Here is a highly recommended reading https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/treason-science-journals Quote: In many instances, pandemic-related science journalism smacks of questionable motives. The most high-profile example of this was the now infamous letter by 27 scientists published in The Lancet on March 7, 2020, asserting that they “overwhelmingly conclude” that the pandemic had a natural origin, and condemning the suggestion that the virus emerged in a lab as “conspiracy theories” that put scientists lives at risk. What the 27 scientists neglected to mention is that their statement was organized by Peter Daszak, a co-author of the letter who is also the president of the NGO that facilitated U.S. government funding to the lab in Wuhan that the FBI and Department of Energy have concluded is the likely source of the pandemic.
Quote "Fauci then cited the paper—in effect quoting himself, since he coordinated the article behind the scenes and was given final approval before it published" Nothing in the probe says Fauci was involved in the writing or the approval of the paper, typical right wing consipratard garbage as usual hoping people wouldn't actually check up the sources.
The only person quoting himself is the Republican who peddled the lab leak theory without any evidence and then says Fauci was made aware of the possibility, what was Fauci supposed to do about a theory from a politician? Tell the scientists in the conference call to not write scientific papers because a Republican has another theory?
Well, Lancet did act either negligently (no due diligence) at best or immorally at worse imo (I don't recall Fauci pushing the Lancet article but I'm fairly certain something to the effect of "consensus is zoonotic" was said: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/202...inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/10/covid-origins-investigation-wuhan-lab It soon emerged, based on emails obtained by a Freedom of Information group called U.S. Right to Know, that Daszak had not only signed but organized the influential Lancet statement, with the intention of concealing his role and creating the impression of scientific unanimity. Under the subject line,“No need for you to sign the “Statement” Ralph!!,” he wrote to two scientists, including UNC’s Dr. Ralph Baric, who had collaborated with Shi Zhengli on the gain-of-function study that created a coronavirus capable of infecting human cells: “you, me and him should not sign this statement, so it has some distance from us and therefore doesn’t work in a counterproductive way.” Daszak added, “We’ll then put it out in a way that doesn’t link it back to our collaboration so we maximize an independent voice.” Baric agreed, writing back, “Otherwise it looks self-serving and we lose impact.” Baric did not sign the statement. In the end, Daszak did. At least six other signers had either worked at, or had been funded by, EcoHealth Alliance. The statement ended with a declaration of objectivity: “We declare no competing interests.” Daszak mobilized so quickly for a reason, said Jamie Metzl: “If zoonosis was the origin, it was a validation…of his life work…. But if the pandemic started as part of a lab leak, it had the potential to do to virology what Three Mile Island and Chernobyl did to nuclear science.” It could mire the field indefinitely in moratoriums and funding restrictions.