| You again failed to provide definition. And you seem to get confused about goalposts. So, let me reiterate 3 hard facts here: 1. as my previous link is gone here is 2 pretty same NIH and government definitions of GoF, 2016 and 2025: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/738... (1) Gain-of-function research.--The term ``gain-of-function
research'' means any research that--
(A) involves the genetic alteration of an organism
to change or enhance the organism's biological
functions, which change or enhancement may include
increased infectivity, transmissibility, pathogenicity,
or host range (which is the spectrum of hosts that an
organism can infect); or
(B) may be reasonably anticipated to confer
attributes to an organism, such that the organism would
have enhanced infectivity, pathogenicity, or
transmissibility, or otherwise pose a threat to
national security, public safety, or the health of
humans, companion animals, or livestock, poultry,
seafood and aquaculture species, or game animals.
https://osp.od.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Gain-of-Fu..."Gain-of-function (GOF) research involves experimentation that aims or is expected to (and/or, perhaps, actually
does) increase the transmissibility and/or virulence of pathogens." Both definitions clearly cover Wuhan research - genetically implanting ACE2 binding protein on non-human coronavirus so that the resulting virus infects and kill human cells containing ACE2 receptor. Thus hard fact numero uno - Fauci lied to Congress. 2. >Your claim was that Proximal Origins authors didn't consider the lab leak. No. My claim is that NIH didn't perform any scientific study - which would naturally include peer reviewed publishing of results - of Wuhan created viruses vs. COVID. What doesn't count as such a study is the lazy email chat between several dudes who were recruited by Daszak without even letting them know of the conflict of interests that he and Fauci had on the matter. 3. Fauci as a top leader at a scientific institution had the duty to maintain scientific integrity of the institution. Giving his and Daszak conflict of interests on the matter, he catastrophically failed at maintaining that scientific integrity when he didn't not send independent investigators to Wuhan instead of Daszak. Note how synergistically the fact 3. dovetails with the fact 1. and how that provides very plausible explanation for the fact 2. And with that i rest my case :) |
Great stuff.
And just totally bailing on your claim that "Daszak ran into WIV and destroyed evidence" lol
Have a good night!