We Never Know
No Slack
Right. So the paper in question does not support what is claimed in the OP, in fact the reverse.
Which is why I said "It differs a bit from what the video says"
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Right. So the paper in question does not support what is claimed in the OP, in fact the reverse.
If you read the thread you will see it is not true. So he is still a doctor.Fauci is a political hack. If true, it shows he stopped being a doctor long ago.
Is this why four presidents used him? Maybe consider getting off right-wing news and then actually doing some homework.Fauci is a political hack. If true, it shows he stopped being a doctor long ago.
Because the best that only some can do is to parrot what they run across on right-wing sources. Fox has been on Fauci's case, for just one example, since the Trump administration mishandled the vaccine roll-out as some of them formally in that administration have stated. As you're probably aware of, Pfizer very much was worried about the politicizing of the vaccines, which is why they refused to take federal money from the Trump administration when developing it.If you read the thread you will see it is not true. So he is still a doctor.
What evidence, from a reputable source, do you have that Fauci is a "political hack"?
On second thought don't bother. It will just be more of this poisonous campaign to bring down an expert, because he is more trusted by the people than Trump was.
Four president's used him?Is this why four presidents used him? Maybe consider getting off right-wing news and then actually doing some homework.
So, you prefer the less educated more? Seems so.Four president's used him?
Confirmed the political hack component for me.
Txs
A political hack that changes his political/medical opinion based on who the President is at the time?Four president's used him?
Confirmed the political hack component for me.
Txs
Think doctors can't be corrupt to be politically obedient to their superiors whims?A political hack that changes his political/medical opinion based on who the President is at the time?
Come on.
I'm saying that what you're saying doesn't make much sense.Think doctors can't be corrupt to be politically obedient to their superiors whims?
No, but I do listen to the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons over Fauci.I'm saying that what you're saying doesn't make much sense.
But you've apparently been conditioned to think Fauci is some kind of lying hack, so there will be no convincing you, I fear.
Do you happen to listen to Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity?
I doubt that very much as the research on covid has increasing become available and in general agreement with other researchers.No, but I do listen to the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons over Fauci.
Thank you for sharing this linkHere is Dr Fauci's paper. It differs a bit from what the video says but its obvious he supports gain of function research.
Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward
Anthony S. Fauci
Read more at....
Research on Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus: The Way Forward
Thank you for the linkSky News isn't a source I would trust. Full stop.
Did Fauci Fund ‘Gain of Function’ Research, Thereby Causing COVID-19 Pandemic? | Snopes.com
The potential benefits and risks of these experiments must be discussed and understood by multiple stakeholders, including the general public, and all decisions regarding such research must be made in a transparent manner.
However, the issue that has been intensely debated is whether knowledge obtained from these experiments could inadvertently affect public health in an adverse way, even in nations multiple time zones away.
Putting aside the specter of bioterrorism for the moment, consider this hypothetical scenario: an important gain-of-function experiment involving a virus with serious pandemic potential is performed in a well-regulated, world-class laboratory by experienced investigators, but the information from the experiment is then used by another scientist who does not have the same training and facilities and is not subject to the same regulations. In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic? Many ask reasonable questions....
Scientists working in this field might say—as indeed I have said—that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.
However, we must respect that there are genuine and legitimate concerns about this type of research, both domestically and globally. We cannot expect those who have these concerns to simply take us, the scientific community, at our word that the benefits of this work outweigh the risks, nor can we ignore their calls for greater transparency, their concerns about conflicts of interest, and their efforts to engage in a dialog about whether these experiments should have been performed in the first place. Those of us in the scientific community who believe in the merits of this work have the responsibility to address these concerns thoughtfully and respectfully.
Granted, the time it takes to engage in such a dialog could potentially delay or even immobilize the conduct of certain important experiments and the publication of valuable information that could move the field forward for the good of public health
Within the research community, many have expressed concern that important research progress could come to a halt just because of the fear that someone, somewhere, might attempt to replicate these experiments sloppily
However, although influenza virus scientists are the best-informed individuals about influenza virus science, and possibly even about the true level of risk to public health, the influenza virus research community can no longer be the only player in the discussion of whether certain experiments should be done. Public opinion (domestic and global) and the judgments of independent biosafety and biosecurity experts are also critical
If we want to continue this important work, we collectively need to do a better job of articulating the scientific rationale for such experiments well before they are performed and provide discussion about the potential risk to public health, however remote.
What? He's the most educated, and qualified doctor in the country or something?So, you prefer the less educated more? Seems so.
I follow the paycheck of these people. The ones who controls what he can and cannot say via his employer.I doubt that very much as the research on covid has increasing become available and in general agreement with other researchers.
No, but I do listen to the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons over Fauci.
They are independent and not beholden to political control.
They are independent and not beholden to political control.
It figures.