What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Fauci: "Senator Paul, you don't know what you're talking about"

westwall

LET'S GO BRANDON!
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
75,343
Reaction score
31,239
Points
2,290
Location
Nevada
Gain of Function according to the NIH definition:


In 2014, the U.S. government put a pause on new funding of gain-of-function research, which it defined this way: “With an ultimate goal of better understanding disease pathways, gain-of-function studies aim to increase the ability of infectious agents to cause disease by enhancing its pathogenicity or by increasing its transmissibility.” A 2016 paper on the ethics of gain-of-function research said: “The ultimate objective of such research is to better inform public health and preparedness efforts and/or development of medical countermeasures.”

The pause — intended to provide time to address concerns about the risks and benefits of these studies — applied to certain research on influenza, MERS and SARS.

“Specifically, the funding pause will apply to gain-of-function research projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route,” the White House said in an Oct. 17, 2014, announcement.

As a Nature article at the time explained, there had been fierce debate among scientists on exactly what research should be deemed too risky. And some confusion on where the line would be drawn for this pause.

“Viruses are always mutating,” the article said, “and [Arturo] Casadevall [then a microbiologist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City], says that it is difficult to determine how much mutation deliberately created by scientists might be ‘reasonably anticipated’ to make a virus more dangerous — the point at which the White House states research must stop.”





Wwwwhhhhhich is exactly what they were doing.
 

Batcat

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
2,700
Reaction score
2,590
Points
1,938
So why did Trump allow the restrictions to be lifted?
These article helps explain what happened.


***snip***


All of this helps explain what happened last year when President Trump took what seemed to many to be the perfectly reasonable step of ordering a halt to U.S. taxpayer funding of the Communist Chinese research lab in Wuhan that could have been the source of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In April 2020, the Chinese had refused to provide samples, allow an inspection of the Wuhan lab, or otherwise cooperate on steps necessary to help figure out the pandemic and its origins. When Trump got word that the U.S. was sending taxpayer money to the lab and its scientists, he ordered it stopped. Funds were blocked to the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance that was responsible for dispensing some U.S. taxpayer money to the Wuhan lab.

What happened when the funding stopped?

The scientific establishment kicked into action.



***snip***

U.C. Irvine received the NIH grant money to conduct a three-year research project on using genetically engineered herpesviruses to map the human brain. The grant listed Prof. Min-Hua Luo, a group leader at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as one of the "multiple principal investigators" for the project and noted that she and her colleagues at the Wuhan Institute of Virology will play a significant role in the research project. "Prof. Luo and other key investigators in her group at Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences will collaborate with [U.C. Irvine Prof.] Xiangmin Xu and other [multiple principal investigators] in the U.S.," the research grant read.

Luo was listed as a coauthor in both of the academic articles published with the support of the NIH grant.

Goodman said the NIH's opaque funding practices could be concealing even more examples of taxpayer money going toward the Chinese laboratory.
 

pknopp

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
36,908
Reaction score
11,415
Points
1,360
These article helps explain what happened.


***snip***


All of this helps explain what happened last year when President Trump took what seemed to many to be the perfectly reasonable step of ordering a halt to U.S. taxpayer funding of the Communist Chinese research lab in Wuhan that could have been the source of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In April 2020, the Chinese had refused to provide samples, allow an inspection of the Wuhan lab, or otherwise cooperate on steps necessary to help figure out the pandemic and its origins. When Trump got word that the U.S. was sending taxpayer money to the lab and its scientists, he ordered it stopped. Funds were blocked to the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance that was responsible for dispensing some U.S. taxpayer money to the Wuhan lab.

What happened when the funding stopped?

The scientific establishment kicked into action.



***snip***

U.C. Irvine received the NIH grant money to conduct a three-year research project on using genetically engineered herpesviruses to map the human brain. The grant listed Prof. Min-Hua Luo, a group leader at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as one of the "multiple principal investigators" for the project and noted that she and her colleagues at the Wuhan Institute of Virology will play a significant role in the research project. "Prof. Luo and other key investigators in her group at Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences will collaborate with [U.C. Irvine Prof.] Xiangmin Xu and other [multiple principal investigators] in the U.S.," the research grant read.

Luo was listed as a coauthor in both of the academic articles published with the support of the NIH grant.

Goodman said the NIH's opaque funding practices could be concealing even more examples of taxpayer money going toward the Chinese laboratory.

He doesn't have to argue to end it if he had never lifted the restrictions to start with.
 

Lastamender

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
22,327
Reaction score
17,680
Points
2,400
1634842437450.png
 

Batcat

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
2,700
Reaction score
2,590
Points
1,938
He doesn't have to argue to end it if he had never lifted the restrictions to start with.
I can verify Trump pulled an NIH grant for research at the Wuhan Lab in 2020 but I can’t find any article that says Trump reinstated it. Trump may have been bypassed by new funding issued by the NIH. The President can make policy but government bureaucrats can ignore it.

Perhaps you can provide a link. I seem to remember he did change his mind.



NIH Cancels Funding for Bat Coronavirus Research Project

The abrupt termination comes after the research drew President Trump’s attention for its ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.​

Shawna William​

Apr 28,2020​


Update (August 28): STAT reports that the NIH has awarded EcoHealth Alliance new funding as part of a grant to a network of institutions and research teams that will work to determine how and where viruses and other new pathogens emerge from nature to begin infecting people.

Update (August 19): According to a
Wall Street Journal report and a statement by EcoHealth Alliance, NIH reversed its termination of the grant but suspended funding until EcoHealth meets new requirements, including arranging an inspection of the Wuhan Institute of Virology by an outside team. “NIH’s letter does not represent a good faith effort to understand the nature of our ongoing research,” EcoHealth says in its statement, but “imposes on us a series of demands that the NIH is fully aware many governments and the World Health Organization alike have been unable to successfully satisfy.”


Update (May 26): Last week, 77 Nobel laureates and 31 scientific societies separately sent letters to NIH Director Francis Collins criticizing the decision to terminate the grant and urging that it be reviewed,
Science reports.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
59,929
Reaction score
12,936
Points
2,220
What happened to Rand's criminal referral?

:auiqs.jpg:

Looks like Fauci scraped the little fraud Rand off of his shoe, and Rand slithered back to his rock.
 

pknopp

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
36,908
Reaction score
11,415
Points
1,360
I can verify Trump pulled an NIH grant for research at the Wuhan Lab in 2020 but I can’t find any article that says Trump reinstated it. Trump may have been bypassed by new funding issued by the NIH. The President can make policy but government bureaucrats can ignore it.

Perhaps you can provide a link. I seem to remember he did change his mind.



NIH Cancels Funding for Bat Coronavirus Research Project

The abrupt termination comes after the research drew President Trump’s attention for its ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.​

Shawna William​

Apr 28,2020​


Update (August 28): STAT reports that the NIH has awarded EcoHealth Alliance new funding as part of a grant to a network of institutions and research teams that will work to determine how and where viruses and other new pathogens emerge from nature to begin infecting people.

Update (August 19): According to a
Wall Street Journal report and a statement by EcoHealth Alliance, NIH reversed its termination of the grant but suspended funding until EcoHealth meets new requirements, including arranging an inspection of the Wuhan Institute of Virology by an outside team. “NIH’s letter does not represent a good faith effort to understand the nature of our ongoing research,” EcoHealth says in its statement, but “imposes on us a series of demands that the NIH is fully aware many governments and the World Health Organization alike have been unable to successfully satisfy.”


Update (May 26): Last week, 77 Nobel laureates and 31 scientific societies separately sent letters to NIH Director Francis Collins criticizing the decision to terminate the grant and urging that it be reviewed,
Science reports.

Obama enacted a ban on the research. Trump reversed that in 2017.

US government lifts ban on risky pathogen research
 

Batcat

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
2,700
Reaction score
2,590
Points
1,938
Obama enacted a ban on the research. Trump reversed that in 2017.

US government lifts ban on risky pathogen research
Thanks.

That explains why I couldn’t find that Trump reversed his 2020 decision. Trump may have listened to Fauci early on and was convinced the research was harmless.

Trump did make mistakes. Not as many as Joe Biden has but Trump was not perfect. Trump also got some stuff right in my option while I can’t say that about Joe.
 

pknopp

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
36,908
Reaction score
11,415
Points
1,360
Thanks.

That explains why I couldn’t find that Trump reversed his 2020 decision. Trump may have listened to Fauci early on and was convinced the research was harmless.

Trump did make mistakes. Not as many as Joe Biden has but Trump was not perfect. Trump also got some stuff right in my option while I can’t say that about Joe.

Reversing the ban was a pretty big mistake.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
59,929
Reaction score
12,936
Points
2,220
Thanks.

That explains why I couldn’t find that Trump reversed his 2020 decision. Trump may have listened to Fauci early on and was convinced the research was harmless.

Trump did make mistakes. Not as many as Joe Biden has but Trump was not perfect. Trump also got some stuff right in my option while I can’t say that about Joe.
haha, of course not. Get yer cult card pulled...
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
59,929
Reaction score
12,936
Points
2,220
And the possible ramifications far worse.
oooh.... Scary! Like what? I think you will find that these risks have been overblown, and scientists have much more control over the conditions in the lab than you think.

Hint: "Gain of function" research generally does not mean, "Engineering a more virulent virus and making bunches of it and storing it." That's where people get it wrong, and scientists are left trying to explain things to people that they do not understand.
 

pknopp

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
36,908
Reaction score
11,415
Points
1,360
oooh.... Scary! Like what? I think you will find that these risks have been overblown, and scientists have much more control over the conditions in the lab than you think.

Hint: "Gain of function" research generally does not mean, "Engineering a more virulent virus and making bunches of it and storing it." That's where people get it wrong, and scientists are left trying to explain things to people that they do not understand.

It may not always mean that but it does also mean that. It does not take "bunches of it" at that. All it takes is one affected person leaving the facilities.
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
59,929
Reaction score
12,936
Points
2,220
It may not always mean that but it does also mean that.
True. The issue here is lumping things together that are very different. This is the attempt the fraud Rand Paul tried to make, because a) he is a jackass and doesn't know what he is talking about, and b) he knows his target audience is also abjectly ignorant about any of this.
 

pknopp

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
36,908
Reaction score
11,415
Points
1,360
True. The issue here is lumping things together that are very different. This is the attempt the fraud Rand Paul tried to make, because a) he is a jackass and doesn't know what he is talking about, and b) he knows his target audience is also abjectly ignorant about any of this.

Fauci lied.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$120.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top