October 6, 2022, 1:23

COVID Origins: Fauci’s Change of Mind & Daszak’s EcoHealth Projects Deserve Scrutiny, Analyst Says – 08.06.2021, Sputnik International

COVID Origins: Fauci’s Change of Mind & Daszak’s EcoHealth Projects Deserve Scrutiny, Analyst Says – 08.06.2021, Sputnik International

Subscribe

Ekaterina BlinovaAll materialsWrite to the authorJoe Biden and Anthony Fauci’s apparent change of heart related to the coronavirus origin is noteworthy and triggers further questions, according to Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel, who believes that Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance also deserves serious scrutiny.

The hypothesis suggesting that SARS-COV-2 leaked from a Chinese lab in Wuhan is “plausible” and “deserves further investigation,” says a study by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, as quoted by The Wall Street Journal.

Although the study was prepared in May 2020, it has attracted fresh interest in Congress as the White House investigates the theory coronavirus leaked from a lab, something that was previously regarded as a crackpot idea. However, China’s Foreign Ministry has denounced the probe and accused Washington of “political manipulation and blame shifting.”

Abrupt Change of Mind

On 23 May, a previously undisclosed US intelligence report surfaced claiming that several researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell ill in November 2019 and were hospitalised shortly before the confirmed COVID outbreak.

Earlier, White House chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci told American senators on 11 May that the possibility of the virus having escaped from the lab “certainly exists,” adding that he was “totally in favour of a full investigation of whether that could have happened.” The statement came in contradiction with his earlier assertions that available evidence on the origins of the virus “are totally consistent with a jump from a species from an animal to a human.” Thus, on 17 April 2020, Fauci rejected the notion that the coronavirus was created in a lab during a White House press conference.

On 25 and 26 May, Fauci said the National Institutes of Health (NIH) designated a modest grant of $600,000 for China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology to study whether bat coronaviruses could be transmitted to humans. Although he denied that the NIH funded any “gain-of-function research” into whether a virus can change in a way that increases pathogenesis, transmissibility, or host range, he didn’t rule out that the grantees could do that on their own. “You never know,” Fauci said, while testifying before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Health & Human Services.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) also appears unsure about the origins of the virus. Despite the entity’s March 2021 report concluding the disease most likely originated in a bat or other animal and spread to humans through an intermediate host, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus stated that further studies are needed to find out the roots of SARS-COV-2.

“I expect future collaborative studies to include more timely and comprehensive data sharing,” Adhanom stated on 30 March. “I do not believe that this assessment was extensive enough.”

An aerial view shows the P4 laboratory (L) at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province on April 17, 2020

Controversy Surrounds Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth

Meanwhile, a trove of Fauci emails released by BuzzFeed News and The Washington Post earlier this month fuelled the ongoing controversy.

One of the emails was from Peter Daszak, a zoologist and president of the EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit that funnelled NIH money into the Wuhan Institute of Virology. On 18 April 2020, Daszak personally thanked Fauci for rejecting the theory that the coronavirus leaked from a lab.

According to documents available in the public domain, the NIH announced a grant for a research project titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” in 2014. The funds were sent through EcoHealth Alliance, a nongovernmental research group that focuses on emerging diseases caused by human and animal interactions. In total, EcoHealth received $3,378,896 in NIH funding for the project with just $600,000 going to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

As then-President Donald Trump doubled down on the Wuhan lab leak theory last year, Daszak drafted an open letter signed by 27 scientists for the reputable peer-reviewed general medical journal The Lancet. The statement that strongly condemned the theory that COVID-19 did not have natural origins was published on 19 February 2020.

In addition to this, Daszak later joined a group of the WHO investigators probing the origins of the coronavirus in China in February 2021, triggering a wave of conflict-of-interest accusations: being part of the WHO and The Lancet investigation teams, the EcoHealth president has had long financial and professional ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Commenting on Daszak’s conduct, Nicolas Wade, a British author and former science writer at Nature, Science, and The New York Times, wrote on 5 May 2021 that “virologists like Daszak had much at stake in the assigning of blame for the pandemic.” Wade suggested that “if the SARS2 virus had indeed escaped from research he funded, Daszak would be potentially culpable.” At the same time, however, the author underscored that “so far there is no direct evidence” either for the lab leak theory or the natural origin of the virus.

Peter Ben Embarek, right, gestures as Peter Daszak, left, approaches to bump fists with him before they leave the hotel with other members of a World Health Organization team for another day of field visit in Wuhan in central China’s Hubei province Tuesday, Feb. 2, 2021
What is EcoHealth Really Up to?

According to Ortel, there is more controversy surrounding Daszak and his EcoHealth Alliance. For example, the non-profit IRS filings “are replete with apparent errors, and explain that EcoHealth has strayed far from its original authorised tax-exempt purpose which was protecting wildlife facing extinction,” the analyst notes.

It also raises questions as to why in addition to NIH and USAID, EcoHealth was funded by the US Department of Defence. According to the Independent Science News website, the Pentagon provided nearly $39 million for the EcoHealth Alliance “including contracts, grants, and subcontracts” between 2013 and 2020. Of this amount, $34.6 million came from the Defence Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a DoD branch tasked with “counter[ing] and deter[ring] weapons of mass destruction and improvised threat networks.”

The Independent Science News suggests that for some unknown reason EcoHealth “obscures its Pentagon funding” on its website.

Twisted Narrative

The abrupt change of mind on part of Joe Biden, Anthony Fauci, Big Media, and Big Tech as well as Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth programmes give more questions than answers, according to the Wall Street analyst.

On the other hand, the Biden administration’s investigation into the origins of the virus appears to be aimed at diverting the public attention from potential questions about the US’ virology research to China’s role in the alleged “leak,” according to a 1 June op-ed by award-winning British journalist Jonathan Cook.

Sourse: sputniknews.com

Related posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *