David Morens NIH Emails Redacted

Message rom: David Moen co. EE 0! pater Dasak isin. Andersen Edvard Homes I Jason Gale Extomal Sender. Bo aware of Inks, atachments and requests. | Robert Kessier I Stephen Goldstein — Subject: here's the latest ne of attack today. Peter and colleagues, As you know, I try to always communicate on gmail because my NIH email is FOIA'D constantly. Yesterday my gmail was hacked, probably by these GoF assholes, and until IT can get it fixed T may have to occasionally email from my NIH account. It spent a couple hours today but couldn't fix it. Stuff sent to my gmail gets to my phone, but not my NIH computer. Don't worry, just send to any of my addresses and I will delete anything I don't want to see in the New York Times. d David M. Morens. MD [email com (work) cell) 001774 

IMPORTANT: My gmail frequently sends incoming messages to Trash, which is apparently not correctable. 1f you don't hear from me in a reasonable time, please try again, call, or use my NIH email address IMPORTANT: For US Government.related email, please also reply to my NIAID address On'Thu, Sep , 2021 at 5:10 PM Peter Dak | Here's a report in the Daily Caller that goes ater the Go argument tha the chimeric bat viruses yielded more virus in humanized mice than the parental bat virus strain. hitps://dailycaller com) 2021/09/09 ecohealth-allance-gain-of- function higher viral-ac-anthony-faucl/ There's a good response from NIH: ‘An NIH spokesperson told the DCNF the agency “never approved any research that would make a coronavirus more dangerous to humans.” “The research we supported in China, where coronaviruses are prevalent, sought to understand the behavior of coronaviruses circulating n bats that have the potential to cause Widespread ease,” the spokesperson sad. “The body of science produced by tis research demonstrates that the bat coronavirus sequences published from that work NIH supported were not SARS-Cov-2. More importantly, because of similar research to understand coronaviruses, we were able to move swiftly to develop vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and save ives.” This story is particularly tating because f you ook at the P3CO rules, I's clear they are meant for pathagens that occur in humans and might be made more dangerous. These were bat viruses that have never been shown to occur in humans. Let's akso not forget that the virus with a higher vial load in mice was actually because it had the spike protein of a bat virus being flown around every night by tens of thousands of bats in rural china ~ not something new created by us to enhance viruence - In fact, the opposite: the fact that we could do this work with a chimera means that we. don't have to isolate and culture every single new bat cov we find. It reduces isk! INVESTIGATIVE GROUP Fauct-Funded Wuhan Lab Viruses Exhibited Over 10,000 Times Higher Viral Load Than Natural Strain, Documents Show 01775 

ANDREW KERRINVESTIGATIVE REPORTER September 09, 2021325 PM ET + US. and Chinese researchers funded by the Nationa Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases created Viruses in » Wuhan ab tha exhisited over 10,000 times higher viral load in humanized mice, records released by the agency show. + Rutgers University professor Richard bright sid the data was "bona fde bombhel” tha proves the NIAID, under Dr. Anthony Faucr leadership, violated federal polices, endangered the pubiic and le to the public + Fauci testified before the Senate n June tha is agency never funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. US. and Chinese researchers funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) created viruses in a Wuhan ab that ehibited over 10,000 tims higher ial oad in humanized mice than the natural virus they were based on, according to an infectious disease professor citing documents recently released by the agency. The U.S. nonprofit group Eotiealth Allance notified the NIAID in two reports that between June 2017 and May 2018 t had created three lab-generated chimeric SARS elated coronaviruses in hina that extbited “significantly higher” viral loads, documents frst reported by The Intercept show, but the agency continued to fund the project with taspayer dollars without flagging it for review by an independent federal committee created in late 2017 to oversee gain-of- function research. Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright, a vocal opponent of gain-of-function research, said the data was a “bona fide bombshell” that proves the NIAID, under Faucs leadership, vilated federal polices endangered the public and led © the public “Three EcoHealth/[Wuhan Institute of Virology] lab-generated viruses exhibited >10x to >10,000x higher viral load than the starting bat virus in humanized mice,” Ebright tweeted. “One EcoHealth/WIV lab-generated virus exhibited higher pathogenicity than the starting bat vs in infection studies with humanized mice.” “Ihe results demonstate-unequivcally-a gan in function” he sad. 001776 

In comparison, the viral load for people infected with the delta variant is roughly 1,000 times higher than those infected with the original strain of the virus, according to Nature science journal. Ebrght added on Twitter that the gain of funtion research activity that NIAID allowed EcoNeslth lance t conduct in China could have yielded the virus that causes COVID-19 or a progenitor of that virus, EcoHealth Alliance first notified the NIAID it created the three lab-generated SARS-related coronaviruses in a progress report detailing its research activities between June 2017 and May 2018. “Using the reverse genetic mthods we previously developed, infectious clones with the WIV backbone and the spike protein of SHCDL4, WIVAE and Rs4231, respectively, were consiructed and recombinant viruses were successfully rescue” the group said nit progress report. 2 and days post infection, the ral load in ung issues of mice Challenge ith WIVI-SHCO145, FWIVI-WIVL6S and rWIVI-RG42315... were significantly higher than that in IVA infected mice.” “These results demonstrate varying pathogenicity of SARS-CoV with diferent spike proteins in humanized mice,” the report added. EcoMealth Allance included a chart visualizing th increased viral lad of thei lab-creted viruses, Th charts presented na Log scale meaning each tick of th chart represents a 100-old increas in ial load in mice with ‘humanized cells, Ebright explained to the Daily Caller News Foundation. Chants submited b Ecotieaith Allance tothe National Insitute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases showing os of body ‘weight (right) and viral load (left) of mice with humanized cells infected with the natural WIV1 viral strain and three EcoMealthlab-reated virus strains. The viral load chart is presented in Log scale, meaning each tick of the graph represents a 100-fold increase in viral load, Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright explained to the DCNF. (Screenshot) “Each tick in the chart on the right represents an increment of 100x,” Ebright told the DCNF. “The day 4 data show greater than-10,000x higher vial loads or the lab-generated viruses.” ‘The viral load for humanized mice infected with the natural virus caught up with the lab-created strains by the end of the experiment the chrt shows, but Ebrght sad that viral load inthe eary stags ofa infection are important figures to consider when assessing pathogens transmissibility. “ln terms of assessing potential for transmissibility, the irl load ata time points, particularly at erly ime points, is relevant. (see Delta variant),” Ebright told the DCNF. EcotealthAllance provided another chat in ts progress report showing that humanized ice nected with EcoHealth's lab-created viruses lost more bodyweight than humanized mice infected with the natural WIV1 strain. 01777 

EcoMeaith Alliance included the same two charts in a 2018 request to the NIAID requesting additional funding for ts research in China, the document trove released by The Intercept shows. Federal funding fo gain of function experiments that increase the transmissibility or pathogenicity of potential pandemic pathogens was temporarily suspended in 2014 due to widespread scientific concerns t risked leaking supercharged viruses nto the human population. Funding for gain-of-function research was resumed in late 2017, but only for projects that went through the new Potential Pandemic Pathogens Control and Oversight (P3CO) Framework, which includes a review by an HHS review board tasked with critical evaluating whether grants that involve enhancing dangerous pathogens, such 2s coronaviruses, are worth th risks and that proper safeguards ae in place. The NIAID opted not to flag the Ecoealth Alliance grant for PCO aftr determining on its own accord that the project “gid not involve the enhancement of the pathogenicity or transmissbity of the viruses studied,” National Institutes of Health spokesperson previously told the DCHF. (RELATED: US Grant To Wuhan Lab To Enhance Bat Based Coronaviruses Was Never Scrutinized By HHS Review Board, NIH Says Fauci said during a congressional hearing in May that the NIH and NIAID “categorically has not funded gain-of-function research to be conducted atthe Wuhan Institute of Virology,” a claim that ed Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in July to send a criminal referral tothe Department of Justice to investigate whether Faucilied before Congress. The P3CO framework defines an “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen as any lab-<reated virus that exhibits any level of boosted transmissibility and/or virulence. Funding agencies such as the NIAID are required to flag any research rant thatis “reasonably anticipated to create, transfer, or use enhanced PPPs” fo P3CO review. Despite tis, documents released by The Intercept suggest that the NIAID authorized EcoHealth Alliance to conduct gain-of-function experiments on bat coronalruses up to certain threshold. The NIAID informed EcoMealth Alliance n a June 2018 award notice that it must notify the agency only fit creates a virus “with enhanced growth by more than [10 times] compared to wildtype strains,” according to documents released by The Intercept. The NIAID inked to the P3CO review process, which contains no such mention of a 10 times allowance, in the very next sentence, the document shows. NIAID notice to EcoHealth Allance in June 2018 saying t must notify the agency only iit produces a ab virus that exhibits more than 10 times enhancement over wild-type strais. (screenshot) 01778 

