4 ms·

I can’t find the actual order but a search turns up many articles about it. Here’s one: https://www.nature.com/articles/514411a https://www.nature.com/articles

I can’t find the actual order but a search turns up many articles about it. Here’s one: https://www.nature.com/articles/514411a https://www.nature.com/articles/514411a

cyberax 2y ago
> The US government surprised many researchers on 17 October when it announced that it will temporarily stop funding new research that makes certain viruses more deadly or transmissible. So it's not clear what the actual order entails and how temporary it was. And the whole advisory language ("asked scientists") seems to be kinda distinct from "banned". > The grants are all public and document gain of function research, which was illegal since President Obama had banned it through an executive order. In general, these kinds of conspiracy theories just collapse when you start pulling the threads.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - cyberax 2y ago
    I mean, it's your claim, not mine. I looked at the first part of the whole narrative that seemed out-of-place and it turned out to be not quite as claimed. > which Fauci helped EcoHealth avoid But had he? What exactly the order entailed in the first place?
- morepedantic 2y ago
  >In general, these kinds of conspiracy theories just collapse when you start pulling the threads. You think it's a conspiracy theory that Obama banned GoF research? OK, it was through an OSTP directive working with the NIH rather than an EO, but that's splitting hairs. It also wasn't banned, but only subject to a higher degree of scrutiny. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-diligence-assess-risks-and-benefits-life-sciences-gain-function-research https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-d...
paul_h 2y ago
Reconsideration was started under Obama, too: https://www.science.org/content/article/after-criticism-federal-officials-revisit-policy-reviewing-risky-virus-experiments https://www.science.org/content/article/after-criticism-fede... (published 17 Jan 2017)

I can’t find the actual order but a search turns up many articles about it. Here’s one: https://www.nature.com/articles/514411a https://www.nature.com/articles/514411a

cyberax 2y ago

> The US government surprised many researchers on 17 October when it announced that it will temporarily stop funding new research that makes certain viruses more deadly or transmissible. So it's not clear what the actual order entails and how temporary it was. And the whole advisory language ("asked scientists") seems to be kinda distinct from "banned". > The grants are all public and document gain of function research, which was illegal since President Obama had banned it through an executive order. In general, these kinds of conspiracy theories just collapse when you start pulling the threads.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
[flagged]
- cyberax 2y ago
  I mean, it's your claim, not mine. I looked at the first part of the whole narrative that seemed out-of-place and it turned out to be not quite as claimed. > which Fauci helped EcoHealth avoid But had he? What exactly the order entailed in the first place?
morepedantic 2y ago
>In general, these kinds of conspiracy theories just collapse when you start pulling the threads. You think it's a conspiracy theory that Obama banned GoF research? OK, it was through an OSTP directive working with the NIH rather than an EO, but that's splitting hairs. It also wasn't banned, but only subject to a higher degree of scrutiny. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-diligence-assess-risks-and-benefits-life-sciences-gain-function-research https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-d...

paul_h 2y ago

Reconsideration was started under Obama, too: https://www.science.org/content/article/after-criticism-federal-officials-revisit-policy-reviewing-risky-virus-experiments https://www.science.org/content/article/after-criticism-fede... (published 17 Jan 2017)