2012 scientific article by Fauci said gain of function research, worth risk of global pandemic. You can thank him. "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?
Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward
Anthony S. Fauci
Fauchi pushing for gain of function before congress. 2012 saying worth risks.
Peter Daszak, Whose EcoHealth Alliance Helped Send US taxpayer Money to the Wuhan Lab, Thanked Fauci For Defending China
EcoHealth Alliance/ Dr. Peter Daszak
Mentioned in the emails was involved in actual sars virus splicing He wrote scientific papers about how he did it. As far back as 2013
Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research Lab-made coronavirus related to SARS can infect human cells. Peter Daszak, who co-authored the 2013 paper. Daszak is president of the EcoHealth Alliance
WHO inspector has conflict of interest in Wuhan COVID probe: Prominent biologist
Richard Ebright says Peter Daszak has conflict of interest in WHO and Lancet investigations of Wuhan outbreak
Peter Daszak, put out fake propaganda claiming it could not be man made or a lab leak.
On February 19, 2020, The Lancet, among the most respected and influential medical journals in the world, published a statement that roundly rejected the lab-leak hypothesis, effectively casting it as a xenophobic cousin to climate change denialism and anti-vaxxism. Signed by 27 scientists, the statement expressed “solidarity with all scientists and health professionals in China” and asserted: “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.”
Then came the revelation that the Lancet statement was not only signed but organized by a zoologist named Peter Daszak, who has repackaged U.S. government grants and allocated them to facilities conducting gain-of-function research—among them the WIV itself. David Asher, now a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, ran the State Department’s day-to-day COVID-19 origins inquiry. He said it soon became clear that “there is a huge gain-of-function bureaucracy” inside the federal government.
'He told me it wasn't gain of function, but admitted it in these emails': Rand Paul says Fauci lied over US-funded research in Wuhan lab and demands he is fired
Fauci told him at a hearing last month: 'The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute'
Paul claimed Fauci's emails show he was worried the NIH funded gain-of-function research as early as last February
'In his email, in the subject line, he says 'gain of function research.' He was admitting it to his private underlings seven to eight months ago,' Paul said
Fauci appeared in an interview with The Donlon Report in which he defended a grant the United States had provided the Wuhan lab
Fauci also admitted he 'can't guarantee everything that is going on' in the lab
Fauci Reportedly Relaunched NIH Gain-of-Function Research without Consulting White House
Judicial Watch Obtains Records Showing NIAID under Dr. Fauci Gave Wuhan Lab $826k for Bat Coronavirus Research From 2014 to 2019
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch today announced that it obtained 280 pages of documents from the Department of Health and Human Services revealing that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci.
The documents, some of which were redacted or withheld in their entirely, were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records of communications, contracts and agreements with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-00696)). The agency is only processing 300 pages records per month, which means it will take until the end of November for the records to be fully reviewed and released under FOIA.
The records include a chart of NIAID funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology sent on April 21, 2020, by NIAID’s Chase Crawford to Principal Deputy Director Hugh Auchincloss and other NIAID officials. The agency funds directed to the Wuhan Institute of Virology between the years 2014-2019 total $826,277. All of the projects listed in the chart are titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
In an April 15, 2020 email marked “high” importance, Principal Deputy Director of NIH Lawrence Tabak emailed Fauci, NIH Director Francis Collins, and other NIH officials with the subject line: “HEADS UP: Wuhan lab research:”
Tabak: WH has strongly embraced concerns raised by Congressman Gaetz who is publicly criticizing HHS/NIH for funding the Wuhan laboratory’s bat research. Here’s this quote from another article: “I’m disgusted to learn that for years the US government has been funding dangerous and cruel animal experiments at the Wuhan Institute, which may have contributed to the global spread of coronavirus, and research at other labs in China that have virtually no oversight from US authorities.” [Emphasis in original]
This is a large multi-country study with Wuhan being one site. The principal investigator, Peter Daszak, is based in NY at EcoHealth Alliance, Inc. [Emphasis in original]
Tabak provides details of the grant to Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, for a project titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” Tabak continues, saying, “The 3.7M dollar figure is over 6 years to all sites which include (several in) China, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Myanmar. We estimate that approximately $826,300 has been spent at this site since the inception of the grant. Yearly costs appear to be about 80K/year. The grant is in year 6 of a total of 10 year.”
A January 9, 2020, email exchange labeled “high” importance between NIAID Senior Scientific Advisor Dr. David Morens and Daszak details the relationship between the Fauci agency and the Wuhan Institute of Virology:
Morens: Hi guys, do any of you have any inside info on this new coronavirus that isn’t yet in the public domain? Or any thoughts?
Daszak: Yes – lots of information and I spoke with Erik Stemmy and Alan Embry yesterday before the news was released. Erik is my program officer on our coronavirus grant specifically focused on China….
Morens: Thanks, the excitement never ends, right?
Daszak: NIAID has been funding coronavirus work in China for the past 5 years … (1R01Al110964: “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” ). That’s now been renewed … Collaborators include Wuhan Institute of Virology (currently working on the nCoV), and Ralph Baric [of University of North Carolina].
What diagnostic test are they using to make such a claim?
If they are using the PCR process that is not a diagnostic tool nor a test of any kind. It is a lab tool to amplify scarce elements for lab research work. If you run enough cycles you can get whatever you want. You do not use it as a test tool for the flu.
So what diagnostic test are they using?
In order to stop this coronavirus pandemic 75% of all humans on Earth need to be vaccinated within the same six month period. Otherwise, we're just chasing our tail.
ANOTHER COVID STRAIN
No sir! Never saw this coming shure didn’t!
This is just more contagious it's not any more lethal. Of every person infected so far .33 percent died and its dropping many elderly etc already died or have vaccine. https://youtu.be/jJpyvAv-oFQ
The goal is to have people not get very sick and die.
Looks like way more people had it but were asymptomatic.
As all vulnerable UK citizens are now vaccinated the vast majority of current 'cases' are now amongst the healthy young. These people are walking into hospital and walking out. The NHS is not under pressure, which is the justification for restrictions, and even if it was that is not a good enough reason to shut down society. This is simple authoritarianism nothing more.
This comment may be in violation of our guidelines. You can still post it, but it will remain hidden until reviewed by one of our moderators.
This comment may be a reaction with little substance. It's at risk of being ranked lower than other comments.
Quality over quantity. You've hit our limit for comments posted. Please try again in an hour.