Jn sehen the CHF ho sgn “eer proved any ress it wold ke roads oe I TTT SSIs body of science produced by this research demonstrates that the bat coronavirus sequences published from that work Si A Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please — eo wr 4 Tomnenanne E— 001779 

‘Rasmussen, Angie’ {ENS Robert Kessler ‘stephen Goldstein’ INN ‘Subject: RE: The Intercept report on coronavirus research at Chinese labs. That's interesting about esse Bloom 1 wasn't aware of that work and hacht reall heard of him before this year to be honest. | suspect that ike many people is view of his own research is tht i's highly professionally managed and carefully controlled re. biosafety. He clearly has a different view of the work at WIV & by other leading Chinese. Scientists and seems suspicous of their motive in many of his public comments. This can't be based on thir published Work — s often excellent. It ust sees like a cifficulty people have teasing apart their viewpoint about the Chinese Govt from their opinion about individual scientists. Anyons who's been on the ground in China rapidly realizes that the two are no the same. Cheers, peter Peter Dastak president Ecoteaith Alance 520 Eighth Avenue, Suite 1200 New York, NY 10018-6507 usa Tel. I Website: uw ecoheaithaliance org Twitter: @peterDaszak Ecoealth Alliance develops science-based solutions to prevent pandemics and promote conservation From: Garry, Robert F Sent: Wechesday, September 8, 2021 4:12 PM To: Peter Daszak NN isizn G. Andersen Ce: David Morens| Edward Holmes Jason Gale Rasmussen, Angie Rober: Kessler EE Sen Goldstein NE Subject: Re: The Intercept report on coronairus research at Chinese labs 0001780 

Sy cto Tesla Tnsnta Mammon oon vs om ————— quite a number that could be considered “risky” at least by a Relman/Ebright definition. Selecting drug resistant From: pcr Dor: Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 at 2:49 PM “To: Kristian Andersen| Co Davoren Rc Edward Hones _ rr A ober Kessler Stephen Goldstein _____ _ __] Subject: RE: The Intercept report on coronavirus research at Chinese labs B eT a A RAN ek oH iy a —_—— show one of the chimeras having more than a log virus output than the parent strain (WIV-1). The NoA was updated in Re because they now have a copy of our “report to NIH” in which we show this, but of course that's not going to stop et TS SA HE SA EEN Ts ens Er a a er gh er rane 001781 

Cheers, eter [— President EcoHealth Allance 520 ighth Avenue, Suite 1200 New York, NY 10018-6507 I To: Website: un ecohealthaliance org Twitter: @PoterDaszak He RA TE EP TN CEA ATi [RE —— Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 1030 PW To: Peter Dasza IN Ce Dovel Morons EES; Gory, ober: SN vor Holmes oson Ge Rasmussen, Angie Bert Keser 3 Stephen Goldstein Sueject: Se The Intercept report om coronavirus research at Chinese las 16s harassment, plan and simple it has absolutely nothing do with tying o find the ruth of how SARS- CoV-2 emerged in the human population. The way I see it though, we now have a) the entire US IC having completed their investigation, (5) unredacted grants and annual reports from EcoHealth, and (c) old theses from the WIV. ‘This is exactly the type of information that Ebright, Metzl, Relman, Bloom, Chan, and the rest of the lot have been requesting. Now this work has been completed, what was unearthed? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. No evidence of the virus (or sequence) at the WIV (or anywhere else) prior to the pandemic. No gain-of-function work (despite what Ebright says). The same cloning system used again and again (WIV). Vero cells used for virus isolation (SARS-CoV-2 loses the FCS in those cells), and no previously unreported viruses isolated (although 1 001752 

note the repeated use of "isolates" in one of the annual reports to describe 11 samples - 1 myself have made that mistake before). So again, there's nothing, “This absence of evidence is in fact evidence of absence in this particular case - there would have been some evidence for SARS-CoV-2 in some of these documents had it been at the WIV. Yet, nothing. As for GOF work, again nothing. I note the mention of work with recombinant MERS in the year 3 report for work proposed in year 4 - depending on the nature of work, that could be considered GOF/DURC. However, when reading the year 4 report, I don't see any of that work mentioned - just work with pseudotyped viruses, which is clearly not GOF (or URC) OF course, people will take stuff out of context to make anyihing fit a particular narrative. However, there's an expiration date on bullshit and I suspect we're well past due. K On'Tus, Sep 7,2021 a1 628 PM Peer Das J Here's one of the “journalists” who got the “Scoop. Basically they just FolA'd NIH, then sued when NIH refused to release, then dumped the documents online and asked for “people with relevant expertise to get n touch’. Cue Drs. Ebright, Relman, Chan, Bloom and others to start thei attempt at a character assassination. Mara Histendah @Maratvistendahl 150 NEW: We obtained hundreds of pages from NIH detaling Ecokeaith Alliance's work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. We are publishing them in full. With @fastlerner and @theintercept legal team, which filed a FOIA lawsuit for the documents’ release 01753 

New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab More than 900 pages of material related to US. funded coronavirus research in China were released following 3 FOIA Iawsuit by The Intercept. theintercept.com ‘Mara Huistendahl @Marstiistendshl 15h The full documents are here: “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” ://documentcloud.org/d /21055989-understanding-i ruses rant notice. “Understanding Rsk of Zoonotic Virus Emergence in Emerging Infectious Disease Hotspots of Southeast Asia” hitps/documentcloud.org/ documents 21055988 risk zoonotic virus hotspots grant notice. 001784 

Maa tend Oana » TE EA RATT hers, rene eter Dasa resident Eoelt Allance 520 Eighth Avenue, Suite 1200 NewYork, NY 100186507 usa To. I Weinteryomscteatbatins rg Twitter: @PeterDaszak EcoHealth Alliance develops science-based solutions to prevent pandemics and promote conservation oss 

rom: David iorens I Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 9:07 PM Tor Peter Deszak EEEEG—— Ce: Gary, Robert F eisian G. Andersen. Edvard Holmes Jason Gale obert Kessler — Subject: Re: The Intercept report on coronavirus research at Chinese labs Do not rule out suing these assholes for slander. d Sent from my iPhone David M Morens OD, NIAID, NIH On Sep7,2021,a12039, Peter Dose | ~ < To be honest, this whole process is beyond a joke. We're spending. huge amount of staff time dealing with the 85 from these Fo requests even though the grant's been terminated, suspended and funds are stil unavailable. The lab leakers are already string up bullshit ins of attack that will bring more negative publicity our way — whichis what thisis about - 3 way o line up the GoF attack on Fauci or the risky research attack onal of us. Jesse Bloor now tying to claim we weren't following our proposed rules for data release (not true — all SARS-CoV. RaRp sequences on Genbank in summer 2020, despite the grant being terminated) he's tagaing Alina Chan and The. Seoker' on Twitter. Ebrights tying to lm we were working on MERS az shadow’ line of work. Therell be more to come - justa free foral effort to find a few sentences tat they ca take out of context. Cheers, peter Peter Daszak president Ecotealth Alliance 520 Eighth Avenue, Suite 1200 New York, NY 10018.6507 usa 001788 

ol. I Website: nw ecoheaihaliance.org Twitter: @PeterDaszak EcoMealth Alliance develops science-based solutions t prevent pandemics and promote conservation rom: Garry, Robert - INN Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 8:08 PM To: Kristian G. Andersen SESS £dward Holmes Cas lason Gale angela rasmussen dos dmoren ester 202562 QE Subloct: hehe Intercept report on coronavirus research a Chinese labs Totally that the real story of the FOIAed grants «no SC2 or anything close that could have been converted toi. Metal, Chan and others wanted a forensic investigation. The grants that they thought would be private and written before the pandemic do not mention a new SARS-like virus. YOu can be sure that a new virus 76% similar to SC1 would have been front and center in the applications and progress reports. My guess this Is part of the info the IC used to conclude no bioweapon, likely no engineering - NO SC2 before the pandemic. Tnis Gof debate now very clearly has nothing to do with the orgin of SC2. < 01757 

ew —_—— Snore links, attachments and request Fi tart Sodor, Bo vate, atch an ces, ho aie] po a It is just so tedious and so bloody stupid. Other than the abuse, the worst thing is every day that goes by, and the more shit that is thrown, the less likely we are of finding out what rally happened PROFESSOR EDWARD C. HOLMES FAA FRS ARC Australian Laureate Fellow THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases & Biosecurity, School of Lie & Environmenal Sciences and School of Medical Sciencs, ‘The University of Sydney | Sydney | NSW | 2006 | Australia T © I On10 Sep 2021, at 3:17 pm, Jason Gale (8L00MBERG/ NEWSRo0M:) [= Well done, Angie, for being a voice of reason. I'm Sorry my profession seems intent on piling on you, David, Personaily, I find this whole line of inquiry incredibly boring. Hope you're able to switch off soon and get sone zest. Jason From: daszak At: 09/10/21 15:09:54 UICH0:00 sumjectr TE ET Ton out. 75: 

Really appreciate you speaking out Angie. us rea the piece in the Intercept and ifs very upsetting: bttps:/theintercept com/2021/03/09/covc-orgins-gain-of function research) What you saidis correct without evidence of abiltytoinfect people, or transmit even rom one animal to another, t ant possibly meet the NIH definition of GoF, whichis now offically the P3CO definition as follows (from https://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Documents/P3CO pdf): Section Il. Scope and Definitions For the purposes of this HHS P3CO Framework: A. A potential pandemic pathogen (PPP) is a pathogen that satisfies both of the following: 1.ltis likely highly transmissible and likely capable of wide and uncontrollable spread in human populations; and 2.1tis likely highly virulent and likely to cause significant morbidity and/or mortality in humans. B. An enhanced PPP is defined as a PPP resulting from the enhancement of the transmissibility and/or virulence of a pathogen. Enhanced PPPs do not include naturally occurring pathogens that are circulating in or have been recovered from nature, regardless of their pandemic potential How on any planet is a bat CoV thats never been seen in people, “kel highly transmissible and likely capable of wide and uncantrolabie spread in human popuiations”? It sees the scientists that believed tis to be Gof base it on one. of the chimeras growing faster than the parental strain early on, while forgetting that 1) these are bat viruses have never been shown to infect people, or tha, as you say Angie — the growth ate of th parental strain caught up with t by the end of the exp. fm. disappointed that Vincent Racaniello s one of these scientists — he should know better Fm hoping that more willspeak out and pint tothe differences between their version of what GoF is, and the actual definition that we're all supposed to adhere to, and by the way that NIH uses as the agency of note to decide! U.S.-funded experiments in China posed biosafety risks but did not cause Covid-19 pandemic, scientists say. <Mail Attachment peg>-<Mail Attachment peg> <Mail Atachment.peg> Sharon Lerner, Mara Hyistendah], Maia Wibbett 001759 

DOCUMENTS OBTAINED BY The Intercept contain new evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the nearby Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment, along with their collaborator, the U.S.-based nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, have engaged in what the U.S. government defines as “gain- of-function research of concern,” intentionally making viruses more pathogenic or transmissible in order to study them, despite stipulations from a U.S. funding agency that the money not be used for that purpose. Grant money for the controversial experiment came from the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is headed by Anthony Fauci. The award to EcoHealth Alliance, a research organization which studies the spread of viruses from animals to humans, included subawards to Wuhan Institute of Virology and East China Normal University. The principal investigator on the grant is EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak, who has been a key voice in the search for Covid-19’s origins. Scientists unanimously told The Intercept that the experiment, which involved infecting genetically engineered mice with “chimeric” hybrid viruses, could not have directly sparked the pandemic. None of the viruses listed in the write-ups of the experiment are related to the virus that causes Covid-19, SARS-CoV-2, closely enough to have evolved into it. Still, several scientists said the new information, which the NIH released after it was sued by The Intercept, points to biosafety concerns, highlighting a general lack of oversight for research on pathogens and raising questions about what other information has not been publicly disclosed. “As a virologist, I personally think creating chimeras of SARS-related bat coronaviruses that are thought to pose high risk to humans entails unacceptable risks,” said Jesse Bloom, who studies the evolution of viruses at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. Severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, is a disease caused, like Covid-19, by an airborne coronavirus. <Mail Attachment jpeg> National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci listens during a briefing on the coronavirus pandemic at the White House on March 26, 2020 in Washington, OC. ‘The experiment also raises questions about assertions from Fauci and NTH Director Francis Collins that NIH-funded projects at the Wuhan Institute of Virology did not involve gain-of-function research. In May, Fauci testified before Congress: “The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function | Ty 

research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” The documents do not establish whether Fauci was directly aware of the work. Scientists working under a 2014 NIH grant to the EcoHealth Alliance to study bat coronaviruses combined the genetic material from a “parent” coronavirus known as WIV1 with other viruses. They twice submitted summaries of their work that showed that, when in the lungs of genetically engineered mice, three altered bat coronaviruses at times reproduced far more quickly than the original virus on which they were based. The altered viruses were also somewhat more pathogenic, with one causing the mice to lose significant weight. The researchers reported, “These results demonstrate varying pathogenicity of SARSr-CoVs with different spike proteins in humanized mice.” But the terms of the grant clearly stipulated that the funding could not be used for gain-of-function experiments. The grant conditions also required the researchers to immediately report potentially dangerous results and stop their experiments pending further NIH review. According to both the EcoHealth Alliance and NIH, the results were reported to the agency, but NTH determined that rules designed to restrict gain-of-function research did not apply. The Intercept consulted 11 scientists who are virologists or work in adjacent fields and hold a range of views on both the ethics of gain-of-function research and the Covid-19 origins search. Seven said that the work appears to meet NIH’s criteria for gain-of-function research. One said that the experiment “absolutely does not meet the bar” for gain-of- function research. “You can’t predict that these viruses would be more pathogenic, or even pathogenic at all in people,” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist with the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization at the University of Saskatchewan. “They also did not study transmissibility at all in these experiments,” meaning that the scientists did not look at whether the viruses could spread across a population. Three experts said that, while they did not have enough knowledge of U.S. policies to comment on whether the research met NTH criteria, the experiment involving humanized mice was unnecessarily risky. One virologist, Vincent Racaniello, a professor of microbiology and immunology at Columbia University, said while he considered the mouse experiment described in the document to clearly fall into the gain-of-function category, he didn’t see it as problematic. “You can do some kinds of gain-of-function research that then has unforeseen consequences and may be a problem, but that’s not the case here,” said Racaniello. 001751 

Robert Kessler, communications manager for EcoHealth Alliance, denied that the work on the humanized mice met the definition of gain-of-function research. Kessler insisted that bat viruses are not potential pandemic pathogens because, he said, “a bat virus is not known to be able to infect humans.” The proposal justified the work on WIV1 by explaining that it is “not a select agent” — referring to a list of closely monitored toxins and biological agents that have the potential to pose a severe threat to public health — and “has not been shown to cause human infections, and has not been shown to be transmissible between humans.” But the group’s bat coronavirus research was focused on the very threat that bat viruses pose to people. Kessler did acknowledge that, while the original bat coronavirus in the experiment did not spread among humans, the research was designed to gauge how bat coronaviruses could evolve to infect humans. All but two of the scientists consulted agreed that, whatever title it is given, the newly public experiment raised serious concerns about the safety and oversight of federally funded research. “In my point of view, the debate about the definition of ‘gain-of-function’ has been too much focused on technical aspects,” said Jacques van Helden, a professor of bioinformatics at Aix-Marseille Université. “The real question is whether or not research has the potential to create or facilitate the selection of viruses that might infect humans.” The experiments described in the proposal clearly do have that potential, he said. NIH spokesperson Elizabeth Deatrick said that the agency had considered the research — and decided not to restrict it under its own rules. “In 2016, NIAID determined that the work was not subject to the Gain-of-Function (GoF) research funding pause and the subsequent HHS P3CO Framework,” Deatrick wrote, referring to criteria put in place in 2017 to guide the agency’s funding decisions about research that involves, or is reasonably anticipated to involve, potential pandemic pathogens. Republican members of Congress have alleged, without sufficient evidence, that gain-of-function research in Wuhan sparked the coronavirus pandemic. As part of an inquiry into the origins of the pandemic, they have twice grilled Fauci in Congress on his role as NIAID director. In a heated exchange in July, Republican Sen. Rand Paul accused Fauci of lying when he claimed that NTH did not fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Experts now say that the documents support the contention that NTH funded gain-of-function work, though not in the specific instance where Paul alleged it. “There’s no question,” said Racaniello, of Columbia University, who pointed to boo 1752 

the decreased weight of the mice infected with the chimeric viruses that was described in the research summaries sent to NIH. “From the weight loss, it's gain of function. Tony Fauci is wrong saying it’s not.” But the documents do not prove Paul's claim that Fauci was lying, as they do not make clear whether Fauci read them. Nor do they in any way support Paul’s allegation that Fauci was “responsible for 4 million people around the world dying of a pandemic” — or that anyone intentionally caused Covid-19. What is clear is that program officers at NIAID, the agency that Fauci oversees, did know about the research. A paragraph describing the research, as well as two figures illustrating its results, were included in both a 2018 progress report on the bat coronavirus grant and an application for its 2019 renewal. And NIH confirmed that it reviewed them. “NIH has never approved any research that would make a coronavirus more dangerous to humans,” the agency said in a statement, echoing remarks by Collins, the NIH director, posted to its website in May. “The research we supported in China, where coronaviruses are prevalent, sought to understand the behavior of coronaviruses circulating in bats that have the potential to cause widespread disease.” Similar research funded by NTH had aided in the development of vaccines against the coronavirus, the statement continued. ‘The White House did not respond to questions about the research. Cheers, peter Pater Daszak president EcoHealth Allance 520 Eighth Avenue, Suite 1200 New York, NY 10018-6507 usa be 001793 

