[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[rollo tomasi]

"Research in this manuscript was supported by grants from the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Disease and the National Institute of Aging of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) under awards U19AI109761 (R.S.B.), U19AI107810 (R.S.B.), AI085524 (W.A.M.), F32AI102561 (V.D.M.) and K99AG049092 (V.D.M.), and by the National Natural Science Foundation of China awards 81290341 (Z.-L.S.) and 31470260 (X.-Y.G.), and by USAID-EPT-PREDICT funding from EcoHealth Alliance (Z.-L.S.). Human airway epithelial cultures were supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease of the NIH under award NIH DK065988 (S.H.R.). We also thank M.T. Ferris (Dept. of Genetics, University of North Carolina) for the reviewing of statistical approaches and C.T. Tseng (Dept. of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Texas Medical Branch) for providing Calu-3 cells.

Experiments with the full-length and chimeric SHC014 recombinant viruses were initiated and performed before the GOF research funding pause and have since been reviewed and approved for continued study by the NIH. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.

Notice, below, that Boyd F. Yount, Jr. “designed the infectious clone and recovered chimeric viruses” and the “Bat Lady” from Wuhan, Zhengli Li Shi “ provided the SCH014 spike sequences and plasmids”

“A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence” Nat Med: 2015 Dec;21(12):1508-13

Fauci was either in on it (From his zeal to continue on after his work was declared BSL-4 I say yes) or just totally incompetent. Either way he should be strung up (In Mindcraft of course)

[Disambiguator]

Splitting hairs. Bottom line is that the virus was engineered by humans, not a bat virus mutation.

[Political Junkie Too]

The issue as I see it is not the phrase "gain of function," it's the phrase "technically correct."

First, "technically correct" is not a phrase you will hear applied to Republicans, as "President Trump was technically correct when he said..."

Second, as I understand it's usage regarding "gain of function" definitions, it is spin to sidestep the fact that the "gain of function" (or whatever you want to call it) bypassed the highest lab security protocols for dangerous virus experimentation.

From what I've read, Fauci's "technically correct" definition was what was used to avoid having to go through the most rigorous laboratory procedures, monitoring, and reporting requirements.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

-PJ

[Bryan24]

Did they modify the virus? That is a simple question that can be answered Yes or No.

Fauci got caught helping China modify viruses. He should be imprisoned for stupidity, even if no laws were broken.

[DesertRhino]

Pure meaningless sophistry. They are taking animal viruses, and deliberately giving them the ability to spread wildly in humans.

The virus is gaining the function of being able to spread in humans. It’s illegal, and Fauci lied. Paul exposed him.

This article is like when our side hears a democrat mention an AR-15 or an AK as an assault rifle. We smugly explain that it is NOT an assault rifle because it does not go full auto. Then we strut around like we made a devastating point.
Meanwhile everyone else goes back to discussing upcoming assault rifle laws.

Paul was right, Fauci lied. Fauci facilitated the creation of this virus. The article is pointless except to hobbiests.

[ifinnegan]

“I’m disappointed in Sen. Paul for not highlighting this very important distinction.”

You seem not to realize you do not describe or state what “this very important distinction” is.