All things political. Coronavirus Edition. (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Maxp

    Well-known member
    Joined
    May 17, 2019
    Messages
    459
    Reaction score
    747
    Offline
    I fear we are really going to be in a bad place due to the obvious cuts to the federal agencies that deal with infectious disease, but also the negative effect the Affordable Care act has had on non urban hospitals. Our front line defenses are ineffectual and our ability to treat the populous is probably at an all time low. Factor in the cost of healthcare and I can see our system crashing. What do you think about the politics of this virus?
     


    Unpacking the story of Fauci and painful experiments involving dogs
    Documents obtained by an animal rights group show that NIH was not fully transparent when the controversy erupted in 2021.

    by @GlennKesslerWP
    June 7, 2024

    “As director of NIH, you did sign off on these so-called scientific experiments. And as a dog lover, I want to tell you this is disgusting and evil. What you signed off on and these experiments that happened to beagles paid for by the American taxpayer. And I want you to know Americans don’t pay their taxes for animals to be tortured like this.”

    — @RepMTG (R-Ga.), questioning Anthony S. Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), during a House hearing on the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, June 3

    “What does dogs have to do with anything that we’re talking about today?”
    — Fauci, in response.

    During the coronavirus hearing this week, Greene attacked Fauci as she held up a photo of two sedated puppies, their heads placed in mesh cages, as they lie on a table while being swarmed by sand flies. Outside the hearing, an ad truck commissioned by a group opposed to taxpayer-funded animal experiments circled Capitol Hill with billboards that showed Fauci together with this photo and directed people to a website called BeagleGate.org. The group, the White Coat Waste Project, is founded and run by people with links to conservative-leaning organizations, The Washington Post has reported.

    When we first saw Greene hold up the photo, we figured this would be easy to debunk — another in a string of misleading attacks against Fauci, who became the public face of the government’s response to the pandemic.

    After all, when this first became an issue in 2021 — unrelated to covid then as it is now but part of a general effort among conservatives to discredit Fauci in any way possible — a raft of fact checks noted that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) said the study in question, conducted in Tunisia, had been attributed in error to the agency that Fauci ran, a division of NIH. The scientific journal that published the study issued a correction. NIH said that it did fund a study in Tunisia involving dogs and sand flies, but NIH suggested that study was a more benign one that allowed the dogs to roam.

    But it’s more complicated than that, a review of NIH emails and documents obtained by the group since 2021 under the Freedom of Information Act suggests. Some of the documents call into question NIH’s statements at the time, part of what appears to be a bungled public relations response.

    What’s less complicated is that it’s silly to personally blame Fauci for the design of research studies — about 5,500 were approved by NIAID just in 2023 — endorsed many levels below the director. “The experiments that NIH funded go through strict regulatory processes of the treatment of animals, the humane treatment of animals,” Fauci said in response to another lawmaker who raised the issue in the hearing this week. “I signed off on them because they were approved by a peer review.”

    The Facts
    Female sand flies carry a parasite that produces zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis (ZVL), an often-neglected tropical disease in humans. Domestic dogs are the main reservoir host and sand flies are the main vector. The problem is especially acute in Tunisia, where a 1996 study of 50 cases in one hospital found a mortality rate of about 6 percent in children under the age of 5.

    Animals are often used in research, where they serve as “models” that allow for investigation of a problem. NIH, on its website, notes that fish, frogs, fruit flies and roundworms are used to understand biological processes that could affect humans.

    But there is something about using dogs — especially common household pets such as beagles — that make many people squeamish. According to the most recent annual animal usage report by the U.S. Agriculture Department, nearly 16,000 dogs in 2019 were subjected to pain in the United States during research experiments — and nearly 400 received no pain medication.

    The White Coat Waste Project hit a nerve when it publicized the Tunisia sand fly study in 2021, emphasizing the dramatic photo that Greene waved at Fauci. The Post reported that Fauci’s office got 3,600 phone calls in 36 hours. A bipartisan letter signed by 24 members of Congress, citing the group’s reports on animal studies, said that lawmakers had “grave concerns about reports of costly, cruel, and unnecessary taxpayer-funded experiments on dogs.”

    The Tunisian sand fly study pictured in the photo was published on July 27, 2021, in the journal PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. The study described how the beagles, between 6 and 8 months old, and obtained from the kennels of the Pasteur Institute of Tunis, were sedated and then exposed to hundreds of sand flies that had been deprived of food for 24 hours.

    That August, the study caught the attention of White Coat Waste, where the story was quickly picked up by right-leaning websites.

    Fauci seeks information about the dog study grant

    In late October 2021, CNN asked Fauci to appear for an interview, and one of his staff members suggested late on Oct. 24 that Fauci pause any TV interviews “until we get a handle on this.” Early the next morning, Fauci emailed 12 officials and asked them to “tell me what grant or contract they are referring to.” Within two hours, one replied that they might have identified the grant. (Most staff members’ names are redacted.)

    "Let us find out for sure if it is that grant, and then let us take a look at what the experimental design is, and importantly whether it has received the appropriate ethical and animal care consideration,” Fauci replied in an email. “I want this done right away since we are getting bombarded by protests.”

    Within two hours, one of the researchers involved, Abhay Satoskar, a professor of pathology and microbiology at Ohio State University, emailed to say that NIAID had been mistakenly cited as a funder of the study and that he would seek a correction from the journal. One NIAID official wrote in an email that Satoskar “stated that it was mistakenly cited because he was not clear of the true purpose of US funding acknowledgment” and that the program in question had been funded only by the Pasteur Institute.

    NIAID issued a public statement on Oct. 26 saying it had funded a separate sand flies project involving the study of a vaccine to prevent leishmaniasis. In this study, 12 dogs were given the vaccine and then put in “an enclosed open space” outside during high sand fly season, NIAID said, to see whether the dogs still became infected.

    Relying on a single researcher’s statement

    The emails obtained by White Coat Waste show that NIAID officials were relying on Satoskar’s statement and had no independent knowledge of whether it was correct. When an Associated Press reporter doing a fact check asked for proof that NIAID did not fund the project, one NIH official on Oct. 28 internally admitted it had none.“

    Our evidence is simply the statement of the PI, Dr. Satoskar,” the official wrote to another NIAID official, using an abbreviation for principal investigator, according to the emails. The official added: “It is not uncommon for investigators to give very wide attribution to grants and contracts that supported a given project, so it is not surprising that they went too broad in acknowledging support of the publication.”

    Matthew Fenton, director of NIAID’s Division of Extramural Activities, replied as part of the email chain: “It seems to me that the only way to prove that the grant funds weren’t used for other projects is to do an audit of those grant expenditures and invoices. This would not be something that could be done quickly.”

    NIH declined to answer whether an audit was ever undertaken and whether NIAID confirmed what Satoskar said.

    A potential conflict of interest, and a correction

    Meanwhile, the emails show that when Satoskar asked Shaden Kamhawi, the editor of the journal, to correct the article, she agreed immediately but noted internally that she might have a conflict of interest because she was an employee of NIAID. (Her bio on the NIAID website also listed Satoskar as one of her “main collaborators.”)

    “As I am an NIAID employee, I am not sure if there is a COi here so please let me know,” she wrote in an email to colleagues that was written just six hours after Fauci first asked for information.

    NIH also declined to answer questions about her potential conflict, but the emails obtained by White Coat Waste contain a draft statement to be given to reporters if the question arose. “The request for a correction of the funding statement came from the authors of the study,” the statement said. “It is a standard policy of the journal of PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases and its responsibility as a publisher to correct publication errors when made aware of them. None of Dr. Kamhawi’s supervisors at NIAID were involved with the journal’s decision to make this correction.”

    The press guidance said Kamhawi became aware of the issue only in November, though the internal emails show she learned of it on Oct. 25, the same day Fauci asked about it.

    Study is removed from the NIH database

    When The Post reported on the controversy in November 2021, the article noted: “The trapped-beagles study does not appear in a database of NIH-funded projects.” The emails show that, while it was removed before the publication of The Post article, the study had been listed in the database for months and was still listed as of the previous month, when Fauci first asked about the controversy.“

    We need that to be corrected too, ASAP please,” one NIH staffer wrote on Oct. 27. The anxiety level rose as officials realized it would take several days, until Nov. 1, before the project would be removed from the database — where reporters could not then find it.

    NIH also declined to answer questions about the removal of the study from the database.

    A second study also caged dogs

    Finally, other documents obtained by White Coat Waste suggest the Tunisia study funded by NIH was not as benign as the agency suggested. Instead of an “enclosed open space,” the study’s grant application shows a photograph that indicated that the dogs were kept in a cage as they were “exposed to sand fly bites each night through the sand fly season to ensure transmission.” The grant application also described how, separately, dogs would be sedated and placed in cages for two hours while they were exposed to 15 to 30 female sand flies.

    In a statement, NIH said: “The two studies began at different times and involved different animals. The study in the journal PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases used symptomatic animals from previous studies approved by that grantee institution’s animal care and use committee in 2012. NIAID funds were used for an R21 study [Exploratory/Developmental Grant] that started in August 2018 and ended in July 2021. Information from the principal investigator shows 12 healthy dogs were vaccinated and sent into the field in 2019 for natural exposure during Sand fly season (August to November) to test a candidate visceral leishmaniasis (VL) vaccine. According to the study’s principal investigator, the 12 dogs were healthy and did not have symptoms of VL at the conclusion of the NIAID-funded grant period.”

    Satoskar referred questions to Benjamin Johnson, an Ohio State University spokesman. “We have nothing more to add,” Johnson said.

    The Bottom Line
    The emails show that NIH was not fully transparent as it tried to handle a public-relations nightmare. Perhaps there was little reason to doubt Satoskar, but officials embraced his explanation without confirming as they rushed out a statement. They made no acknowledgment that they had removed the study from the NIH grant database or that the editor of the journal that quickly issued the correction had a potential conflict of interest. Moreover, the NIH study in Tunisia that the agency said it funded was cast in a positive light that is undermined by the grant application that has since been made public.

    What is leishmaniasis, Dr. SFL?
     
    Omg Seth Abraham. Of all the Looney leftists wingers to follow on X, he's up there with the worst. Now I'm understanding your posting now after I see you follow him.
    As opposed to Glenn Greenwald and every other RWNJ you post?

    What is leishmaniasis, Dr. SFL?
     
    Maybe I missed it if it was posted somewhere in this thread, but what was the supposed endgame here?

    Dr. Fauci was been with NIH for decades worked with administrations of both parties and was by all accounts well respected by everyone

    After all this time he decides to unleash (or at least facilitate and coverup the unleashing of) a worldwide plague because.......reasons?

    He was either pushing 80 or already in his 80s, this particular infections was particularly deadly for the elderly

    There was an article during the height of the pandemic detailing his daily schedule at the time. He was working like 20 hours a day. And all his TV interviews was in addition to everything he was doing behind the scenes

    So to recap, nearing retirement Dr. Anthony Fauci releases this disease, which targets the demographic he, his spouse, and I'm assuming his closest friends, family and colleagues belong to.

    The ensuing pandemic subjects him to an extended work schedule that would exhaust a college student. The nation's and global economy crater, millions of people die, million's more are still suffering from long covid, many of whom will never recover

    And all because.......what again?
     
    Last edited:
    I googled it for you.

    An infection with leishmania parasites spread by sandflies.

    You know the study I'm talking about it involves beagles right?
    You do know that the disease strikes dogs, right?

    Or perhaps only ugly dogs should be tested?

    Btw, I knew what it was long before you responded.
     
    Maybe I missed it if it was posted somewhere in this thread, but what was the supposed endgame here?

    Dr. Fauci was been with NIH for decades worked with administrations of both parties and was by all accounts well respected by everyone

    After all this time he decides to unleash (or at least facilitate and coverup the unleashing of) a worldwide plague because.......reasons?

    He was either pushing 80 or already in his 80s, this particular infections was particularly deadly for the elderly

    There was an article during the height of the pandemic detailing his daily schedule at the time. He was working like 20 hours a day. And all his TV interviews was in addition to everything he was doing behind the scenes

    So to recap, nearing retirement Dr. Anthony Fauci releases this disease, which targets the demographic he, his spouse, I'm assuming his closest friends and colleagues belong to.

    The ensuing pandemic subjects him to an extended work schedule that would exhaust a college student. The nation's and global economy crater, millions of people die, million's more are still suffering from long covid, many of whom will never recover

    And all because.......what again?
    According to some people it was all about power...the power to make people stand 6 feet apart and wear masks.

    1718053348320.png
     
    Maybe I missed it if it was posted somewhere in this thread, but what was the supposed endgame here?

    Dr. Fauci was been with NIH for decades worked with administrations of both parties and was by all accounts well respected by everyone

    After all this time he decides to unleash (or at least facilitate and coverup the unleashing of) a worldwide plague because.......reasons?

    He was either pushing 80 or already in his 80s, this particular infections was particularly deadly for the elderly

    There was an article during the height of the pandemic detailing his daily schedule at the time. He was working like 20 hours a day. And all his TV interviews was in addition to everything he was doing behind the scenes

    So to recap, nearing retirement Dr. Anthony Fauci releases this disease, which targets the demographic he, his spouse, I'm assuming his closest friends and colleagues belong to.

    The ensuing pandemic subjects him to an extended work schedule that would exhaust a college student. The nation's and global economy crater, millions of people die, million's more are still suffering from long covid, many of whom will never recover

    And all because.......what again?

    Because he wanted to control MAGA Republicans. /s
     
    Maybe I missed it if it was posted somewhere in this thread, but what was the supposed endgame here?
    The endgame is to hold people responsible for causing a pandemic that killed 20 million people and cost 25 trillion.

    The most important thing is to make sure gain of function research is permanently banned before it causes a pandemic again.
    Dr. Fauci was been with NIH for decades worked with administrations of both parties and was by all accounts well respected by everyone
    Democrats were questioning Fauci back during the AIDS crisis similar to how Republicans questioned him on Covid.

    Gay activist/playwright Larry Kramer's scathing 1988 letter on Fauci's handling of the AIDS epidemic:

    ...It doesn’t take a genius to announce that you have elected to personally supervise the study of a broad range of new drugs. Yet, two years later, you are forced to admit you’ve barely begun.

    It doesn’t take a genius to request, as you did, 126 new staff persons, receive only 11, and then keep your mouth shut about it.

    It takes an incompetent idiot.

    To quote Representative Henry Waxman at the above hearings: “Dr. Fauci, your own drug selection committee has named 24 drugs as high priority for development and trials. As best as I can tell, 11 of these 24 are not in trials yet. Six of these drugs have been waiting for six months to more than a year. Why the delays? I understand the need to do what you call setting priorities but it appears even with your own scientists’ choices the trials are not going on.”

    Your defense? “There are just confounding delays that no one can help… we are responsible as investigators to make sure that in our zeal to go quickly, that we do the clinical study correctly, that it’s planned correctly and executed correctly, rather than just having the drug distributed.”

    ...How many years ago did we tell you about aerosol pentamidine, Tony? This stuff saves lives. And we discovered it ourselves. We came to you, bearing this great news on a silver platter, begging you: can we get it officially tested; can we get it approved so insurance companies and Medicaid will pay for it (as well as other drugs we beg you to test) as a routine treatment, and our patients going broke paying for medicine can get it cheaper? You monster.

    “Assume that you have AIDS, and that you’ve had pneumonia once,” Representative Nancy Pelosi said. “You know that aerosolized pentamidine was evaluated by NIH as highly promising… You know as of today that the delays in NIH trials… may not be solved this year… Would you wait for [an NIH] study?”[/I)

    You replied: “I probably would go with what would be available to me, be it available in the street or what have you.”

    After all this time he decides to unleash (or at least facilitate and coverup the unleashing of) a worldwide plague because.......reasons?
    I have never said or implied that Covid was purposely released. I assume is was accidentally released due to negligence and improper safety training. A State Department cable in 2018(I think that was the year) talked about concern that the Wuhan lab lacked the proper safety equipment and training for the staff in Wuhan.

    Fauci helped with the coverup probably felt bad because of the NIH funding the research in Wuhan.
    He was either pushing 80 or already in his 80s, this particular infections was particularly deadly for the elderly

    There was an article during the height of the pandemic detailing his daily schedule at the time. He was working like 20 hours a day. And all his TV interviews was in addition to everything he was doing behind the scenes

    So to recap, nearing retirement Dr. Anthony Fauci releases this disease, which targets the demographic he, his spouse, I'm assuming his closest friends and colleagues belong to.

    The ensuing pandemic subjects him to an extended work schedule that would exhaust a college student. The nation's and global economy crater, millions of people die, million's more are still suffering from long covid, many of whom will never recover

    And all because.......what again?
    It's nice that he's a hard worker and dedicated to his profession, but when you are funding controversial research that causes a worldwide pandemic and you help to cover up your and your governments role I could care less about him being dedicated to his job.

    The question is why are Democrats still so desperate to protect him despite everything we know now.
     
    The endgame is to hold people responsible for causing a pandemic that killed 20 million people and cost 25 trillion.

    The most important thing is to make sure gain of function research is permanently banned before it causes a pandemic again.

    Why are you voting for Trump then?
     
    The endgame is to hold people responsible for causing a pandemic that killed 20 million people and cost 25 trillion.
    I’m assuming you don’t include the person with the decision-making authority for the national response?

    And the question was not what is your goal. It’s what do you think Fauci’s goal was? What did he have to gain?
     
    I’m assuming you don’t include the person with the decision-making authority for the national response?

    And the question was not what is your goal. It’s what do you think Fauci’s goal was? What did he have to gain?

    It goes even further then that. Obama paused all gain of function research. Does anyone want take a wild guess which administration started it back up in 2017?

    It's why Fox used to run propaganda about Fauci tricking Trump.

     
    It goes even further then that. Obama paused all gain of function research. Does anyone want take a wild guess which administration started it back up in 2017?

    It's why Fox used to run propaganda about Fauci tricking Trump.

    And Trump was intimately involved in that decision 😆
     
    Was Trump working at the lab in Wuhan or did he approve the funding for the gain of research in Wuhan?
    He was in charge of the national response to the crisis that killed the millions of people that you claimed to want to prevent in the future and hold people accountable for.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom