Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States China

US Suspends Federal Funding To Wuhan Lab Over Non-Compliance (reuters.com) 101

The U.S. has suspended federal funding to China's Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) for failing to provide documentation related to concerns over biosafety protocol violations at the facility that has faced questions for years over the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. From a report: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) also said it wants to bar the Chinese research body from participating in government procurement and non-procurement programs going forward. WIV has not received federal funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the U.S. medical research agency, since July 2020, according to an HHS statement on Wednesday.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Suspends Federal Funding To Wuhan Lab Over Non-Compliance

Comments Filter:
  • Don't put it on Biden. If anyone allowed the "China virus", bamboozled or not, it was Trump. Trump funded Wuhan for 4 years and gets off scot-free. Trump got rid of the federal pandemic preparedness program (almost like he knew the virus was coming). Trump allowed the pandemic and enabled the ensuing panic. Same way his federal agencies instigated the January 4 riot which right-wing idiots think Biden was president at that time. Biden did not become president until January 20th you idiots. Look it up. Maybe

    • I think this is the easiest way to address conspiracy theories--make the conspiracy big enough to include the ostensible saviors using the exact same methodology. There is a -1 response to your post that demonstrates how impotent conspiracy-mongers are when challenged by even crazier conspiracies. I think there is an XKCD on point along with the "Birds aren't real" people.
    • Settle down, Trump was just continuing programs set up by the previous administration, as presidents often do.

      • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @10:24AM (#63701810)

        Really? Why did Trump life the ban Obama put in place for gain-of-function research? Reference: https://www.science.org/conten... [science.org] 2nd reference: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/dua... [umn.edu] Then why did he cancel the pandemic preparedness program setup by the previous administration. Reference: https://www.vanityfair.com/new... [vanityfair.com]

        Again: Why was the gain-of-function research ban lifted during Trump's reign of terror? Why did he dismantle the pandemic response team?

        • He didn't "cancel" the pandemic response plan, he reorganized it, there is a difference.

          • by GlennC ( 96879 )

            And the way he "reorganized" it was at least as bad as if it had been cancelled.

            Neither Trump nor Biden are capable of leading a Cub Scout pack, let alone a nation.

            Unfortunately, we're stuck with either "Team Blue" or "Team Red" so we're screwed either way.

        • Why was the gain-of-function research ban lifted during Trump's reign of terror? Why did he dismantle the pandemic response team?

          For me, your references paint a different story. The Obama admin allowed a panel to carve out exceptions to the ban, and then later, an Obama appointee at the NIH that trump left in place got rid of the ban entirely. And honestly I don't know what the PPP was, or what it could have possibly done to change the trajectory of covid-19. The linked article doesn't say exactly. But it looks like the answer is probably "nothing". The PPP can't To be clear I'm no trump fan, but I think his pandemic respons

    • rump got rid of the federal pandemic preparedness program (almost like he knew the virus was coming).

      That is untrue. Departments were reorganized. The same people were doing the same job before and after, just under a different name.

      Trump allowed the pandemic and enabled the ensuing panic.

      That is untrue. He shut down traffic with China very early and took a lot of criticism from the Democrats for doing so. He ended us slowing the progress of the disease in the US which help prevent our healthcare system from being overloaded. In other words, he saved lives by closing early.

    • by jwhyche ( 6192 )

      The TDS strong in this one.

    • 1) The president cannot fund anything. Only congress can spend taxpayer money.

      2) Congress always plays the same trick: they bring the president a budget at the 11th hour, the president can either accept the entire thing, or reject the entire thing and shutdown the federal government. Trump did a shutdown for a long time, but eventually had to give up.

      3) Nobody knows what is in these colossal spending bill. The last one was 5000 pages long. Nobody had time to read it. Nobody would have read it if they did ha

    • So, remember when Trump was lambasted by the media for daring to say the virus came from China? Called xenophobic and whatnot? He could have slapped the documented proof of COVIDâ(TM)s origins, and people like YOU would have still called him a liar.

