Why Is the NIH Still Trusting Peter Daszak? – Opinion

Last night we reported that the NIH responded to Representative Comer’s request. The letter said that SARS-CoV-2 cannot have originated from Wuhan Institute of Virology. But that same letter indicated that EcoHealth Alliance, led by Peter Daszak (dubious), had also violated terms of grant. They were withholding data.

You did read it correctly.  Based on information provided by an organisation that admitted to having received it, the NIH rejected the laboratory-leak theory. This is contrary to the grant terms that might have allowed for the creation of SARS-CoV-2.

As we have reported numerous times since the May 11th hearing which began my quest regarding this topic, the NIH has been complicit in a cover-up, even delaying my request for documents up to a year upon their unilateral determination that RedState, essentially, isn’t really a journalistic outfit.  Despite the constant roadblocks and Fauci’s continued lies, we continued our quest to best educate you, our readers.

With this letter, the NIH remains true to form and spins more lies and misinformation, which we’ll detail in this article.

They reach their conclusions as soon as the letter starts, but they don’t specify where the information was obtained and ignore the reliability of that source.

“It is important to state at the onset that the published genomic data demonstrate that the bat coronaviruses studied under the NIH grant to EcoHealth Alliance, Inc. and subward to the Wuhan Institute of Virology are not and could not have become SARS-CoV-2.  Both the progress report and the analysis attached here again confirms that conclusion, as the sequences of the viruses are genetically very distant.”

As stated last night in the article, EcoHealth Alliance was the source of that information.  Many people, whether they were board members or employees, who had been funded or collaborated with EcoHealth Alliance signed a letter denying the possibility that the virus originated in Wuhan in January 2020. This was before there had ever been a case of COVID-19 in the United States.  RedState, the first organisation to look into signatories was to determine their numerous clear and reported conflicts of interests. The letter in The Lancet science journal did not mention these issues.  Later, when The Lancet established their own COVID origins team, it was headed by EcoHealth Alliance’s President and the mastermind behind the Lancet letter, Dr. Peter Daszak.  After reaching his own conclusions regarding the SARS-CoV-2 origins, we were able to ask Dr. Peter Daszak how impartial he could have been in his evaluation of all the data.  Daszak was then dismissed by the Lancet Origins Commission, regardless of whether it had anything to do with our reporting.

The origins of COVID-19 were also determined by Daszak, who was also a member of the World Health Organization team.  Although the final WHO report found the virus had likely developed naturally, it did not provide any information about the location or the intermediate hosts, nor the number of patients zero.  Later, the WHO Director General deemed the WHO’s final report to be unreliable. China later rejected the request for more transparency and greater access.  The 400-page report containing Daszak was only four pages long and did not address the potential for lab leakage.  Further, it was later revealed that WHO had received data from China to draw their conclusions. However, access was denied to WHO Investigation Team to any of the original labs or sources where SARS-CoV-2 may have originated.

EcoHealth Alliance’s information is the sole source of the letter. This latest letter also states that EcoHealth Alliance did not comply with the grant conditions and that EcoHealth Alliance failed to disclose any biosafety requirements.  According to the NIH letter, determinations made come from a progress report, that was “submitted to NIH in August 2021, in response to NIH’s compliance enforcement efforts.”

The NIH deemed it acceptable to draw conclusions based on information from what at best is wildly inconsistent sources, but at the same, admitted that the report they provided was not complete enough to make the appropriate decisions.  EcoHealth Alliance was given five additional days to modify and complete their report. However, this is not a reason to allow them to lie or mislead.  Daszak has shown he’s capable of it.  Daszak has been the thread through all efforts to eliminate the lab-leak hypothesis.  Were we to believe that an organization under his direct control will ever reveal the truth when it would lead them to the five-million murders?  It is obvious that the answer to this question is a clear no.