It’s been several months since I’ve focused on Peter Daszak and the EcoHealth Alliance (EHA), which was funded by your tax dollars to “improve” upon viruses found in nature.
The evidence for this has been out there for some time, but many avoid drawing any conclusion, finding it circumstantial. Or something.
Remember Daszak being caught organizing the open letter in The Lancet, proclaiming all talk of gain-of-function research as “conspiracy” theorizing and “dangerous”?
Well, now The Lancet is reported to be preparing to publish an article going so far as to say that “there is no direct support for the natural origin of SARS-CoV‑2, and a laboratory-related accident is plausible.”
Meanwhile, my co-podcaster, on his LocoFoco Netcast, quotes Daszak’s own public boastings (from YouTube), effectively laying out EcoHealth Alliance’s gain-of-function research, talking of insertions of the spiked protein, and referencing to his colleagues in China.
And now another revelation, via science writer Matt Ridley. Specifically, Drastic Research reveals an earlier Daszak grant proposal to inject “deadly chimeric bat coronaviruses collected by the Wuhan Institute of Virology into humanised and ‘batified’ mice.”
This proposal — “named ‘DEFUSE’” — was not accepted by … oh, and this gets good … DARPA.
“In other words, a branch of the federal government had already judged aspects of EHA’s research … as falling under the definition of GOF [gain of function], only for [Health and Human Services] to approve similar work without P3CO review in 2018 and 2019,” the Drastic Research report summarizes.
So it was too iffy for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, but hunky dory with our medical bureaucrats?
The story is more than just about bats, it’s about laboratory manipulation of existing viruses to create new viruses.
Which is, well, batty.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
—
See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
2 replies on “[Not] Just Plain Bats”
Thanks for the update. This stuff is ridiculous. Reality is even weirder than the conspiracy theories.
The Lancet is not to be trusted. They published (and later had to retract) a story claiming that HCQ was ineffective against COVID. Its ‘journalism’ is iffy, at best. Trust has been broken. It cannot be regained quickly, or easily by one article.