      And I hate to tell you this, but funding Wuhan predates Trump. It stsrted under Obama, and along with the fact that the NIH was using a third party to slip funding to the lab, Fauci vehemently and public ally denied any connection, and denied the lab leak

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Is what Joe Rogan tells me to think.

  • by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @10:12AM (#63701776)

    wait why is the USA funding China?

    • by canux ( 735734 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @10:22AM (#63701808)

      The NIH provided funding to the US-based EcoHealth Alliance who then outsourced some of the research to the Chinese lab in question. The BBC has the rundown [bbc.com].

    • Yes ! THIS ! THIS far into covid ?! YIKES !!
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      @Joe_Dragon [slashdot.org]: “wait why is the USA funding China?

      Because such gain-of-function research is banned in the U.S.A
      • @Joe_Dragon [slashdot.org]: “wait why is the USA funding China?” Because such gain-of-function research is banned in the U.S.A

        And that is a good enough reason to fund chinese bioweapons program?

    • wait why is the USA funding China?

      Nixon on Kissenger, a failed idea from the 1960s/70s. The idea was that by engaging with China we could make it friendlier. This idea died during the Tiananmen Square massacred in 1989. But by then too many politicians were making lots of money off of China trade so they continued with "engagement".

      All the favorable trade policies were premised on China being a poor developing nation. Again, for to continue padding their pockets, politicians continued these favorable to China trade policies well past Chi

    • Because "science"? We fund millions of things around the globe, you'd be amazed whee your tax dollars are being spent.

    • we got to put our own people on the ground there in China. People who could monitor the situation and help prevent an outbreak from reaching American shores.

      It's not a coincidence that shit got out of hand when we stopped funding China. There's an old saying in foreign policy: it's cheaper to drop food than bombs.
  • Orly? (Score:2, Informative)

    by CEC-P ( 10248912 )
    Guys, it's all a conspiracy and it's impossible that a virus they were studying specifically cannot possibly have showed up right down the street in the wild. China's Chinese-made bio-safety equipment and work ethic are both world class!

    If you have a dissenting opinion based on facts and science and evidence and investigations, that's not allowed and all your social media accounts were be banned. In fact, not only don't talk about this but keep voting for establishment, rich politicians.
    • Guys, it's all a conspiracy and it's impossible that a virus they were studying specifically

      You mean a class of virus, because there's zero evidence they were every studying the strain that caused COVID-19.

      If you have a dissenting opinion based on facts and science and evidence and investigations

      Which yours isn't, since you don't actually seem to understand there's no evidence they had the virus.

      In fact, not only don't talk about this but keep voting for establishment, rich politicians.

      Lemme guess, if you're American you plan to vote for the very rich Trump over the much less wealthy Biden.

      • by sfcat ( 872532 )

        You mean a class of virus, because there's zero evidence they were every studying the strain that caused COVID-19.

        Technically there is zero evidence WIV was studying any virus since they destroyed all their samples they were studying at the beginning of the outbreak. However, since when has intentionally destroying evidence for no scientific reason been proof it never existed? If anything, it is a giant blinking sign pointing at their guilt.

        • You mean a class of virus, because there's zero evidence they were every studying the strain that caused COVID-19.

          Technically there is zero evidence WIV was studying any virus since they destroyed all their samples they were studying at the beginning of the outbreak. However, since when has intentionally destroying evidence for no scientific reason been proof it never existed? If anything, it is a giant blinking sign pointing at their guilt.

          I've no idea what you're talking about unless it's this [businessinsider.com].

          If it is... I don't see the argument. Isn't asking labs not equipped to handle a dangerous virus to destroy samples of said virus exactly what you want them to do?

          More to the point, you think this is them publicly announcing that they're destroying evidence? Why wouldn't they just order WIV to destroy their samples secretly? Like it doesn't even make sense as a conspiracy theory.

          • by sfcat ( 872532 )

            If it is... I don't see the argument. Isn't asking labs not equipped to handle a dangerous virus to destroy samples of said virus exactly what you want them to do?

            WIV is equipped to handle those types of viruses. That's why research on those types of viruses happens there. Also, they publicly announced it because otherwise we would expect them to exist and ask to see them. Your level of denial is quite spectacular. OJ supporters were more rational.

    • you can go read the peer reviewed research that says:

      1. The virus lacks any of the markets of being tampered with or made by people.

      2. The virus has all the markets of having originated from bats and pangolins in the region.

      3. The only serious debate left is whether it came out of the wet markets, the rampant deforestation or a little bit of both.

      Start with Rebecca Watson's YouTube videos on the subject. From there you'll find links to various papers on the subject. You could also use Google Sc
      • by G00F ( 241765 )

        1. The virus lacks any of the markets of being tampered with or made by people.

        Agree, but this means it wasn't modified, not that it didnt come from

        2. The virus has all the markets of having originated from bats and pangolins in the region.

        by region you mean over 500 miles away? That's more than the distance of san francisco and vegas.

        3. The only serious debate left is whether it came out of the wet markets, the rampant deforestation or a little bit of both.

        Incorrect. Wuhan is still a very likely and plausible path. It's just not a virus that was altered. it's very possible that their wild caught virus they brought back to study/catalog escaped the lab (twice)

        The bat version of this virus was brought back to Wuhan lab to be studied. Just because it doesnt show signs of being modified doesn't m

    • How can you post this and not be downvoted to oblivion? I mean, I'm impressed.
      I make such comments and end up -1 Troll every time.

      • Because "The $cience(tm)" changed.

  • Just to get this out of the way, no, the virus was not man made. Or if it was China has secret biotech that is so advanced as to be indistinguishable from magic and instead of using it to make tons of money they decided to unleash a virus on the world that devastated their economy and people too.

    Current tech for manipulating viruses leaves clear traces. On a quick look there was what looked like some of those traces in COVID-19, after a bit of investigation the scientists who claimed they might be prese
    • Just to get this out of the way, no, the virus was not man made. Or if it was China has secret biotech that is so advanced as to be indistinguishable from magic and instead of using it to make tons of money they decided to unleash a virus on the world that devastated their economy and people too.

      Nice strawman you have torched there. Noone is suggesting Chinese made a de-novo virus from scratch - what people are suggesting is they were doing gain of function research on a natural virus, and failed to follow safety procedures, resulting in its release into the wild. But you knew that.

      Current tech for manipulating viruses leaves clear traces. On a quick look there was what looked like some of those traces in COVID-19, after a bit of investigation the scientists who claimed they might be present came out and said no, our quick glance at the data was wrong, and the sequences were in fact naturally occurring. We know this because with our tech when we insert stuff into a virus it doesn't last. It's not naturally occurring, so after a few dozen generations it fades away.

      Oh, another nice strawman there. Noone is suggesting they were doing CRISPR on that virus, only that they were passaging it in human cell cultures, resulting in evolutionary adaptation to human hosts. Guess what, evoluti

      • I didn't say the claim was they made a virus from scratch. I specifically said the claim is that China modified an existing virus, and that claim is bogus because the tech to do that doesn't exist. Gain of Function leaves behind traces that aren't there (go watch those Rebecca Watson videos) and even then those changes don't persist across multiple generations of a virus because we don't have the tech to make them persist.

        You don't need to spend hours of your life, just search YouTube for "Rebecca Watso
        • You're missing the point. Probably deliberately, but I'll give you the benefit of doubt, for the last time. Please say exactly where "magic" is involved in the scenario of "gather virus samples from wild, infect human cell cultures with it allowing it to adapt to human hosts, with no trace-leaving CRISPR involved, fail at containment, causing release into the wild". And no, telling me to google up some youtube celebrity and watch all hundreds of hours of her videos for the one that supposedly answers that d
          • at least not very well. Handwashing with soap is enough to prevent it.

            So now you're telling me you want me to believe that a bunch of virologist were out gathering viruses by hand for unspecified nefarious purposes and they didn't wash their hands?

            Honestly that's such a silly point I missed it because I didn't consider it. If you told me Gargamel made the viruses to kill the Smurfs I think that would've been more grounded in reality. But even Gargamel would know to wash his hands...
            • at least not very well. Handwashing with soap is enough to prevent it. So now you're telling me you want me to believe that a bunch of virologist were out gathering viruses by hand for unspecified nefarious purposes and they didn't wash their hands? Honestly that's such a silly point I missed it because I didn't consider it. If you told me Gargamel made the viruses to kill the Smurfs I think that would've been more grounded in reality. But even Gargamel would know to wash his hands...

              Ah, so the people telling us to disinfect hands with alcohol (that left quite many people, myself included with some nasty sores) for 2 years were conspiracy theorists, and just soap would have been enough? And of course nevermind the airborne route? Yeah, at this point I'm done talking with you I guess.

              • by XXongo ( 3986865 )

                at least not very well. Handwashing with soap is enough to prevent it.

                Ah, so the people telling us to disinfect hands with alcohol (that left quite many people, myself included with some nasty sores) for 2 years were conspiracy theorists, and just soap would have been enough?

                I don’t know who those people were who were telling you to disinfect hands with alcohol, but yes, that it correct: soap and water is the preferred way to wash your hands to prevent spread of viruses. Alcohol is the second choice, if water is not available.

                And this is not new; it’s been stated in pretty much every piece of advice on hand washing. I’m surprised you missed it.

                "Washing hands with soap and water is the best way to get rid of germs in most situations. If soap and water are not

        • Gain of Function leaves behind traces

          No, it doesn't. Gain of Function is literally nothing more than setting up a specific environment to encourage evolution to proceed in a specific manner and then letting biology happen. There is no splicing, modification, or anything that would in any way be detectable. You might be able to see signs of GoF by looking for the types of evolution you might observe in a lab vs in the wild. But we're talking about a virus that already doesn't exhibit the spillover signat

    • Spot on!
  • NIH (Score:1, Troll)

    by p51d007 ( 656414 )
    Fauci "funded" the Wuhan lab for gain of function after the "experts" in America said it was too dangerous to do it here. Bypassing our rules/laws allowed him to get it done in China. Worked out pretty well didn't it?
    • With all the conspiracy nuts and fools in the USA, I sure hope REAL SCIENTISTS do their science by any means possible.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        The "conspiracy nuts" are proven right, time and time again, to not trust a word that is said to them. If the government, science and media would stop lying, maybe they'd regain some credibility.

        Fat chance. Lying to stupid people for immediate policy goals is ingrained in the character of our society now. Despite its corrosive long term effect on credibility.

        Goebbels figured this out also, ultimately, but halfway measures intended to retain the ability to propagandize the masses failed him, and all the r

  • It is surprising that USA sends money to so many places and many a times even citizens of those countries dont know that.
  • Should we start a pop-up-free nerd news site now? We can call it "nopop.org". I wonder where we could find some programmers...
  • Dictatorships do not like transparency at the best of times, and COVID-19 was not the best of times for China. So fairly early into COVID-19 China did what it always does and went into full info lockdown, including of course the lab.

    So the US is suspending funding since no one wants to deal with a lab that's in the habit of covering everything up.

    This isn't really evidence for or against the lab-leak hypothesis, it's just further evidence that China is a dictatorship who defaults to secrecy, and should ther

    • you're funny, with Fauci funding that lab that was in the habit of covering everything up.

      You virtue signal condemning China? pffft, they're not the problem here.

      • you're funny, with Fauci funding that lab that was in the habit of covering everything up.

        I'm not sure that's a coherent argument since it sounds like the lab wasn't in the habit of covering things up until they went into info lockdown mode after COVID.

        You virtue signal condemning China? pffft, they're not the problem here.

        China is a brutal dictatorship that engages in widespread IP theft, horrific human rights abuses, and actual genocide.

        But I do agree they're not the problem here.

        There's no evidence that COVID was a result of anything but them having a set of demographics and traditions that make cross over diseases more likely. And their response to COVID wasn't

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Working...