.
The project proposal states: "We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential."
In layman's terms, "spillover potential" refers to the ability of a virus to jump from animals to humans, which requires that the virus be able to attach to receptors in the cells of humans. SARS-CoV-2, for instance, is adept at binding to the ACE2 receptor in human lungs and other organs.
According to Richard Ebright, an infectious disease expert at Rutgers University, the project description refers to experiments that would enhance the ability of bat coronavirus to infect human cells and laboratory animals using techniques of genetic engineering. In the wake of the pandemic, that is a noteworthy detail.
Ebright, along with many other scientists, has been a vocal opponent of gain-of-function research because of the risk it presents of creating a pandemic through accidental release from a lab.
Dr. Fauci is renowned for his work on the HIV/AIDS crisis in the 1990s. Born in Brooklyn, he graduated first in his class from Cornell University Medical College in 1966. As head of NIAID since 1984, he has served as an adviser to every U.S. president since Ronald Reagan.
A decade ago, during a controversy over gain-of-function research on bird-flu viruses, Dr. Fauci played an important role in promoting the work. He argued that the research was worth the risk it entailed because it enables scientists to make preparations, such as investigating possible anti-viral medications, that could be useful if and when a pandemic occurred.
The work in question was a type of gain-of-function research that involved taking wild viruses and passing them through live animals until they mutate into a form that could pose a pandemic threat. Scientists used it to take a virus that was poorly transmitted among humans and make it into one that was highly transmissible—a hallmark of a pandemic virus. This work was done by infecting a series of ferrets, allowing the virus to mutate until a ferret that hadn't been deliberately infected contracted the disease.
The work entailed risks that worried even seasoned researchers. More than 200 scientists called for the work to be halted. The problem, they said, is that it increased the likelihood that a pandemic would occur through a laboratory accident.
Dr. Fauci defended the work. "[D]etermining the molecular Achilles' heel of these viruses can allow scientists to identify novel antiviral drug targets that could be used to prevent infection in those at risk or to better treat those who become infected," wrote Fauci and two co-authors in the Washington Post on December 30, 2011. "Decades of experience tells us that disseminating information gained through biomedical research to legitimate scientists and health officials provides a critical foundation for generating appropriate countermeasures and, ultimately, protecting the public health."
Nevertheless, in 2014, under pressure from the Obama administration, the National of Institutes of Health instituted a moratorium on the work, suspending 21 studies.
Three years later, though—in December 2017—the NIH ended the moratorium and the second phase of the NIAID project, which included the gain-of-function research, began. The NIH established a framework for determining how the research would go forward: scientists have to get approval from a panel of experts, who would decide whether the risks were justified.
The reviews were indeed conducted—but in secret, for which the NIH has drawn criticism. In early 2019, after a reporter for Science magazine discovered that the NIH had approved two influenza research projects that used gain of function methods, scientists who oppose this kind of research excoriated the NIH in an editorial in the Washington Post.
"We have serious doubts about whether these experiments should be conducted at all," wrote Tom Inglesby of Johns Hopkins University and Marc Lipsitch of Harvard. "[W]ith deliberations kept behind closed doors, none of us will have the opportunity to understand how the government arrived at these decisions or to judge the rigor and integrity of that process."
Jan 28, 2021 06:19:40 #
Humm, from Blurryeyed's essay above, "Trump and a few of his supporters have been so mum on the destruction that China released onto the world?"
Well, Blurryeyed, combine that turn-their-back silence with the "let it rage" attitude of Trump/Republicans and the known susceptibility of those who the Republicans deem the "undesirable non-white" people to the SARS-COVID-2 [COVID-19 disease] virus, then it may be that they, the white supremacists' Republican party, purposely were conducting a purge of the population.
As an added benefit, the purge will result in a 65+ population being 15% of the deaths, saving 6+ Trillion dollars a year in Social Security and Medicare "socialistic" costs. Those monies are needed to fund the 1% who will in turn fund the Republican party elections.
Blurryeyed, your essay is filled with truth, half-truth, and untruths, the linkage is well done and to your credit, most will not be able to separate and recognize that the wolf is not Red Ridinghood's grandmother. You, Blurryeyed, are a skilled propagandist, congratulations. Many dictatorships to be would be proud of having you on their team.
Well, Blurryeyed, combine that turn-their-back silence with the "let it rage" attitude of Trump/Republicans and the known susceptibility of those who the Republicans deem the "undesirable non-white" people to the SARS-COVID-2 [COVID-19 disease] virus, then it may be that they, the white supremacists' Republican party, purposely were conducting a purge of the population.
As an added benefit, the purge will result in a 65+ population being 15% of the deaths, saving 6+ Trillion dollars a year in Social Security and Medicare "socialistic" costs. Those monies are needed to fund the 1% who will in turn fund the Republican party elections.
Blurryeyed, your essay is filled with truth, half-truth, and untruths, the linkage is well done and to your credit, most will not be able to separate and recognize that the wolf is not Red Ridinghood's grandmother. You, Blurryeyed, are a skilled propagandist, congratulations. Many dictatorships to be would be proud of having you on their team.
Jan 28, 2021 06:24:39 #
Wow, really showing your true colors.
Besides this being old news, hyping it up is beneath you. Well, it used to be.
Besides this being old news, hyping it up is beneath you. Well, it used to be.
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.
Jan 28, 2021 06:38:41 #
DaveO wrote:
Wow, really showing your true colors.
Besides this being old news, hyping it up is beneath you. Well, it used to be.
Besides this being old news, hyping it up is beneath you. Well, it used to be.
Not so much, what was the point of this research, had the American people been asked if we want to fund Chinese labs doing such potentially dangerous research what do you imagine the response would have been. Do Fauci and our government not share in responsibility for the Covid pandemic?
Jan 28, 2021 06:45:04 #
Jan 28, 2021 06:47:53 #
Reddog wrote:
Poor blurry! LOL😩
Yup, just keep drinking the kool-aid dog, of course those in power are smarter than you, how can anyone ever question the wisdom of their ways, even when they result in a world-wide pandemic.... I guess that other scientific leaders who stood in opposition of the research are also worthy of your scorn......
Don't feel sorry for me, I still have the ability of independent thought which obviously is more than can be said of you.
Jan 28, 2021 08:36:13 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
Not so much, what was the point of this research, had the American people been asked if we want to fund Chinese labs doing such potentially dangerous research what do you imagine the response would have been. Do Fauci and our government not share in responsibility for the Covid pandemic?
So apparently you have not bothered to actually see what was funded, how the funds were used and what the objectives were.
Similar ongoing research enabled a quick response to formulate vaccines for the Covid family of viruses, but I'm sure you know that. You must be aware of the other like virus infections.
Check out Software and Computer Support for Photographers section of our forum.
Jan 28, 2021 08:46:58 #
DaveO wrote:
So apparently you have not bothered to actually see what was funded, how the funds were used and what the objectives were.
Similar ongoing research enabled a quick response to formulate vaccines for the Covid family of viruses, but I'm sure you know that. You must be aware of the other like virus infections.
Similar ongoing research enabled a quick response to formulate vaccines for the Covid family of viruses, but I'm sure you know that. You must be aware of the other like virus infections.
No, I have come across nothing that would support your claim, and without the dangerous research the vaccine would have never been needed in the first place and we would not have lost 400k + to the virus. Please link your information explaining your claims, it is my understanding that it was the advancement in breaking down the DNA and RNA sequencing that allowed for the rapid development of the vaccines, not Fauci's dangerous research support.
Jan 28, 2021 10:16:48 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
No, I have come across nothing that would support your claim, and without the dangerous research the vaccine would have never been needed in the first place and we would not have lost 400k + to the virus. Please link your information explaining your claims, it is my understanding that it was the advancement in breaking down the DNA and RNA sequencing that allowed for the rapid development of the vaccines, not Fauci's dangerous research support.
RNA research in the US, as well as meagerly funded infectious disease research with China have been going on for years. To think that Pfizer magically pulled a rabbit out of the hat is silly.
https://respiratory-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12931-020-01479-w
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200721184454.htm
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/research/niaid-research-china
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/research/us-china-collaborative-biomedical-research-program
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16378050/
https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/national-international/fact-check-trump-spreads-distorted-claim-on-wuhan-lab-funding/2234179/
https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-once-dismissed-idea-became-a-leading-technology-in-the-covid-vaccine-race/
Jan 28, 2021 11:11:10 #
DaveO wrote:
RNA research in the US, as well as meagerly funded... (show quote)
So, I read all of the linked articles and no where do any of them even make mention of "Gain Function Research", "experiments that would enhance the ability of bat coronavirus to infect human cells and laboratory animals using techniques of genetic engineering." which is what this post is about. They do however talk about synthetic RNA being used to develop the vaccine, which has nothing to do with this thread. I find it odd, that as a bat virus threatens world health, over a million people have died, and we find out that our government was supporting and funding research into the modification of this very same virus in the very same area where the outbreak occurred. Yes, obviously the story broke, but it did not break very hard as I have never seen it mentioned anywhere until this last week where someone mentioned it almost in passing.
So, there are some simple questions to be answered, and no I don't pretend to be an authority, but I do have an opinion.
Should our government be funding such dangerous research outside of our borders where they have absolutely no control over lab safety or the ongoing disposition of these dangerously modified viruses...
Was it right for Fauci to be silent on what he knew about the Wuhan Lab and the work being done there as well as his and the NIH's support of it?
Pretty simple, and no this does not have to be partisan, but they are questions that deserve consideration.
BTW the Gain Function Research had nothing to do with the development of the vaccines and possibly everything to do with the origin of the pandemic.
Jan 28, 2021 12:21:19 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
So, I read all of the linked articles and no where... (show quote)
I was reluctant to waste any time at all trying to alleviate any of your convictions. The single source you cited hardly prove your allegations or inferences. If you wish to criticize the scientific covid research since the mid nineties and offer opinions on their methodology, that's all well and good, but I don't see any valid links to support your opinions.
Why must everything be a partisan contest? I'm sure that you are capable of easily finding more information than what you appear to currently possess.
Check out AI Artistry and Creation section of our forum.
Jan 28, 2021 12:57:59 #
DaveO wrote:
I was reluctant to waste any time at all trying to... (show quote)
I am being critical of Fauci, and the bureaucracy he represents as they play god with such research, we are not talking about 90's research, we are talking about funding that was as recent as 2017, and we are talking about gain function research, taking viruses that may not be at all transferable to humans and modifying them to become animal to human transferable and consequently contagious human to human. Apparently these scientists are not as good as they think they are because they allowed their modified virus to escape upon the world, unless you still believe that it was a wet market even though the funded research was occurring in the Wuhan lab. That is the research that he supported and funded, I am sure that the NIH and Fauci were far from being the only organizations funding such research, but I also think that both he and the NIH should have been more forth coming regarding their support and history with such programs, it was the Trump administration that stopped the funding.
Jan 28, 2021 13:12:37 #
dpullum wrote:
Humm, from Blurryeyed's essay above, "Trump a... (show quote)
Hey Dpullum, again, you are just full of dodo, did you even read it? Did you miss the link at the top of the article providing a link to the original Newsweek article? BTW, I was in Florida the 16th through the 18th closing out a family estate home and someone bought Covid into that house as we were packing it out, I am in my 2nd full week of Covid, that is why you are seeing so much of me here because I like a good boy am completely sequestered during the illness. Lucky for me it is not been any worse than a very mild cold and I was able to get the monoclonal antibody infusion, lucky me, I expect to be over this thing by next week. Bet you and others here wish I would have died, well no such luck but there is always tomorrow and we don't yet know what that will bring.
Anyway, this certainly is not a ploy to reduce the Social Security rolls as you suggest, I will further suggest that you have to be some kind of AH to even think of making such an assertion.
Jan 28, 2021 13:19:01 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
I am being critical of Fauci, and the bureaucracy ... (show quote)
How about a link showing the amount funded to this project including when and who initiated the funding. Elaborate on who participated and what the objective of the research was. Had it made front page news within the first few years there likely would have been few who even remotely cared about an ongoing collaborated scientific effort that included infectious disease research.
My link showing research from the 90's regarding RNA showed that Pfizer didn't start this research in response to the pandemic. Your wandering assertions do not support our original discussion.
Jan 28, 2021 13:21:03 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
Hey Dpullum, again, you are just full of dodo, did... (show quote)
Get well and best wishes.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Black and White Photography section of our forum.