Richard H. Ebright Profile picture
Sep 7, 2021 10 tweets 2 min read Read on X
"NEWLY RELEASED documents provide details of US-funded research on..coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology..The Intercept has obtained more than 900 pages of documents detailing..work of..EcoHealth Alliance..at the Chinese lab.."

interc.pt/3yN1YIj
"The trove of documents includes two previously unpublished grant proposals that were funded by the NIAID, as well as project updates relating to the EcoHealth Alliance’s research, which has been scrutinized amid increased interest in the origins of the pandemic."
The materials show that the 2014 and 2019 NIH grants to EcoHealth with subcontracts to WIV funded gain-of-function research as defined in federal policies in effect in 2014-2017 and potential pandemic pathogen enhancement as defined in federal policies in effect in 2017-present.
(This had been evident previously from published research papers that credited the 2014 grant and from the publicly available summary of the 2019 grant. But this now can be stated definitively from progress reports of the 2014 grant and the full proposal of the 2017 grant.)
The materials confirm the grants supported the construction--in Wuhan--of novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses that combined a spike gene from one coronavirus with genetic information from another coronavirus, and confirmed the resulting viruses could infect human cells.
The materials reveal that the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses also could infect mice engineered to display human receptors on cells ("humanized mice").
The materials further reveal for the first time that one of the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses--one not been previously disclosed publicly--was more pathogenic to humanized mice than the starting virus from which it was constructed...
...and thus not only was reasonably anticipated to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity, but, indeed, was *demonstrated* to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity.
The materials further reveal that the the grants also supported the construction--in Wuhan--of novel chimeric MERS-related coronaviruses that combined spike genes from one MERS-related coronavirus with genetic information from another MERS-related coronavirus.
The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Richard H. Ebright

Richard H. Ebright Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @R_H_Ebright

Jun 7
There were two funding cutouts between the NIH and the reckless coronavirus gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology: (1) Peter Daszak on NIH grant AI110864, and (2) Peter Hotez on NIH grant AI098775. Image
Read 6 tweets
Jun 2
"Vincent Munster and Claude Kwe, both researchers with the NIH at the Rocky Mountain Laboratory were charged today in a criminal complaint with conspiracy to smuggle monkeypox into the US and giving false statements to federal law enforcement"

justice.gov/usao-edmi/pr/f…
"Vincent Munster, a citizen of the Netherlands, 53, is the Chief of the Virus Ecology Section, Laboratory of Virology at the Rocky Mountain Laboratory in Hamilton, Montana. Claude Kwe, a citizen of Cameroon, 38, is a research fellow in Munster’s section. "
"The work of both men is focused on 'emerging viral pathogens and how those pathogens 'cross the species barrier.' They work at a Biosafety Level 4 laboratory"
Read 8 tweets
May 19
HHS letter: "This is to notify you...I have suspended you and initiated proceedings to debar you from participating in Federal Government procurement...programs....[Y]ou lack the present responsibility to participate in Federal procurement...programs."

science.org/cms/asset/8669…Image
"NIH found that, based on his own statements and published research, Dr. Ralph Baric was engaged in GoF research that was subject to the October 17, 2014, U.S. Government funding pause and NIH Notice Number: NOT-OD-15-011, Funding Pause for Certain Types of Gain-of-Function Research Projects to that effect, and continued to participate in in GoF research even after being notified of this by the NIH."
"Also, the NIH found that Dr. Ralph Baric was not forthcoming surrounding his Wellcome Trust grant in documents submitted to the NIH."
Read 5 tweets
Apr 29
A.I. Bots Told Scientists How to Make Biological Weapons
nytimes.com/2026/04/29/us/…
"Dr. David Relman went cold at his laptop as an A.I. chatbot told him how to plan a massacre...[T]he chatbot explained how to modify an infamous pathogen in a lab so that it would resist known treatments."
"Worse, the bot described in vivid detail how to release the superbug, identifying a security lapse in a large public transit system...The bot outlined a plan to maximize casualties and minimize the chances of being caught."
Read 12 tweets
Apr 28
Fauci's autopen preemptive pardon prevents Fauci from being indicted together with Morens.

Nevertheless, Fauci needs to be compelled, under subpoena, to testify about his role in operating a RICO out of the NIAID Office of Director.
Read 8 tweets
Apr 16
HHMI President O'Shea: "[T]he authors propose a shift in what counts in the biomedical sciences: researchers should be recognized for what they choose to share on their own terms and timeline (for example as preprints), not what journals select"

zenodo.org/records/196007…Image
"Current incentives for researchers place a strong emphasis on journal publications...[I]ncentives that tie journal peer review to editorial selection of articles,,,work against the timely and authentic communication of research findings."
"Resolving this issue requires more than reforming who edits journals or how they are funded. It demands a structural separation between dissemination (publishing and peer review) and selection (curation)."
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(