COVID-19
COVID-19 isn’t going away
What does a COVID-19 survey of Major League Baseball employees have to do with our pandemic lockdown here in Canada? Tons! This interview with Dr. Jay Bhattacharaya of Standord University is packed full of information that will answer many of the questions we have about how long this battle against COVID-19 is going to last. It also sheds light on the effectiveness of our province and nation-wide lockdowns.
How effective is the lockdown? When should lockdowns be lifted? What will happen as lockdowns are lifted? Will there ‘ever’ be an effective vaccine? How widespread is COVID-19 in our general population? Should we try to achieve “herd immunity”? This fascinating interview is a must see by anyone who wants to understand what we’re up against.
This video was produced by the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University. The program is called Uncommon Knowledge.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharaya from Stanford Medicine makes his third appearance on Uncommon Knowledge in eight weeks, this time to discuss a new COVID-19 survey of Major League Baseball employees he co-authored. The survey tested more than 5,600 employees across all 30 Major League Baseball clubs. The results are yet another data set showing how COVID-19 spreads across geographical and economic lines. Dr. Bhattacharya also discusses the very real health risks associated with a prolonged lockdown and answers some of the questions raised by his last survey of Santa Clara County.
Jay Bhattacharya is a Professor of Medicine at Stanford University. He is a research associate at the National Bureau of Economics Research, a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, and at the Stanford Freeman Spogli Institute. He holds courtesy appointments as Professor in Economics and in Health Research and Policy. He directs the Stanford Center on the Demography of Health and Aging. Dr. Bhattacharya’s research focuses on the economics of health care around the world with a particular emphasis on the health and well-being of vulnerable populations. Dr. Bhattacharya’s peer-reviewed research has been published in economics, statistics, legal, medical, public health, and health policy journals. He holds an MD and PhD in economics from Stanford University.
Cenovus replies to low-blow from Norway’s trillion dollar oil fund
COVID-19
‘That Science Should Not Have Been Done’: Former CDC Director Compares Fauci To Oppenheimer
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Mariane Angela
Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Robert Redfield appeared Wednesday on Newsmax to discuss Dr. Anthony Fauci’s preemptive pardon by former President Joe Biden.
“I hope that it gives Fauci an opportunity to try to be more honest and transparent about the decisions that he made and what he did. I’m not confident that that’s going to happen,” Redfield said during an appearance on “Rob Schmitt Tonight.”
“You know, I also think it’s odd for Biden to pardon him prospectively when he hasn’t been accused of any direct crime. I know if I was in that position that I wouldn’t like that because it does imply that I actually did something wrong.”
Redfield also talked about events portrayed in the 2023 film “Oppenheimer.”
The former director said he hopes — similar to J. Robert Oppenheimer’s eventual realization of his impact on global warfare — Fauci might come to terms with the ramifications of his decisions before and during the pandemic.
“You know, when I watched the ‘Oppenheimer’ movie and I watched the scenes when Oppenheimer finally realized what happened with the science that he gave to the world, particularly when President Truman decided to use the atomic bomb a second time, and he realized that he had opened up really a big problem in terms of giving science to create a weapon that could kill hundreds of thousands of people. I don’t know if Tony realizes, and he’s very sensitive to this issue,” Redfield said when asked if Fauci recognized his responsibility.
Redfield said he wonders whether Fauci acknowledges the full extent of his actions, particularly what Redfield said was Fauci’s role in funding gain-of-function research.
“I do think Tony did mislead the nation, and he did mislead the Congress. He did make some bad decisions when it came to funding the research and gain-of-function research in China,” Redfield said.
Redfield said he hopes Fauci would act transparent and accountable in his actions.
“I think it’s really important. If one good thing comes from this is we get a moratorium on gain-of-function research. I do hope Tony takes advantage of this opportunity to basically be more transparent and let people understand why he made the decisions he did and also admit some accountability for the negative consequences of those decisions,” Redfield said, adding “that [that] science should not have been done.”
During the last hours of his presidency on Monday, Biden issued preemptive pardons to Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley, and the members of the Jan. 6 committee and said that they should not be subjected to “unjustified and politically motivated prosecutions.” The pardon spans back to 2014, encompassing Fauci’s role on the White House Coronavirus Task Force and his position as the chief medical advisor to Biden.
Accusations against Fauci include lying to Congress and circumventing requests under the Freedom of Information Act. Fauci has consistently described COVID-19 as a “natural occurrence” and denied any link between his agency’s subawards to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origins of the virus. Several experts have accused Fauci of committing perjury during his congressional testimonies, particularly in his denials that the viruses he supported could have evolved into COVID-19.
