"Gain of Function" is a Misnomer when referencing SARS-CoV-2's Lab Origins [vanity]

FR | 7/25/2021 | self

[logi_cal869]

I'm disappointed in Sen. Paul for not highlighting this very important distinction. And Fauxi is probably laughing about it (e.g. "You don't know what you're talking about." Fauxi is absolutely correct).

I was literally yelling at the radio when they played segments of Paul & Fauxi; perhaps someone reading this can send a dutiful message to someone else with a direct line to Dr. Paul so he actually sounds informed "about what he's talking about" next time and put that pr!ck Fauxi in his place.

If anyone sources their new terminology beyond what is asserted in this 2013 paper as being newer than GOFOC, please share it in forum.

[Sacajaweau]

You’re full of it...

[Lazamataz]

You sound like Joe Biden.

[Chode]

a rose...

[big bad easter bunny]

Rand Paul is not ignorant, even if you keep saying it but since you do I figure you must be ignorant!

[Track9]

The meaningful part is simply did they modify the code so it would jump species and now infect humans. The rest is irrelevant.

[BlueHorseShoe]

You’re kidding me, right? Have you been drinking idiot juice?

You know nothing. You couldn’t be more wrong. You don’t even deserve to have the info shown to you. Stop. You’re embarrassing yourself.

[fireman15]

“parroting the terminology used by even ignorant Sen Paul”

Because attacking the credibility of someone who is on our side and one of the few members of the Senate who is an actual doctor is always such a good idea...

“Gain of function of concern” vs “Gain of function” would seem to most to be completely trivial nitpicking. It is along the lines of someone referring to the “Tour de France” as “The Tour” when referring to the recently concluded bicycle race. It has no importance depending on the context of the conversation.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Arguing semantics. Josef Fauci knew exactly what Paul was talking about.

[smokingfrog]

Whether or not gain of function was taking place, I would argue that taxpayer $ should not have been used to fund Wuhan research. From what I understand, the French helped to build that lab and were then kicked out.

https://reason.com/2021/07/23/is-anthony-fauci-lying-about-nih-funding-of-wuhan-lab-research-or-is-rand-paul/

[Macoozie]

“whenever researchers are working with RNA viruses, GoF mutations are naturally arising all the time”

so . . . whenever scientists are working with RNA viruses, GOF mutations are naturally arising all the time?

Yeah I thought that’s how it read.

so . . . Scientists working with RNA viruses produce GoF mutations.

Kind of easy for most folks to see, unless you are too “nuanced” to think freely anymore.

[SERKIT]

Fauci can GOFOC himself. “Gain of Function” is a euphemism for the biological weaponizing of various viruses. The Chinee Communist Party and Chinese Military (sorry to be redundant) spearheaded this study which led to a leak at a poorly run lab that Fauci helped fund. Occam’s Razor leads us to some very easy dots that have yet to be openly connected.

[BushCountry]

Gain of Function is only three words. If something (anything) is modified to function in a whole new way, it has gained a function.

I don’t need Bill Clinton to say, “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

Words have meaning. Modifying an animal virus to infect humans is a gain of function.

[proust]

“If we only knew the right phrase, then shazam!”

Fauci is doing the lawyer dance. It isn’t working. Rand is winning.

[enumerated]

You and your man-crush Fauci remind me of Rapist-in-Chief Bill Clinton when he said “…it depends on what the definition of “is” is.”

You know perfectly well that Senator Paul is right and that Fauci is as corrupt as they come - an extremely well-paid liar.

Nobody cares about your Clintonian quibble over semantics.

[BushCountry]

so . . . Scientists working with RNA viruses produce GoF mutations.

We’re talking about purposely directing the GoF variants to attack humans, making a weapon. This does not happen all the time.

It is stupid comparing a naturally occurring mutation during simple research to making a biological weapon. What was happening in the lab funded by NIH was weapons research and Fauci was buried neck deep.

[logi_cal869]

FISH ON!

[rollo tomasi]

"In an interview with Megyn Kelly Wednesday, Rogin revealed that scientists who wish to speak out on details of COVID-19 are barred from doing so since research funding comes from organizations like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) which are influenced or run by Fauci.

I often talk to scientists who say the same thing, that say, ‘Listen, we really want to speak out about this, but we can’t do it. Why can’t we do it? Well, we get all of our funding from NIH, or NIAID… which is run by Dr. Fauci,' he said on Kelly’s podcast. “And so we can’t say anything like ‘Oh, gain-of-function research might be dangerous, or it might have come from a lab, because we’re going to lose our careers, we’re going to lose our funding, we’re not going to be able to do the work.'"

Gain-of-function research, which puts pressure on the transmissibility and mutation of pathogens, was advanced five years prior to the coronavirus outbreak in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology–which receives funds to conduct related research from the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) which is overseen by Fauci.

"The head of the funding, the head of the entire field, really, is Anthony Fauci,” he said. "He’s the godfather of gain-of-function research as we know it. That, again, just what I said right there, is too hot for TV because people don’t want to think about the fact that our hero of the pandemic… might also have been connected to this research, which might also have been connected to the outbreak."

[Robert DeLong]

"GOF RESEARCH AS DEFINED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT"

This was written by Fauci in 2015, after having been told to stop GOF funding in 2014.

So, ask yourself was this written with the intent to continue GOF funding using slight of hand by muddying the waters so to speak, to enable continuation of funding for GOF research?

Seems likely, as it absolves him from technically, as per definition of GOF research that was now defined, of engaging in GOF funding.

Just too darn convenient, don't you think? To further remove himself, he funded a 3rd party that he knew was funding the Wuhan Lab with the NIH/NIAID funds awarded to Peter Daszak president of EcoHealth Alliance, which had already resulted in another pandemic in 2014.

Gain-of-Function Research: Background and Alternatives

The following pertains to the link directly above:

Board on Life Sciences; Division on Earth and Life Studies; Committee on Science, Technology, and Law; Policy and Global Affairs; Board on Health Sciences Policy; National Research Council; Institute of Medicine. Potential Risks and Benefits of Gain-of-Function Research: Summary of a Workshop. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2015 Apr 13.

[logi_cal869]

“You and your man-crush Fauci”...”Nobody cares about your Clintonian quibble over semantics.”

---

Except Fauxi and his handlers. I never wrote that Paul was wrong about Fauxi, but he’s horribly ignorant about GOF and Fauxi called him out on it.

Many FReepers are as well. That’s a shame, but it happens here with EVERY controversial topic.

They’re in full attack mode to defend the status quo and you deny the obvious, now stated clearly for the first time (in spite of the prognostications of other ignoramuses).

Maybe you should read my WHOLE post and see the very last line.

How do you type with your head so far up your backside?