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"

badger2

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2016
Messages
12,309
Reaction score
1,943
Points
140
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.
Pseudorabies is a porcine herpesvirus, so we’re not surprised about this funding, considering the fact the the Indians may be right: SARS-CoV-2’s most ancient ancestor is PRRSV, a pig virus, not a bat virus.
 

westwall

LET'S GO BRANDON!
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
75,340
Reaction score
31,238
Points
2,290
Location
Nevada

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
59,926
Reaction score
12,933
Points
2,220
Name them. Four will do.
- Improving the ability of vaccines to prompt creation of antibodies

- finding better ways of testing theories

- Finding better treatments

- assisting the growth of viruses in culture

There are many more. Articles written for laymen can be found all over the web.

Did you think scientists did not have any benefits in mind when doing this research? Seems like a pretty stupid thing to think.
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
61,123
Reaction score
18,833
Points
2,290
Location
Maine
Lol. So pretty much what i just wrote.
Did you go back and read the letter? Are you here to apologize?
Yes, I read the letter, apologize for what? Did Fauci or firm, intentionally manipulate the virus they were investigating to purposely make it more infectious and contagious for humans? Nope, they didn't.... At least not from what I can tell from the letter. Experiments to see how animal viruses would react in humans is not against the NIH rules on gain of function.

Purposely, with intent to making a virus more potent and more infectious is the line the NIH draws on gain of function..... No one in the lab intentionally did that to the virus they were experimenting on....from what I can tell from the letter?
 

gipper

Libertarian/Anarchist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
44,169
Reaction score
15,236
Points
2,250
- Improving the ability of vaccines to prompt creation of antibodies

- finding better ways of testing theories

- Finding better treatments

- assisting the growth of viruses in culture

There are many more. Articles written for laymen can be found all over the web.

Did you think scientists did not have any benefits in mind when doing this research? Seems like a pretty stupid thing to think.
What is your opinion of this less than one minute video?
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
61,123
Reaction score
18,833
Points
2,290
Location
Maine
Yes, I read the letter, apologize for what? Did Fauci or firm, intentionally manipulate the virus they were investigating to purposely make it more infectious and contagious for humans? Nope, they didn't.... At least not from what I can tell from the letter. Experiments to see how animal viruses would react in humans is not against the NIH rules on gain of function.

Purposely, with intent to making a virus more potent and more infectious is the line the NIH draws on gain of function..... No one in the lab intentionally did that to the virus they were experimenting on....from what I can tell from the letter?
From what I gather they gave the mouse a human Ace2 receptor, to see how the virus reacted with it.... They didn't manipulate the virus to make it more infectious or dangerous...?
 

badger2

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2016
Messages
12,309
Reaction score
1,943
Points
140
Yes, I read the letter, apologize for what? Did Fauci or firm, intentionally manipulate the virus they were investigating to purposely make it more infectious and contagious for humans? Nope, they didn't.... At least not from what I can tell from the letter. Experiments to see how animal viruses would react in humans is not against the NIH rules on gain of function.

Purposely, with intent to making a virus more potent and more infectious is the line the NIH draws on gain of function..... No one in the lab intentionally did that to the virus they were experimenting on....from what I can tell from the letter?
Extrapolating on any lab work fails to address the source in nature. Fau Chi knows the ebola source in nature is still unknown, too. The perfect commie crime would be releasing the naturally-evolved virus, already made nasty from bat rumps residing in a copper mine.
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
61,123
Reaction score
18,833
Points
2,290
Location
Maine
Extrapolating on any lab work fails to address the source in nature. Fau Chi knows the ebola source in nature is still unknown, too. The perfect commie crime would be releasing the naturally-evolved virus, already made nasty from bat rumps residing in a copper mine.
Did they release this virus they were experimenting on???
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$120.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top