Brownstone Institute
The Deplorable Ethics of a Preemptive Pardon for Fauci
From the Brownstone Institute
Anthony “I represent science” Fauci can now stand beside Richard “I am not a crook” Nixon in the history books as someone who received the poison pill of a preemptive pardon.
While Nixon was pardoned for specific charges related to Watergate, the exact crimes for which Fauci was pardoned are not specified. Rather, the pardon specifies:
Baseless and politically motivated investigations wreak havoc on the lives, safety, and financial security of targeted individuals and their families. Even when individuals have done nothing wrong – and in fact have done the right things – and will ultimately be exonerated, the mere fact of being investigated and prosecuted can irreparably damage reputations and finances.
In other words, the dying breath of the Biden administration appears to be pardoning Fauci for crimes he didn’t commit, which would seem to make a pardon null and void. The pardon goes further than simply granting clemency for crimes. Clemency usually alleviates the punishment associated with a crime, but here Biden attempts to alleviate the burden of investigations and prosecutions, the likes of which our justice system uses to uncover crimes.
It’s one thing to pardon someone who has been subjected to a fair trial and convicted, to say they have already paid their dues. Gerald Ford, in his pardon of Richard Nixon, admitted that Nixon had already paid the high cost of resigning from the highest office in the land. Nixon’s resignation came as the final chapter of prolonged investigations into his illegal and unpresidential conduct during Watergate, and those investigations provided us the truth we needed to know that Nixon was a crook and move on content that his ignominious reputation was carve d into stone for all of history.
Fauci, meanwhile, has evaded investigations on matters far more serious than Watergate. In 2017, DARPA organized a grant call – the PREEMPT call – aiming to preempt pathogen spillover from wildlife to people. In 2018 a newly formed collaborative group of scientists from the US, Singapore, and Wuhan wrote a grant – the DEFUSE grant – proposing to modify a bat sarbecovirus in Wuhan in a very unusual way. DARPA did not fund the team because their work was too risky for the Department of Defense, but in 2019 Fauci’s NIAID funded this exact set of scientists who never wrote a paper together prior or since. In late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 emerged in Wuhan with the precise modifications proposed in the DEFUSE grant submitted to PREEMPT.
It’s reasonable to be concerned that this line of research funded by Fauci’s NIAID may have caused the pandemic. In fact, if we’re sharp-penciled and honest with our probabilities, it’s likely beyond reasonable doubt that SARS-CoV-2 emerged as a consequence of research proposed in DEFUSE. What we don’t know, however, is whether the research proceeded with US involvement or not.
Congress used its constitutionally-granted investigation and oversight responsibilities to investigate and oversee NIAID in search of answers. In the process of these investigations, they found endless pages of emails with unjustified redactions, evidence that Fauci’s FOIA lady could “make emails disappear,” Fauci’s right-hand-man David Morens aided the DEFUSE authors as they navigated disciplinary measures at NIH and NIAID, and there were significant concerns that NIAID sought to obstruct investigations and destroy federal records.
Such obstructive actions did not inspire confidence in the innocence of Anthony Fauci or the US scientists he funded in 2019. On the contrary, Fauci testified twice under oath saying NIAID did not fund gain-of-function research of concern in Wuhan…but then we discovered a 2018 progress report of research NIAID funded in Wuhan revealing research they funded had enhanced the transmissibility of a bat SARS-related coronavirus 10,000 times higher than the wild virus. That is, indisputably, gain-of-function research of concern. Fauci thus lied to the American public and perjured himself in his testimony to Congress, and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has referred Fauci’s perjury charges to the Department of Justice.
What was NIAID trying to preempt with their obstruction of Congressional investigations? What is Biden trying to preempt with his pardon of Fauci? Why do we not have the 2019 NIAID progress report from the PI’s who submitted DEFUSE to PREEMPT and later received funding from NIAID?
It is deplorable for Biden to preemptively pardon Fauci on his last day in office, with so little known about the research NIAID funded in 2019 and voters so clearly eager to learn more. With Nixon’s preemptive pardon, the truth of his wrongdoing was known and all that was left was punishment. With Fauci’s preemptive pardon, the truth is not yet known, NIAID officials in Fauci’s orbit violated federal records laws in their effort to avoid the truth from being known, and Biden didn’t preemptively pardon Fauci to grant clemency and alleviate punishment, but to stop investigations and prosecutions the likes of which could uncover the truth.
