Anthony Fauci stated that EcoHealth Alliance grants were not intended for gain-of function research. A comparison to other similar research conducted and labeled as gain-of-function shows that the two types of research are identical and Fauci’s claims are untrue.
If you’ve been following my reporting on the origins of COVID-19, you’ll already know the name EcoHealth Alliance. For those that don’t, EcoHealth Alliance is a non-profit based in New York, which has been conducting research on global pandemics and has been seeking to identify places where pandemics are likely to start, as well as viruses that may be likely to ignite those pandemics. Although their goals are noble and realistic, I find it difficult to question their methods, or their responses in the aftermath of the COVID-19 Pandemic.
EcoHealth Alliance is a non-profit organization that has been operating for many decades. The current version however has been active since 2010. The National Institutes of Health awarded the group a grant in 2014 to investigate Bat Coronavirus Emergence risk, and specifically, China’s potential risks. Here’s the summary of the project:
Understanding the Threat of Bat Coronavirus emergence Novel zoonotic, Bat-origin CoVs present a major threat to global food security and health. These CoVs were responsible for SARS in China in 2002 and the continuing outbreak of MERS. We discovered in a prior R01 (Funded Research), that there is an incredible diversity in SARSr-CoVs among bats. These viruses can infect humans, cause SARS-like symptoms, or evade vaccines. The primary source of spillover is from people who live near bat habitats. At one location, we found multiple SARSr-CoVs with every gene element of the SARS virus genome. Clarification added
While a lot of that sounds like word soup to some of you, let’s break it down and take a look at what they are saying. The researchers start off by saying they found bat coronaviruses in a past research project that looked similar to SARS. They could have infected the ACE2 receptor of human cells and caused SARS-like symptoms. The research they are discussing, however, and what is authorized by this grant, is for research on natural “zoonotic” viruses, meaning those found in nature that can jump to humans either directly or through an intermediate host (jumping from bats to another animal, to humans). It was found that people living near to bat habitats were at highest risk (this is important and will be discussed later).
Concerning their goals, I’ll try to make them as simple and straightforward as possible.
The first goal was to identify the potential infected viruses and to collect more samples.
Aim 2: They were to analyze where “spillover” (bat to human infection) events were likely to occur and assess the public health consequences of potential infections for SARS viruses.
Thus far, it all seems pretty straightforward and doesn’t raise any red flags. Keep in mind that this grant is for the study of natural viruses. Fauci insisted that funding for natural viruses was not available. The problem with that is, the research described in Aim 3, steps way beyond natural viruses.
S proteins (spike protein), sequence data, and infectious clone technique will be used to evaluate the hypothesis that S-protein sequences with % divergence thresholds can predict spillover potential.
Now, while most of this seems nebulous thus far, there’s something you should know: If you were going to create a virus like SARS-CoV-2, this is the exact type of research you would have to conduct to map how to do so. But while Dr. Fauci and EcoHealth Alliance would like to tell you that this isn’t “gain-of-function research,” it isn’t hard to find out whether or not it was because… The NIH has funded this type of research previously. That same study from yesterday’s article is pretty clear about EcoHealth’s supposed research.
No one was secretive about 2015’s study. The authors confirmed gain-offunction research and went on to detail the dangers that such research poses.
This data combined with restrictions (the US Ban of Gain-of Function Research) are a crossroads between GOF concerns. It is important to weigh the risks of spreading more pathogens and the ability to plan for future outbreaks. It is crucial to evaluate the potential value of these data and determine if further research on these types of Chimeric Viral Studies would be worthwhile. Clarification added
These three points are clear: 1) It was unambiguously gain-of function research. 2) They were justified in their research despite knowing they were creating dangerous pathogens. 3) They used artificial hybrid viruses (chimeric) to forecast the possibility of an outbreak.
This research, which was funded and approved by the NIH and the NIAID and EcoHealth Alliance and included research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, serves as a reminder. These facts are inarguable and can’t be ignored with parsed language.
What exactly were these studies? It is not surprising that these studies involved the use of spike (S) proteins, infectious clone technologies, and analyses of receptor binding. They were then used to predict the probability of an outbreak.
Why is it that the experiments are so similar? Well, that’s because they are. In fact, in order to predict viral pandemics, which both of these studies sought to do, known viruses in nature are modified to see if the “new virus” might infect human cells. If there was no genetic modification or the ability to create chimeric viruses in the lab, we would have no way to know if future outbreaks might occur. As discussed in yesterday’s article, EcoHealth Alliance was warned for not reporting the creation of a chimeric virus which was determined to be an Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogen. I stated in that article a condemnation of the creation of a chimeric virus wasn’t in that letter, just that the results weren’t reported. A 2015 study used one of these viruses to create a chimeric viral. These types of predictions require experiments and gain-of-function research to determine if a virus is likely to mutate or infect humans.
Why? It was the EcoHealth Alliance grant that allowed for gain-of-function research to develop Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens. The research might not be able to create new viruses every time. They may not all become viable. Viable viruses do not have an increased transmissibility or virulence. Regardless, the potential and possibility exist that this research could have created Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens, which is the exact purpose of this very grant: to identify those potential viruses.
For Fauci to suggest that wasn’t the intent, flies in the face of the very description of this grant, and the history of other similar research which we have shown was, by their own admission, gain-of-function. It was a research project to make chimeric virus to determine the probability of such mutations in nature and to see if they could infect human beings. For a decade, he excused this type of research in his defense of gain of function.
Are you sure that your articles won’t lead to my arrest or firing? I don’t think so. But I can hope that when others begin to wake up, you and I can state that we’ve been ready for action against him for a long time.
About Post Author
