Dr Fauci said social distancing 'six foot rule' was not based on scientific data Despite efforts to silence lab leak theorists, Fauci admitted it is not a conspiracy READ MORE: Fauci flip flops during first 7-hour session of grilling before House By CASSIDY MORRISON SENIOR HEALTH REPORTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
Dr Anthony Fauci admitted that the lab leak Covid origin theory was credible as he shed more light on the chaotic decision-making process behind the scenes of America's pandemic response.
During his second day of marathon grilling by Congress, the former White House advisor confessed that the lab leak - the idea Covid was engineered and accidentally released from a lab in Wuhan - was 'not a conspiracy theory'
ADDENDUM: FAUCI; GATES;
1. ‘Gain-of-function’ research: What it is and who is doing it in North Carolina
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/gain-of-function-research-what-it-is-and-who-is-doing-it-in-north-carolina/ar-AAMpLBd
Gain-of-function’ research: What it is and who is doing it in North Carolina
Zachery Eanes, The News & Observer (Raleigh, N.C.) 7/22/2021
Jul. 22—A fiery exchange between Sen. Rand Paul and Dr. Anthony Fauci, the country’s top infectious disease expert, during a congressional hearing on Tuesday is bringing attention once again to a type of research referred to as gain-of-function.
The shouting match between Fauci and Paul was about whether the National Institutes of Health had ever funded gain-of-function research at a prominent virology lab in Wuhan, China.
As the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic remains unknown, eyes have been turning toward the Wuhan lab, which is located in the city where the first cases of COVID-19 were reported.
In May, President Joe Biden called for a more thorough investigation of the origins of the pandemic, with the potential of the virus being leaked from a lab being re-examined. However, a natural origin of the virus via animal-to-human transmission is still considered most likely by scientists.
But the reconsideration of a lab leak has led to more inquiries into protocols at the Wuhan lab, including whether it was conducting gain-of-function research to make coronaviruses more transmissible.
The subset of research known as gain of function has caught the attention of many, including North Carolina Republican Rep. Madison Cawthorn, who said on Tuesday that gain-of-function research in North Carolina needed “to be stopped forthwith.”
Here are answers to some common questions about the research and its presence in North Carolina.
WHAT IS GAIN OF FUNCTION RESEARCH?
Gain-of-function research has gone on for years and involves experiments that take viruses, or other organisms, and alters their genetic make-up to gain a new ability. In viruses, this can mean making it more transmissible or perhaps more deadly.
The research is often intended to demonstrate how viruses could evolve in the near future, and give researchers something on which to test different medical treatments, like vaccines.
In theory, if you could show how one virus that isn’t dangerous to humans at the moment could evolve to attack the human immune system, you could begin preparing for a future where that virus variant exists.
WHY IS GAIN OF FUNCTION RESEARCH CONTROVERSIAL?
This type of research has long been controversial, with many scientists saying the risks outweigh any potential insights from it.
In fact, concern over the potential danger of creating a new virus that could be highly contagious to humans led to the administration of President Barack Obama putting a moratorium on new gain-of-function research in 2014. However, this ban only applied to gain-of-function research that was being conducted on the SARS, MERS and influenza viruses.
The ban had its origins in a 2011 study involving H5N1 influenza viruses that had been modified in a lab to make airborne transmission possible between ferrets, The Lancet reported. The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity asked researchers not to publish their methodology for modifying the H5N1 virus over concerns that bad actors could use it to cause an outbreak in humans. (Those studies, however, were eventually released in full.)
Then in 2014, a series of security mishaps at Centers for Disease Control labs caused a re-examination of lab security across the nation, and built momentum to limiting gain-of-function research.
The ban was lifted in 2017. Now gain-of-function research is evaluated on a case-by-case basis with a review board at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services signing off on experiments with high scientific merit.
Scientists were split on the decision, with some calling it necessary and others saying it would leave society less prepared to deal with future pandemics.
“Gain-of-function experiments allow us to understand how pandemic viruses evolve, so that we can make predictions, develop countermeasures, and do disease surveillance,” Carrie Wolinetz, head of the NIH Office of Science Policy, told The Lancet in 2018.
But Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, told the science journal Nature that he believed most gain-of-function studies “have done almost nothing to improve our preparedness for pandemics — yet they risked creating an accidental pandemic.”
IS IT BEING DONE IN NORTH CAROLINA?
Gain-of-function research has been done in North Carolina, most notably at the lab of UNC-Chapel Hill researcher Ralph Baric.
Baric is one of the world’s preeminent coronavirus researchers, beginning his study of the family of viruses in the 1990s before they were seen as potentially pandemic-level dangerous to humans.
Baric has used gain-of-function techniques to show how coronaviruses could evolve to infect humans and to test new vaccine methods to neutralize them.
This research, and his co-byline with a Chinese scientist on a 2015 paper, has made him the subject of many conspiracy theories over the past year over the origin of COVD-19. But the virus Baric used in the 2015 paper is a completely different strain from the one that causes COVID-19.
The 2015 paper, co-authored with more than a dozen other scientists, including one associated with the WUHAN INSTITUTE OF VIROLOGY, a lab located near the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak, showed coronaviruses in bats were capable of directly infecting humans rather than evolving in another animal first.
Bats have been shown to be responsible for other coronaviruses in the past, like SARS and MERS, though the virus passed through a different animal host before infecting humans in those cases. To prove the theory, scientists created a a hybrid version of a bat coronavirus (the gain-of-function in this experiment) and used it to infect mice whose modified genomes mimicked human lung receptors.
This experiment was already underway when the GOVERNMENT MORATORIUM ON GAIN-OF-FUNCTION RESEARCH WAS IMPOSED. But it was granted an exemption by the National Institutes of Health under a clause that allowed gain-of-function research if it was necessary to protect public health, The MIT Technology Review reported.
Baric noted in his paper the large safety precautions taken for his research, including the fact that it was done in a biosafety level 3 lab, air-locked to keep potential airborne toxins from escaping. But even at Baric’s lab, accidents have happened, including a researcher being bitten by an infected mouse.
In the paper, Baric noted that the merits of this type of research were being debated. “The potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks must be weighed against the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens,” he wrote. “Scientific review panels may deem similar studies building chimeric viruses based on circulating strains too risky to pursue.”
But Baric’s work had critics. “The only impact of this work is the creation, in a lab, of a new, non-natural risk,” Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist and bio-defence expert at Rutgers University, told Nature.
Gain-of-function research is NOT LIMITED to viruses. A search of NIH grants to North Carolina institutions shows dozens of projects that mention the term gain-of-function, including ones at N.C. State University looking at pig models for colorectal cancer and one at Duke University that is studying how the heart repairs itself after heart attacks.
DID NIH FUND CHINESE IS GAIN-OF-FUNCTION RESEARCH ?
Unlike in Chapel Hill, similar research on coronaviruses at a lab in China were only done at BSL-2 safety levels, Technology Review reported.
The WUHAN LAB HAD RECEIVED FUNDING FROM THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH, though not directly. In 2015, the NIH gave a roughly $3 million grant to the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance to study bat-borne coronaviruses in China, NPR reported. A small part of the money — about $76,000 per year, according to NPR — went to the Wuhan lab as a subcontractor.
The NIH did not consider EcoHealth’s work with the Wuhan lab to be IS GAIN OF FUNCTION because it did not have the goal of making viruses more deadly or transmissible, Technology Review said.
“This has been evaluated multiple times by qualified people to not fall under the gain-of-function definition,” Fauci said of the funding on Tuesday.
In an interview with Technology Review last month, however, Baric expressed concern with how coronaviruses were being studied in BSL-2 labs in China, But he still believes a natural origin for the virus is more likely than it being the result of a lab leak.
Baric and 17 other scientists signed a letter earlier this year that called for a more thorough investigation of the Wuhan lab and the potential of a lab leak.
“Let’s face it: there are going to be unknown viruses in guano, or oral swabs, which are oftentimes pooled. And if you’re attempting to culture a virus, you’re going to have novel strains being dropped onto culture cells,” Baric told Technology Review. “Some will grow. You could get recombinants that are unique. And if that was being done at BSL-2, then there are questions you want to ask.”
This story was produced with financial support from a coalition of partners led by Innovate Raleigh as part of an independent journalism fellowship program. The N&O maintains full editorial control of the work. Learn more; go to bit.ly/newsinnovate.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/gain-of-function-research-what-it-is-and-who-is-doing-it-in-north-carolina/ar-AAMpLBd
VIDEO: Fauci Says You Must Give Up The ‘Individual Right Of Making Your Own Decision For The Greater Good Of Society’
“But you are a member of society... and as a member of society, reaping all the benefits of being a member of society, you have a responsibility to society”
October 3, 2021
Biden regime medical advisor Anthony Fauci insisted that the American people must “give up” their individual rights and freedoms for the “greater good” of society by injecting themselves with COVID vaccines and wearing masks even it goes against their beliefs.
“But you are a member of society… and as a member of society, reaping all the benefits of being a member of society, you have a responsibility to society,” Fauci declared. “And I think each of us, particularly in the context of a pandemic that’s killing millions of people – you have got to look at it and say, there comes a time when you do have to give up what you consider your individual right of making your own decision for the greater good of society.”
DR. FAUCI ON VACCINE MANDATES:
“There comes a time when you do have to give up what you consider your individual right of making your own decision for the greater good of society.” pic.twitter.com/LCkPLOFlqy
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) October 3, 2021
Fauci made headlines in August after seeming to gloat that “things are going to get worse,” and forecasting “pain and suffering” for unvaccinated people:
“But things are going to get worse,” Fauci told ABC’s Jonathan Karl. “If you look at the acceleration of the number of cases, the seven day average has gone up substantially. You know, what we really need to do John, and we say it over and over again, it’s the truth, we have a hundred million people in this country who are eligible to be vaccinated who are not getting vaccinated.”
The controversial infectious diseases spokesperson continued, “So we’re looking, not I believe to lockdown, but we’re looking to some pain and suffering in the future because we’re seeing cases go up, which is the reason why we keep saying over and over again the solution to this is get vaccinated and this would not be happening.”
EXC: COVID-19 Vaccine Advisor To FDA, CDC Attends Wuhan Conference Featuring Chinese Military Researchers. [They’re all still at it.]
https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/covid-vaccine-advisors-attend-wuhan-conference/
https://mediarightnews.com/fauci-divison-of-nih-partly-funded-lab-that-locked-dogs-heads-in-cages-so-that-the-insects-could-eat-them-alive/
Fauci’s NIH division partly funded a lab to drug dogs and “lock their heads in cages filled with hungry
‘CRUEL’ TESTING
Fauci under fire for ‘puppy experiments that saw beagles locked in cage with hungry sandflies that would eat them ALIVE’
DR Anthony Fauci is under fire for allegedly funding experiments where beagle puppies were locked in cages with hungry sandflies that would eat them alive.
The non-profit organization White Coat Waste Project has accused the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of funding a project that had beagles infected with disease-causing parasites in order to test an experimental drug.
Non-profit organization White Coat Waste Project has accused Dr Anthony Fauci of using tax-payer money to fund cruel experiments on puppies in TunisiaCredit: Splash
The White Coat Waste Project claims some of the dogs allegedly had their VOCAL CORD REMOVED TO MUZZLE THEIR BARKING Credit: Alamy
The Hill reports that a bipartisan group of 24 House Representatives has written a letter demanding that Fauci answer to the claims by the nonprofit.
The organization claims that as many as 44 beagle puppies were used as part of the cruel experiment in a Tunisia laboratory.
Some of the dogs had their vocal cords removed to muzzle their barking.
“Our investigators show that Fauci’s NIH division shipped part of a $375,800 grant to a lab in Tunisia to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sandflies so that the insects could eat them alive,” White Coat Waste told The Hill.
“They also locked beagles alone in cages in the desert overnight for nine consecutive nights to use them as bait to attract infectious sand flies, they added.
The NIAID spent directed $1.68million in taxpayer money on these experiments, according to documents obtained by the non-profit.
The letter was signed by some Democrats such as Representatives Cindy Axne from Iowa and Jimmy Gomez from California.
However, it was mostly signed by Republican lawmakers, including Rep Nancy Mace from South Carolina, who’s leading the effort.
“The dogs were all between six and eight months old. The commissioned tests involved injecting and force-feeding the puppies an experimental drug for several weeks, before killing and dissecting them,” said the lawmakers’ letter, according to Newsweek.
“Of particular concern is the fact that the invoice to NIAID included a line item for ‘cordectomy.’ As you are likely aware, a cordectomy, also known as ‘devocalization,’ involves slitting a dog’s vocal cords in order to prevent them from barking, howling, or crying.”
“This cruel procedure – which is opposed with rare exceptions by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Animal Hospital Association, and others – seems to have been performed so that experimenters would not have to listen to the pained cries of the beagle puppies. This is a reprehensible misuse of taxpayer funds.”
Among the questions the lawmakers want answered is how many drug tests have been done on dogs since January 2018 and how much they have cost.
They also want to know why these tests were performed if the FDA does not require new drugs to be tested on dogs.
Fauci, who is also President Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser, has previously found himself under hot water after being accused of lying to the American public after documents seemed to contradict his claims that his agency did not fund research of coronaviruses in a Wuhan, China, lab.
The NIAID spent directed $1.68million in taxpayer money to these experiments, according to documents obtained by the non-profit
Lawmakers want to know why these tests were performed if the FDA does not require new drugs to be tested on dogs
https://www.the-sun.com/news/3920949/fauci-puppy-experiments-beagles-locked-in-cage/
FAUCEI FUNDED LAB That Drugged Beagle Puppies, Locked Their Heads In Cages Where Sand Flies Ate Them Alive – Report
Some of the dogs had their vocal cords cut out so the scientists wouldn’t hear their barks.
by Andrew White
October 23, 2021
Dr. Anthony Fauci provided partial funding for a Tunisian laboratory experiment where scientists drugged beagle puppies, locked their heads in mesh cages filled with sand flies, and let the insects eat them alive.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden’s chief medical advisor, is currently under fire over the revelation that his National Institutes of Health division (NIH) was partially funding inhumane and brutal experiments involving beagles in North Africa.
In a new report by The Hill, it has been revealed that National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed by Fauci, gave part of a $375,800 grant to a lab in Tunisia “to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sand flies so that the insects could eat them alive.”
Bipartisan legislators demand answers from Fauci on ‘cruel’ puppy experiments
by Christian Spencer | Oct. 22, 2021 | Oct. 22, 2021
https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/medical-advances/578086-bipartisan-legislators-demand-answers-from-fauci/
A nonprofit organization called White Coat Waste Project is claiming that the NIAID is “infecting dozens of beagles with disease-causing parasites to test an experimental drug on them
The organization is also claiming that some of the 44 beagle puppies used in the Tunisian lab had their vocal cords cut out, allegedly so that “scientists could work without incessant barking.”
Dogs with heads in cages – Source: The Hill
“They also locked beagles alone in cages in the desert overnight for nine consecutive nights,” charged the organization, “To use them as bait to attract infectious sand flies.”
(READ MORE: Fauci Granted $3.1 Million To Peter Daszak’s Org, Partially To ‘Alter Bat Coronaviruses Likely To Infect Humans’)
Several Republican and Democrat lawmakers signed a letter to the NIH condemning the experiments as “cruel” and a “reprehensible misuse of taxpayer funds.”
NIAID and Fauci have yet to comment publicly regarding the puppy experiments in North Africa sandflies so that the insects could eat them alive.”
https://nationalfile.com/fauci-funded-lab-that-drugged-beagle-puppies-locked-their-heads-in-cages-where-sand-flies-ate-them-alive-report/
https://t.co/TuujeCjb3M — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) October 23, 2021
Bipartisan legislators demand answers from Fauci on ‘cruel’ puppy experiments
https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/medical-advances/578086-bipartisan-legislators-demand-answers-from-fauci/
“Our investigators show that Fauci’s NIH division shipped part of a $375,800 grant to a lab in Tunisia to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sand flies so that the insects could eat them alive,” White Coat Waste said.
https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/medical-advances/578086-bipartisan-legislators-demand-answers-from-fauci
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CPRT-115SPRT26354/html/CPRT-115SPRT26354.htm
LEARN ABOUT FAUSI, HIS WIFE, GATES HERE:
COVID-19 VACCINES…A STUDY IN HUMAN SUBJECT EXPERIMENTATION
By Sal Martingano
The story begins with Christine Grady, head of Human Subjects Research and Chief of the Department of Bioethics for the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Christine Grady was an Obama appointee under the Presidential Commission for the Study of Biological Issues from 2010 – 2017. This commission was designed to study the effects of biological intervention on human subjects rather than lab animals. The program was never implemented due to ethical issues, however, under the present worldwide COVID-19 pandemic EMERGENCY, fear has overcome all vaccine safety protocols, opening the door for shortened vaccine development times, using humans as testing guinea pigs.
Could there be a connection between Christine Grady and the Gates Foundation, which has long ADVOCATED HUMAN TESTING in 3rd world countries? In a 2017 speech, Christine Grady discussed advocating the “Framework for the Ethics of Research with Human Subjects” worldwide.
It turns out that there is no direct connection between Christine Grady and the Gates Foundation other than the fact that Christine Grady is married to Dr. Anthony Fauci . . .
▪ Dr. Fauci is not on the board of the Gates Foundation but is intimately tied to the Gates Foundation vaccine interest as the head of the NIH COVID-19 vaccine task force.
▪ In a 2002 Philanthropy News Daily article, the Gates Foundation named Dr. Anthony Fauci to oversee the creation and development of the Vaccine Research Center.
▪ Dr. Fauci’s wife, Christine Grady, is head of Human Subjects Research and Chief of the Department of Bioethics for the National Institutes of Health, making for a cozy relationship within the NIH.
▪ Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation press release (2010): “Global Health Leaders Launch the Decade of Vaccines Collaboration.” The Leadership Council includes Dr. Anthony Fauci.
RESEARCH DONATIONS
FAUCI created PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) Gates benefited from part of the $90 billion in HIV PEPFAR funding Current Director of PEPFAR is Dr. Deborah Birx Fauci and Birx are also the heads of the Corona Virus Task Force Response Team, in part funded by Bill Gates. Notice the tight knit circle of players Bill Gates created Philanthropy Partners and has committed $1.75 billion to test vaccines in Africa and South Asia. (Human testing volunteers outside U.S. jurisdiction.) https://www.gatesfoundation.org/philanthropypartners
Gates knows that America is hostage to the COVID-19 pandemic. Gates knows it takes years to SAFELY develop a vaccine, so for Gates to propose a vaccine within a year, he has FULL support, because COVID is physically ruining our lives. Gates knows that an “untested” vaccine will compromise safety which will FORCE the government to indemnify vaccine makers against liability. (A convenient way to bypass human rights violations.)
Gates and Fauci can finally implement their Biological Human Research Experiment project without need for safety or proof of efficacy. How can this be considered ETHICAL? It becomes ethical when the person in charge of Bioethics and Human Experimentation is Dr. Fauci’s wife. The mRNA vaccine has never been tried before on humans. It’s being FORCED on the population using fear and the elimination of our choices . . . i.e., no vaccine and one can’t fly, enter a hospital or go across state lines.
In Fauci’s NIAID AIDS Agenda Strategy of 3/1/1996 for vaccine development, it states:
“to seek development partnerships between the Institute and industry sponsors.” (i.e., BIG PHARMA). “Dr. Fauci is optimistic that useful vaccines can be developed, despite economic, ethical, and cultural constraints.”………… A euphemistic way of stating that his vaccine agenda will have little regard for the effect it has on the economy (lockdowns), the effect on human existence (possible negative effects on human genetics) or regard for individual rights (forced vaccinations).
It must be noted that the CDC refuses to admit that they have yet isolated a single COVID-19 virus (Dr. Derick Knauss, PhD in Virology and Immunology)
“I’m a clinical lab scientist and have tested 1500 ‘supposed’ positive Covid 19 samples collected here in S. California. When my lab team and I did the testing through Koch’s postulates and observation under a SEM (scanning electron microscope), we found NO Covid in any of the 1500 samples.”
“We at the 7 universities that did the lab tests on these 1500 samples are now suing the CDC for Covid 19 fraud. the CDC has yet to send us a single viable, isolated and purified sample of Covid 19.” I’m a Clinical Lab Scientist, COVID-19 Is Fake, Wake Up America!
6000% Increase Deaths After Vaccines.
First quarter CDC COVID-19 Vaccine Statistics, 1/1/21 – 3/31/21
https://thereport.be/article/?u=https://medicalkidnap.com/2021/03/31/6000-increase-in-reported-vaccine-deaths-1st-quarter-2021-compared-to-1st-quarter-2020/&n=0&s=2&c=1&pn=Anonymous
You are probably younger than me so not aware of Fauci past activities LOL, that's a BIG assumption.
Let me just say that throughout my scientific career, I have seen a lot of respect directed towards Dr. Fauci. He is almost a superman of science. Participating in over 1,000 studies while acting as head of NIAID... I've never personally known a scientist to have over 200 publications in their career, and I've never personally known an agency head or even department head to have time to do research. Certainly, when I was head of a department with over 100 scientists, technicians, graduate students, and interns, there was no way I could have found time to do a research project.
Now, as for Dr. Fauci's AIDS research activities. All I read in your post was a bunch of inference and implication, for instance, talking about the Nuremberg code and then about pediatric AIDS studies in order to create the false impression that the AIDS studies violated worldwide human research ethics. If there is concrete evidence that Dr. Fauci went forward with pediatric AIDS studies without ethical oversight and approval, where is it?
And please explain how the medical community is supposed to develop drugs and treatment protocols to treat pediatric AIDS unless they do studies on pediatric AIDS patients? The FDA will never approve a drug for use in children without it being tested in children within the age group the drug is intended to treat. With the exception of the animal rule, it is impossible to get FDA approval for any drug without human clinical trials. (The animal rule is intended for certain situations in which human studies are unethical or unfeasible.) Product Development Under the Animal Rule Guidance for Industry
As for deaths of children enrolled in the clinical trials, we *are* talking about children who have a disease that is always fatal without treatment. Yes, people who have fatal diseases can and do die during clinical trials without any violations of ethics laws. And (referring to the World Tribune article), if drugs with known toxicities are the only treatments available for AIDS, why *wouldn't* the research community be interested in seeing their efficacy in children? If the drugs are effective, then the toxicities are a reasonable trade-off for preventing the child from dying from AIDS.
Your youtube links only go to some long conspiracy rant in which unrelated items are conspiratorially linked in order to convince people who do not understand the scientific process or method.
You link to a Gateway Pundit article which starts out with lies and does not provide a single link to the medical literature. Nope, that isn't a credible source.
The World Tribune article does no better. It is capitalizing on the fact that most people have no clue about the clinical trial process in order to generate traffic. It says "The Associated Press reported in June 2005: “The government has concluded at least some AIDS drug experiments involving foster children violated federal rules designed to ensure vulnerable youths were protected from the risks of medical research,” but where is the link? Where is a citation to the AP article? Why no information that would enable a reader to independently review the source data?
And then the World Tribune article asks, "Why wasn’t Fauci’s NIH interested in competitive AIDS research?" This question is meaningless. First of all, the NIAID headed by Dr. Fauci is subsidiary to the NIH, so there is no "Fauci's NIH." Second, what do they mean by "competitive AIDS research?" The answer provided in the article was equally nonsensical. In order to determine whether there was, in fact, competition in the AIDS research field at that time, I did a search in Pubmed for ((HIV) AND (pediatric)) AND (children) and found that several research groups all over the world were doing HIV studies in children. So, there was actually a lot of competition there.
I presume that you linked the "COMMITTEE ON FINANCE UNITED STATES SENATE" report as "evidence" of Dr. Fauci's supposed evil wrongdoings, but that is a report on the foster care system. It talks about abuse of foster care children and how oversight of the system is ineffective. And so forth. I searched the document for "research", "study", "studies", "trial", and "clinical" to see if there was any mention of enrolling children in research studies, and found nothing. Any mention of research was referring to research of foster children welfare. The only mention of "trial" was in conjunction with the word "criminal." The word "clinical" referred only to medical care of the children. If there is some smoking gun evidence there to prove that Dr. Fauci was doing experiments on children similar to those done by Japan Unit 731 during WWII, I could not find it.
Finally, the 360 News Las Vegas article is just another conglomeration of anti-medical science conspiracies. A lot of innuendo, a dearth of fact.
In the future, be very careful with your references. If you are trying to relay information, use credible references such as those found in the medical literature. Conspiracy websites and youtube videos do not count as references. And government documents are fine, but read them yourself first to make sure they say what you expect them to say. Being a scientist, I do not just take things at face value without checking them myself. I actually do review links and so forth.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci who is currently under public attack over experiments on dogs funded by his agency, but the organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) says the rot runs deep at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and it goes to the top. PETA is offering a solution, but to make sure President Joe Biden gets the message, PETA is began running full-page ads—today Monday, October 25, 2021 in The Washington Post, Tuesday on Politico and in The Hill, and soon in the Washington Examiner—calling on him to appoint a forward-thinking NIH leader who will end the agency’s funding of animal tests and instead invest in state-of-the-art, animal-free research methods. https://youtu.be/pmcRZOYt8Ro