Why Is the NIH Still Trusting Peter Daszak?

AP Photo/Ng Han Guan

As we reported last night, the NIH sent a letter in response to a request from Representative Comer, which stated that the SARS-CoV-2 could not have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, even though that same letter also stated that the source of that information, EcoHealth Alliance, headed by the dubious Dr. Peter Daszak, violated the terms of the grant and was withholding information.


Yes, you read that right.  The NIH dismissed the lab-leak theory based upon information from an organization that they admitted, is in violation of the terms of the very grant that may have funded the research that could have created the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

As we have reported numerous times since the May 11th hearing which began my quest regarding this topic, the NIH has been complicit in a cover-up, even delaying my request for documents up to a year upon their unilateral determination that RedState, essentially, isn’t really a journalistic outfit.  Despite the constant roadblocks and Fauci’s continued lies, we continued our quest to best educate you, our readers.

Now with this new letter, the NIH stays true to its form, spinning further lies and misinformation we will detail here.

As the letter begins, they reach conclusions without detailing where that information came from and ignoring the reliability of the source of that data.

“It is important to state at the onset that the published genomic data demonstrate that the bat coronaviruses studied under the NIH grant to EcoHealth Alliance, Inc. and subward to the Wuhan Institute of Virology are not and could not have become SARS-CoV-2.  Both the progress report and the analysis attached here again confirms that conclusion, as the sequences of the viruses are genetically very distant.”


Now, as stated in the article from last night, the source of the information that was used to reach that conclusion is the EcoHealth Alliance.  Numerous people who were either direct employees or board members, funded by, or had collaborated with EcoHealth Alliance, signed a letter that sought to debunk the theory that the virus may have originated at a lab in Wuhan, in January 2020, before the United States even had its first case of COVID-19.  RedState was the first organization to dig into the signatories, determining their many clear and reportable conflicts of interest, which were not declared in that letter published in The Lancet scientific journal.  Later, when The Lancet established their own COVID origins team, it was headed by EcoHealth Alliance’s President and the mastermind behind the Lancet letter, Dr. Peter Daszak.  We questioned then how a man who has already reached his own conclusion regarding the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, could be impartial in his analysis of the data and evidence before him.  Whether related to our reporting or not, Daszak was dismissed from the Lancet Origins Commission just weeks later.

As if it could not be any more complicated, Daszak was also connected to the World Health Organization team, tasked with determining the origins of COVID-19.  The final report delivered to the WHO found that the virus likely evolved naturally, though it provided no location, no intermediate host, and no patient zero as to the origin of the virus.  That report was later deemed unreliable by the Director-General of the WHO, who later demanded more transparency and access from the Chinese government (a demand that was immediately rejected by China).  It was found that of the 400-page report provided by the team containing Daszak, just four pages tangentially addressed the lab-leak potential and were dismissed.  The WHO also later mentioned that the data used to reach the conclusions in that report, was provided by Chinese Officials, and the WHO Investigation Team was not given access to the original sources nor the labs in question from which the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have escaped.


This new letter, which also determines that EcoHealth Alliance violated the terms of their grant and did not report conditions that would have required new biosafety measures, relies solely on the information provided by EcoHealth Alliance.  According to the NIH letter, determinations made come from a progress report, that was “submitted to NIH in August 2021, in response to NIH’s compliance enforcement efforts.”

Yet, the NIH found it appropriate to reach conclusions based upon information that comes from what, at best, is a wildly unreliable source, while at the same time admitting that their report was lacking the information to appropriately make those determinations.  They have given EcoHealth Alliance an additional five days to amend and supplement their report, but again, why would they give them the opportunity to lie or misinform?  Daszak has shown he’s capable of it.  He has been the golden thread that has run through every effort to defeat the lab-leak theory.  Should we assume an organization that is under his control would ever tell the truth, especially when that truth would implicate them in the murder of five million people?  The answer is obviously a resounding no.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos