Citat:
Att det är förbjudet att bedriva i andra länder betyder inte att slutsatsen blir "så därför gjorde de det just där". Det är ju du som hoppar vidare till en slutsats som helt saknar stöd och som blir totalt orimlig längs vägen.
Nej, USA bedrev inte biovapenforskning i Wuhan, ditt spån. Det bedrevs forskning om coronavirus mot bakgrund av SARS-epidemin, Kina var huvudfinansiär men samarbeten fanns med universitet i nordamerika och Europa.
Du kan läsa på om bakgrunden till Wuhan Institute of Virology här:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_...te_of_Virology
Det bedrevs alltså helt vanlig medicinsk forskning där. Ingenting i närheten av biovapenforskning.
Nej, USA bedrev inte biovapenforskning i Wuhan, ditt spån. Det bedrevs forskning om coronavirus mot bakgrund av SARS-epidemin, Kina var huvudfinansiär men samarbeten fanns med universitet i nordamerika och Europa.
Du kan läsa på om bakgrunden till Wuhan Institute of Virology här:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_...te_of_Virology
Det bedrevs alltså helt vanlig medicinsk forskning där. Ingenting i närheten av biovapenforskning.
Du är ju riktigt riktigt korkad. Inte för jag tror du förstår men för andra i tråden skall jag bifoga information något som du är kliniskt befriad ifrån.
NIH har redan erkänt att det var GF dom finansierade ditt spån
Citat:
At long last, National Institutes of Health (NIH) principal deputy director Lawrence Tabak admitted to Congress Thursday that US taxpayers funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China in the months and years before the COVID-19 pandemic.
Citat:
“Dr. Tabak,” asked Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, “did NIH fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through [Manhattan-based nonprofit] EcoHealth [Alliance]?
“It depends on your definition of gain-of-function research,” Tabak answered. “If you’re speaking about the generic term, yes, we did.”
“It depends on your definition of gain-of-function research,” Tabak answered. “If you’re speaking about the generic term, yes, we did.”
Citat:
The term Gain-of-Function (GoF) describes the gain of new functions by organisms through genetic changes, which can naturally occur or by experimental genetic modifications. Gain-of-Function research on viruses is enhancing transmissibility, virus replication, virulence, host range, immune evasion or drug and vaccine resistance to get insights into the viral mechanisms, to create and analyze animal models, to accelerate drug and vaccine development and to improve pandemic preparedness. A subset is the GoF research of concern (GOFROC) on enhanced potentially pandemic pathogens (ePPPs) that could be harmful for humans. A related issue is the military use of research as dual-use research of concern (DURC). Influenza and coronaviruses are main research targets, because they cause pandemics by airborne infections. Two studies on avian influenza viruses initiated a global debate and a temporary GoF pause in the United States which ended with a new regulatory framework in 2017. In the European Union and China, GoF and DURC are mainly covered by the legislation for laboratory safety and genetically modified organisms. After the coronavirus outbreaks, the GoF research made significant advances, including analyses of modified MERS-like and SARS-like viruses and the creation of synthetic SARS-CoV-2 viruses as a platform to generate mutations. The GoF research on viruses will still play an important role in future, but the need to clarify the differences and overlaps between GoF research, GOFROC and DURC and the need for specialized oversight authorities are still debated.
Skapa ett konto eller logga in för att kommentera
Du måste vara medlem för att kunna kommentera
