NIH Director Cuts Over Dangerous Virus Research in Wuhan After CNN Interview Goes

While most corporate media outlets throw softballs at Dr. Anthony Fauci because of revelations funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) risky gain -of -function research in Wuhan, China, Fauci’s ‘boss’ – NIH Director Francis Collins – did not. very lucky.

In a blistering Sunday night interview, CNN’s Pamela Brown (credit where it’s due) completely roasted Collins thanks NIH funding to the New York -based nonprofit, EcoHealth’s alliance, which conducted research in the book Gain of Function – genetically engineering bat coronavirus so they can infect humans. Last week claimed by the NIH that EcoHealth violated the terms of a grant by failing to report what they had done (which EcoHealth denied), sending Fauci and Collins into full injury control over the weekend.

Now, the official story is that while EcoHealth has breached their contract, and is said to be ‘in trouble’ for failing to report what they have done, NIH and NIAID (Collins and Fauci) continue that the research is not yet sufficient. risk to qualify for the upgrade. watch.

CNNBrown did not allow Collins to escape his carefully crafted points to say-he was repeatedly forced to know how much more NIH funds they did not know, and asked why they should trust the Americans afterwards. in last week’s revelation.

The breakdown of the interview is Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin – which in March was revealed by his BOOKS: “Turmoil Under the Sky: Trump, Xi, and the War for the Twenty-First Century ” that (NIH) “funded numerous projects involving WIV scientists, including much of the work in the Wuhan lab on coronavirus bats.” In April, Rogin revealed that in 2018, U.S. State Department diplomats warned about safety issues in Wuhan labs studying the COVID bat. In short-only a few journalists are as qualified as Rogin to give an opinion on what is happening.

It immediately jumped on it (video below):

Continued by threadreaderapp (emphasis on us):

Brown repeatedly pressured Collins to explain how the NIH had not known FOR TWO YEARS that the contractor itself @EcoHealthNYC Doing research that makes coronavirus bats more contagious to humans, and Collins uses every rhetorical trick to isolate and distract… I mean…

Fauci admitted that no “Gain of Function research was funded by Wuhan.

Brown to Collins: “How [Fauci] say that if you knew that U.S. taxpayer dollars were used to pay for this risky research lab in Wuhan two years ago?“GOOD QUESTION

Collins tried to downplay a rabbit hole semantic debate about the meaning of gain of function (this was his usual filibuster tactic), but Brown stopped him and asked the direct question again:

Brown: “The EcoHealth Alliance violated the terms of its contract… So the question is .. How do you know where this money is going… in Wuhan lab areas if you know it from the EcoHealth Alliance, how the US taxpayer dollars are used?”SAKTO.

Collins acknowledged EcoHealth had breached its contract but said, surprisingly:

“Yes, they did some things they should have told us, but they don’t do the kind of Gain of Function research that requires a special, high level of management.WTAF?

The general point of NIH’s letter to Congress is that if EcoHealth reports the results of its research, it MAY be causing excessive, high levels of oversight. Why did Collins pretend he knew they didn’t do that?

There is more…

and Collins builds up and attacks a straw man by saying: “It is not connected with the advent of SARS-CoV-2. ”

Brown pointed out that he denied a statement that nothing was made. He returned the interview to the issue, why didn’t the NIH know what they were funding?

Brown: “There was risky research being done in that lab with U.S. taxpayer dollars that the NIH didn’t know about and now know. So it raises the question of what other risky experiments are. it could happen to U.S. taxpayer funds without your knowledge. ”

Collins responded that he didn’t think this kind of lax reporting was as widespread. “This particular grantee is in trouble because of not being completely transparent about the work they do and we’re following up on that.” Nothing specific.

Brown urges Collins (again) to recognize that the NIH has some responsibility for not knowing that it is funding this research: “Isn’t this also a failure of NIH management, because NIH is responsible for taking taxpayer money and providing these grants.. ” SIYEMPRE NGA

This time, Collins actually blamed Congress for preventing the NIH from interacting with sub = grantees (the Wuhan lab), completely avoiding why the NIH did not ask EcoHealth (the main grantee) for report in Wuhan FOR TWO YEARS, while a pandemic erupted from. Wuhan

Brown urges Collins on the main issue: “Why would Americans trust you and the NIH on the issue of covid origins, when you don’t know about the programs it funds with Chinese taxpayer dollars? ” LOGICAL QUESTION

First, Collins basically makes the argument that most planes land safely so nothing can be seen here:

“Well, that’s pretty strong, Pam… Most of what they do is what we allow them to do.”

Then Collins made what I look like a sexist comment on Brown

“So please, relax here.” (looks sexist)

“It’s not a situation where I think you can say there’s a huge failure that could endanger human life.” (A bold if not misleading statement)

Brown stands by his position, defending his legitimate and reasonable questions:

“This definitely raises questions about the transparency and governance of the NIH where this grant money will go. Will the NIH get funding from the EcoHealth Alliance?”

Collins is misleading again, saying that Wuhan’s EcoHealth funding has been cut (actually) but ignoring the mention that NIH and NIAID have been given millions more by the EcoHealth Alliance in other contracts since then for other things. Some responsibilities…

This statement by Collins appealed to me most boldly:

“The last thing that needs to happen now is in any sense that we haven’t revealed everything we know.”

The NIH has now ignored numerous requests by Congress for information and recording about its work in China….

Brown concludes with a simple and factual statement:

“It’s the U.S. taxpayer dollars that go into risk research and I believe every American should know about it.”




Reprinted from with permission

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *