It's always sunny in D.C

🤣👍

Yep, only three possible reasons to deny the funding:
1) G-O-F research funding has been made illegal.
2) G-O-F research in Wuhan went very badly.
3) All of the above.

Yep.

Yep again.

I don't know why anyone is surprised. Fauci changing his story every 48 hours and then crying "science!" Is pretty much his MO at this point.

Noice!

At what point did DC go from District of Columbia to District of Corruption?

Many years.

I think it hit the PNR during the Roosevelt years. Size of the government pre-FDR and post-FDR isn't even close and it's just gotten worse since

Inception

the American taxpayer funded the Fauci Fakeout. So really, it's your fault asshole.

...you gonna make a Baldwin meme ?? ... img "de-featured" mine :-(

Seal of Approval - 4z05qo.jpg (click to show) Upvoted!

Why do I bother... He may have mislead about gain of function research. I say mislead because the funding specifically said it couldn't be used for that. It's a frustratingly political thing, and honestly if it can be down he knew for certain, then lock him up.
...but that doesn't make COVID a bioweapon. Virus research is done in Wuhan because it's where or near where many such viruses naturally evolve.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/chinas-military-declares-biotechnology-warfare-fundamental-guiding-principle/

Wow that is garbage. Nowhere in the article does the Chinese military declare what the headline s says.

It also isn't very relevant. The actual references are more toward man/machine interfaces. No mention of viruses or germ warfare.

The evolution and mods that viruses go through naturally are nowhere the speed at which this virus has mutated and become Delta variants. These things take way longer in a natural state of evolution. This observation suggests that COVID-19 has went through an artificial speeding up of it's evolutionary path.

Its speed up because this with the covid shot have massive viral loads when they get covid. It mutates in the vaxxed.

So we are the ooze of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles !

That doesn't make sense. The mRNA causes a protein spike which matches the shell of COVID. It's a protein, not a live virus.

the delta variant, was first isolated in October 2020 in India, from a sample collected in September 2020. India didn't begin a public vaccination campaign until Jan. 16, 2021.

I'm just telling what the studies are showing. The problem is the shot injects a gene therapy mRNA virus into your body which shuts off part of your immune system. It then infects cells all over your body and they start producing the covid spike protein. The body sees the protein and treats it like an invader. Your body doesn't learn any immunity from the covid virus. That means the virus can run rampant in your body and the body only reacts to the spike protein until you get natural immunity from the virus. Just like the unvaccinated.

Source, because that's contrary to anything I've read

Shuts off part of your immune system - what does that even mean? Which part? How?

Starts producing COVID spike protein. Body sees it as an invader. - yes, as designed

"One of the key biological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2, as well as several other viruses, is the presence of spike proteins that allow these viruses to penetrate host cells and cause infection."

The mRNA vaccine infects muscle tissue and causes it to create the spike protein.
The body recognizing the spike protein as an invader and destroying it teaches our bodies to build up antibodies capable of doing the same to COVID, all without the virus ever entering your body. It's actually a brilliant approach.

Do you even read what you post. What you wrote completely agrees with what I said. Learn how the immune system works and you'll know what I'm talking about. Being immune to the spike protein does nothing for immunity to covid. You still get covid.
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210510/Research-suggests-Pfizer-BioNTech-COVID-19-vaccine-reprograms-innate-immune-r

Not only do I read what I write, I read your stuff too.

Your URL was incomplete, for reference, the full url:
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210510/Research-suggests-Pfizer-BioNTech-COVID-19-vaccine-reprograms-innate-immune-responses.aspx

The mRNA spike protein is the same as with coronavirus and it does protect, though it isn't 100% effective.

From what you just posted:
Jorge Domínguez-Andrés and colleagues say that while the vaccine has been shown to be up to 95% effective in preventing infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and subsequent COVID-19, little is known about the broad effects the vaccine may have on the innate and adaptive immune responses.

This vaccine is based on a lipid nanoparticle–formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA that encodes the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 strain that was isolated early on in the pandemic in Wuhan, China.

The spike protein is the main structure the virus uses to infect host cells, and its receptor-binding domain (RBD) is a primary target of neutralizing antibodies following natural infection or vaccination.

Several phase 3 trials have shown that BNT162b2 elicits broad humoral (antibody) and cellular responses that protect against COVID-19.

You have to understand the science to know what they are saying. They aren't saying it protects from covid. They are saying that after injection they saw a 90% immune response to the spike protein, not the virus itself. The virus itself runs rampant in the system just like the unvaxxed. On top of that the shot makes the person more vulnerable to other microbes.

You are wrong. They do say there is a modified response - but they raise no alarms and don't state or imply that this leaves the person immunocompromised. One could infer that, but without information on the degree and duration of the suppression, it is just a guess.

From the papers conclusion:

BNT162b2 vaccine is clearly protective against COVID-19, but the duration of this protection is not yet known, and one could envisage future generations of the vaccine incorporating this knowledge to improve the range and duration of the protection. Our findings need to be confirmed by conducting larger cohort-studies with populations with diverse backgrounds, while further studies should examine the potential interactions between BNT162b2 and other vaccines.

The full text of the conclusion statement:

In conclusion, our data show that the BNT162b2 vaccine induces effects on both the adaptive and the innate branch of immunity and that these effects are different for various SARS-CoV-2 strains. Intriguingly, the BNT162b2 vaccine induces reprogramming of innate immune responses as well, and this needs to be taken into account: in combination with strong adaptive immune responses, this could contribute to a more balanced inflammatory reaction during COVID-19 infection, or it may contribute to a diminished innate immune response towards the virus. BNT162b2 vaccine is clearly protective against COVID-19, but the duration of this protection is not yet known, and one could envisage future generations of the vaccine incorporating this knowledge to improve the range and duration of the protection. Our findings need to be confirmed by conducting larger cohort-studies with populations with diverse backgrounds, while further studies should examine the potential interactions between BNT162b2 and other vaccines.

Different viruses mutate are different rates and the greater a population, the more chances there are for mutation and evolution.

Artificial speeding up.... Source? Sounds pretty much impossible to prove.

Yes they do - but there is still an average life cycle for that to occur. The spreadability and rate that this virus mutates suggests that it was harvested, cultured, harvested, cultured, harvested, cultured, each time grabbing the strongest most prolific samples from the culture - then running those most prolific samples through additional culturing.

Doing this over and over and over again - speeds up the natural life cycle of a virus to mutate and get stronger, much faster.

It's called biological warfare.

Again... Source?

Also, if it was actually biological warfare, wouldn't it be as deadly as SARS? SARS was more deadly but wasn't as contagious.

And is it a barely deadly virus that 99% of people survive? It's so hard to keep it straight.

There was the entire business admitting the U.S. funded the research years ago, where they specifically spelled out that it was made deadlier....

Source? There was the vanity fair article, that was very long and detailed and made the case for it coming from a lab. That doesn't mean it was intentional. If there is a source that says different...I don't know what I don't know.

https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-nih-admits-to-us-funding-of-gain-of-function-research-in-wuhan-lab-423010

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nih-acknowledges-us-funded-gain-of-function-wuhan-lab-despite-faucis-denials

https://www.newsnationnow.com/on-balance-with-leland-vittert/sen-rand-paul-reflects-on-the-nih-admitting-to-gain-of-function-research-in-wuhan/

https://nypost.com/2021/10/21/nih-admits-us-funded-gain-of-function-in-wuhan-despite-faucis-repeated-denials/

The NIH admits US funded gain of research funding... Gain of research (or manipulating the virus to make it more potent) was admitted and funding by the United States was admitted.

The gain in function research isn't a surprise. Vanity fair pretty much drug that into the light in June. A lot of labs do gain of function research to do things like make a human only pathogen spread among rats so they can infect rats and study the virus. Yes, that is scary and both Obama and Trump through different means forbade it. Whether Fauci knew about the gain in function research in Wuhan is the question, because he really might not have as a matter of plausible deniability. Or he might have...

Gain of function research isn't the same as creating a bioweapon or super virus. It doesn't mean it was made deadlier.

After the vanity fair article back in June, I was convinced it was from a lab, it was probably modified. That doesn't make it's release intentional. An accident is more likely. The vanity fair article even had a disclosure that the Wuhan labs rating wasn't high enough (something like that, I read it months ago). And any cover up was probably more cya than anything. Would you want to be the lab tech who didn't follow procedures and killed a lot of people? The guy who approved the exception to fund research there even though it wasn't rated high enough? Whoever caused the spill is probably in a Chinese prison or dead.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins

If you make a virus more potent that can escape into a population - you're engaging in biowarfare wether you like or not (as a scientist working on it)

https://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/GainOfFunction.aspx

Gain of function research is allowed provided the process and conditions above are met. I don't believe the Wuhan lab meet those criteria, but nowhere in us policy or international law is GoF research considered biowarfare.

Then it should be.

I think that parallels gun control arguments or even nuclear power. Gain of function research has potential to advance science and develop new drugs and treatments. Done securely in a lab, it allows us to be prepared in ways we couldn't otherwise be.

It is also potentially very dangerous.

As with most things, it is complicated.