I’m not a Constitutional scholar prepared to argue the legality of this maneuver, but I am an ethical human being, a scientist who contributed another grant to the PREEMPT call, and a scientist who helped uncover some of the evidence consistent with a lab origin and quantify the likelihood of a lab origin from research proposed in the DEFUSE grant. Any ethical human being knows that we need to know what caused the pandemic, and to deprive the citizenry of such information from open investigations of NIAID research in 2019 would be to deprive us of critical information we need to self-govern and elect people who manage scientific risks in ways we see fit. As a scientist, there are critical questions about bioattribution that require testing, and the way to test our hypotheses is to uncover the redacted and withheld documents from Fauci’s NIAID in 2019.
The Biden administration’s dying breath was to pardon Anthony Fauci not for the convictions for crimes he didn’t commit (?) but to avoid investigations that could be a reputational and financial burden for Anthony Fauci. A pardon to preempt an investigation is not a pardon; it is obstruction. The Biden administration’s dying breath is to obstruct our pursuit of truth and reconciliation on the ultimate cause of 1 million Americans’ dying breaths.
To remind everyone what we still need to know, it helps to look through the peephole of what we’ve already found to inspire curiosity about what else we’d find if only the peephole could be widened. Below is one of the precious few emails investigative journalists pursuing FOIAs against NIAID have managed to obtain from the critical period when SARS-CoV-2 is believed to have emerged. The email connects DEFUSE PI’s Peter Daszak (EcoHealth Alliance), Ralph Baric (UNC), Linfa Wang (Duke-NUS), Ben Hu (Wuhan Institute of Virology), Shi ZhengLi (Wuhan Institute of Virology) and others in October 2019. The subject line “NIAID SARS-CoV Call – October 30/31” connects these authors to NIAID.
It is approximately in that time range – October/November 2019 – when SARS-CoV-2 is hypothesized to have entered the human population in Wuhan. When it emerged, SARS-CoV-2 was unique among sarbecoviruses in having a furin cleavage site, as proposed by these authors in their 2019 DEFUSE grant. Of all the places the furin cleavage site could be, the furin cleavage site of SARS-CoV-2 was in the S1/S2 junction of the Spike protein, precisely as proposed by these authors.
In order to insert a furin cleavage site in a SARS-CoV, however, the researchers would’ve needed to build a reverse genetic system, i.e. a DNA copy of the virus. SARS-CoV-2 is unique among coronaviruses in having exactly the fingerprint we would expect from reverse genetic systems. There is an unusual even spacing in the cutting/pasting sites for the enzymes BsaI and BsmBI and an anomalous hot-spot of silent mutations in precisely these sites, exactly as researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology have done for other coronavirus reverse genetic systems. The odds of such an extreme synthetic-looking pattern occurring in nature are, conservatively, about 1 in 50 billion.
The virus did not emerge in Bangkok, Hanoi, Bago, Kunming, Guangdong, or any of the myriad other places with similar animal trade networks and greater contact rates between people and sarbecovirus reservoirs. No. The virus emerged in Wuhan, the exact place and time one would expect from DEFUSE.
With all the evidence pointing the hounds towards NIAID, it is essential for global health security that we further investigate the research NIAID funded in 2019. It is imperative for our constitutional democracy, for our ability to self-govern, that we learn the truth. The only way to learn the truth is to investigate NIAID, the agency Fauci led for 38 years, the agency that funded gain-of-function research of concern, the agency named in the October 2019 call by DEFUSE PI’s, the agency that funded this exact group in 2019.
A preemptive pardon prior to the discovery of truth is a fancy name for obstruction of justice. The Biden administration’s dying breath must be challenged, and we must allow Congress and the incoming administration to investigate the possibility that Anthony Fauci’s NIAID-supported research caused the Covid-19 pandemic.
Republished from the author’s Substack
-
Business2 days ago
Trump, taunts and trade—Canada’s response is a decade out of date
-
Carbon Tax2 days ago
Carbon tax tripping up Liberal leadership hopefuls
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith Media Roundtable from Washington
-
Business2 days ago
Opposition leader Poilievre calling for end of prorogation to deal with Trump’s tariffs
-
Business2 days ago
Trade retaliation might feel good—but it will hurt Canada’s economy
-
Christopher Rufo2 days ago
Trump Abolishes DEI for the Feds
-
Also Interesting2 days ago
Sure-Fire Hacks to Streamline the Process of Writing a Thesis Paper
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Pastor Lectures Trump and Vance On Trans People, Illegal Immigrants