Federal Watchdog Slams Fauci’s Agency And EcoHealth Over Deal With Wuhan Lab

Dr. Anthony Fauci’s federal science agency and EcoHealth AllianceGovernment investigators have found that a U.S. grant was given to a company called ‘Wuhan Institute of Virology’ for bat virus research. However, the company made serious errors, they said.

EcoHealth Alliance did not properly disclose its subgrant recipients—which included the Chinese lab which may have been the origin of COVID—and was two years late in filing a report that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) concluded may have revealed “gain of function,” or experiments which make a virus more dangerous to humans, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Inspector General said in a 72-page report. Fauci headed the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which oversaw the grant and is part of NIH.

“Our audit found that NIH’s own evaluation of the Year 5 progress report concluded that the research was of a type that should have been reported immediately to NIH,” It stated.  Although the Year 5 Report was submitted two years late by the IG, it stated that NIH. “did not effectively monitor or take timely action” Even though you are aware of potential risks, don’t take them lightly.

“This oversight failure is particularly concerning because NIH had previously raised concerns with EcoHealth about the nature of the research being performed. Once NIH received and reviewed the late progress report, NIH concluded the research resulted in a virus with enhanced growth,” It said.

EcoHealth Alliance claimed that NIH never asked for late reports or information about subgrantees and that the agency seemed to be in good terms with it given that it continues to provide funding. After the coronavirus pandemic, NIH terminated EcoHealth’s grant, and EcoHealth successfully appealed the termination—though NIH nonetheless “suspended” it.

After the outbreak of coronavirus, NIH reached out to EcoHealth to obtain additional information from Wuhan. However, the lab refused to provide it to EcoHealth.

EcoHealth’s president, Peter Daszak, was part of the World Health Organization-China team that dismissed the lab leak hypothesis as “extremely unlikely”—despite having been involved in bat coronavirus projects at Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

Former vice president of EcoHealth Alliance Dr. Andrew HuffAuthor of a book entitled “The Truth About Wuhan” This is what they claimed “EcoHealth Alliance and foreign laboratories did not have the adequate control measures in place for ensuring proper biosafety, biosecurity, and risk management, ultimately resulting in the lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

EcoHealth received a grant of $3.7 million from NIAID in 2014. “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” Later that year, the government prohibited gain-of-function studies.

EcoHealth paid $600,000.00 to WIV, and $200,000 for the Wuhan University School of Public Health. The report stated that federal regulations make subgrantees accountable to grantees.

“EcoHealth officials met with WIV staff in person on at least 20 occasions between June 2014 and December 2019 and traveled to Wuhan, China, to meet with individuals from WIV at least annually during that time to discuss the research conducted under its subaward. EcoHealth staff told OIG that they engaged in frequent phone calls and email exchanges with WIV staff throughout the grant period until the time the grant was terminated in April 2020,” auditors said.

EcoHealth was informed by NIAID in 2016 that it “had determined that the research could be gain-of-function and subject to the funding pause on certain gain-of-function research,” EcoHealth was asked for details. The group responded that “it was highly unlikely that this work would have any pathogenic potential,” However, “should any of these recombinants show evidence of enhanced virus growth greater than certain specified benchmarks involving log growth increases, or grow more efficiently in human airway epithelial cells, EcoHealth would immediately: (1) stop all experiments with the mutant [and] (2) inform the NIAID.”

The inspector general did not weigh in on whether NAID’s determination that EcoHealth’s work did not constitute gain-of-function was accurate, saying it did not have the scientific expertise, but noted that staff should “err on the side of inclusion when determining whether to refer research that may involve [gain-of-function] for further review.”

2017 saw the partial lifting of the ban to allow gain-of function research in certain circumstances, which was approved by a special HHS committee. In 2018, NIH determined that that approval was not necessary for EcoHealth’s work, but it appeared a close enough call that it inserted a special provision for its five-year report that “should experiments proposed in this award result in a virus with enhanced growth by more than certain specified benchmarks involving log growth increases, EcoHealth must notify NIAID immediately.”

This five-year report was due September 2019, just a few months prior to the outbreak of the pandemic. “However, not until after NIH requested the progress report in July 2021 did EcoHealth submit it on August 3, 2021, nearly 2 years late,” auditors said.

When NIH finally saw the report, it “believed there was evidence that the research conducted by EcoHealth’s subrecipient WIV during Year 5 resulted in enhanced growth