Website: www.ecohealthallance.org Twitter: @PeterDasak Ecoealth Alliance develops science-based solutions to prevent pandemics and promote conservation rom: Kristian G. Andersen JENN Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 8:13 PM To: David Soren J Cc: Rasmussen, Angie] peter Doszak Garry, Robert F f Cavard Home: ozo Gale Robert Kessler Stephen Goldstein Subject: Re: here's the latest line of attack today. "she’s talked to 10 virologists or “people in adjacent fields” for her follow-up" If she had in fact done that, she'd realize there'd be no news and no need for a second article - except to say “nothing to see here, move along". Sigh. On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 4:28 PM David Morens | ote: Amen and good for you! You are right that Ebright and his ik are not only NOT experts but are harmful demogogues. They need to be called out. Because i am in govemmenti can only fo this off the record, but have done do again and again. Some of them are knowingly promoting false equivalences. If they interviewed a Holocaust survivor, they would say they have to give equal time and space to a Nazi murderer. They have no shame. d Sent from my iPhone David M Morens OD, NIAID, NIH On Sep 9, 2021, at 18:40, Rasmussen, Angie | ERE =: Pater and all 1am so sorry you are still going through all of this. For what it's worth, | broke my rule of talking to disingenuous journalists and sent Mara Hvistendahl a long email teling her exactly what think of the “experts” she’s talked to and setting the record straight about what these FOIA reports supposedly show. From what | can see, they show that you were reporting your work appropriately to NIH as required, the work itself was done in appropriate biocontainment, and, importantly, you didn't have SARS-CoV-2 or a progenitor. | also explained that previous work was published with WIV1 chimeras and that this type of study precludes doing more dangerous (and technically very difficult) virus isolation 001754 

‘She wanted to know whether | agreed with her two sources (likely Alina Chan or Richard Ebright, based on her prior story) that this fits the definition of GoF by NIH and | told her no and explained at length why not and the assertions that it was should disqualify any supposed “expert”. Took every opportunity to dunk on their amateurish, disingenuous bullshit, while also emphasizing the importance of this work. Mara wrote back defensively, claiming she’s talked to 10 virologists or “people in adjacent fields” for her follow-up. | am not optimistic that the follow-up will be more. balanced, but | did try to provide some juicy quotes about how her “experts” actually have no expertise, and emphasized the profound damage these people have done to this essential research They make all of us less safe. Hang in there. Ultimately the truth will come out and it's not going to be from the likes of the Daily Caller's inability to interpret virology data or from Jesse Bloom and all the grifters and conspiracy theorists populating the rabbit hole that he's crawied down. AogelaL Rasmussen, 7.0. Resour Soar Vasco and Infectious Diseass Organization V10O) Unversy of Sssaichouan Orcs Ra Sher nen <Mail Attachment png> On Sep, 2021, 2t 2:07 PM, Peter Daszak | = Heres a report inthe Daily Caller tha goes aftr the Gof argument tha the chimeric bat viruses yielded more irus in humanized mice than the parental bat virus stain. hitos//dalcaler com/2021/08/09/ecoheslth-alance gan-of- functon-higher viral-loacsnthony-faue/ There's a good response from NIH: ‘An NH spokesperson told the DCNF the agency “never approved any research that would make a coronavirus more dangerous to humans.” “The research we supported in Chin, where coronaviruses are prevalent, sought to understand the behavior of coronaviruses circulating in bats that have the potential to cause widespread disease,” the spokesperson said. “The body of science produced by this research demonstrates that the bat coronavirus sequences published rom that work NIH supported were not SARS-CoV-2. Mor importantly, because of similar research to understand coronaviruses, we were able to move swiftly to develop vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and save ves ‘This story is particularly irritating because if you look at the P3CO rules, it's clear they are meant for pathogens that occur in humans and might be made more dangerous, These were bat viruses that have never been shown to occur in 001795 

humans. Let's also not forget that the virus with a higher viral load in mice was actually because it had the spike protein of a bat virus being flown around every night by tens of thousands of bats in rural china ~ not something new created by us to enhance virulence - In fac, the opposite: the fact that we could do this work with a chimera means that we. don't have to isolate and culture every single new bat cov we find. It reduces risk! INVESTIGATIVE GROUP. Fauci-Funded Wuhan Lab Viruses Exhibited Over 10,000 Times Higher Viral Load Than Natural Strain, Documents show <image003.jog> <image007 jog> ANDREW KERRINVESTIGATIVE REPORTER September 09, 20213:25 PM ET Us. and Chinese researchers funded by the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases created viruses in a Wuhan lab that exhibited over 10,000 times higher viral load in humanized mice, records released by the agency show. + Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright said the data was a “bona fide bombshell” that proves the NIAID, under Dr. Anthony Fauci’ leadership, violated federal policies, endangered the public and ied to the public. «aud testified before the Senate in June that his agency never funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. US. and Chinese researchers funded by Dr. Anthony Fauct's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) created viruses in a Wuhan lab that exhited over 10,000 times higher viral load in humanized mice than the natural virus they were based on, according to an infectious disease professor citing documents recently released by the agency. The U.S. nonprofit group Ecokealth Allance notified the NIAID in two reports that between June 2017 and May 2018 t had created three ab-generated chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses in China that exhibited “significantly higher” viral loads, documents first reported by The Intercept show, but the agency continued to fund the project with taxpayer dollars without flagging it for review by an independent federal committee created n late 2017 to oversee gain-of- function rescarch. Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright, a vocal opponent of gain-of-function research, said the data was “bona fide bombshell” that proves the NIAID, under Fauti's leadership, violated federal plices, endangered the public and lied to the public “Three EcoHealth/[Wuhan Institute of Virology] ab-generated viruses exhibited »10x to >10,000x higher viral load than the starting bat virus in humanized mice,” Ebright tweeted. “One EcoHealth/WIV lab-generated virus exhibited higher pathogenicity than the starting bat virus in Infection studies with humanized mice.” “The results demonstrate-unequivocally-a gain in function, he said In comparison, the viral oad for people infected with the delta variant is roughly 1,000 times higher than those: Infected with the original srain of the virus, according to Nature science journal, Ebright added on Twitter that the gain-of-function research activity that NIAID allowed EcoHealth Alliance to conduct in China could have yielded the virus that causes COVID-19 or a progenitor of that virus. 017% 

Ecoealth Alliance first notified the NIAID it created the three lab-generated SARS related coronaviruses in a progress report detailing ts research activites between June 2017 and May 2018. “Using the reverse genetic methods we previously developed, infectious clones with the WIV backbone and the spike protein of SHCOL4, WIV6 and Rs4231, respectively, were constructed and recombinant viruses were successfully rescued,” the group said ints progress report. “2 and 4 days post infection, the viral load in lung tissues of mice challenged with rWIV1-SHCO14S, rWIV1-WIV16S and rWIV1-8s42315.. were significantly higher than that in rWIV1- Infected mice.” “These results demonstrate varying pathogenicity of SARS-CoV with different spike proteins in humanized mice, the report added. EcoHealth Alliance included a chart visualizing the increased viral load of their lab-created viruses. The chart is presented in a Log scale, meaning each tick of the chart represents a 100-fold increase in vial load in mice with humanized cell, Ebrght explained to the Daily Caller News Foundation. <image005.jpg> Charts submitted by EcoHealth Alliance to the National Institute of Alergy and Infectious Diseases showing 10ss of body. weight (right) and viral load left) of mice with humanized cell infected with the natural WIV1 vial strain and three Ecoealth lab-created virus trains. The viral load chart s presented in Log scale, meaning each tick of the graph represents a 100-fold increase inviral load, Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright explained to the DCNF. (screenshot) “Each tick in the chart on the right represents an increment of 100%,” Ebight told the DCNF. “The day 4 data show greater than-10,000x higher viral loads for the lab-generated viruses.” The viral load for humanized mice infected with the natural virus caught up with the lab-created strains by the end of the experiment, the chart shows, but Ebright said that viral loads in the early stages of an infection are important figures to consider when assessing a pathogen’ transmissbilty. “In terms of assessing potential for transmissibility, the viral load at al time points, particularly at early time points, is relevant. (see Delta variant),” Ebrigh told the DNF. EcoHeaith Alliance provided another chart in ts progress report showing that humanized ice infected with FcoMealth's abcreated viruses lost more bodyweight than humanized mice infected with the natural WIV strain EcoMeaith Alliance included the same two charts in a 2018 request to the NIAID requesting additional funding or ts research in China, the document trove released by The Intercept shows. Federal funding for gain-of-function experiments that increase the transmissibility o pathogenicity of potential pandemic pathogens was temporarily suspended in 2014 due to widespread scientific concerns t risked leaking supercharged viruses into the human population. Funding for gain-of-function research was resumed in late 2017, but only for projects that went through the new Potential Pander Pathogens Control and Oversight (P3CO) Framework, which includes a review by an HHS review board tasked with critically evaluating whether grants that involve enhancing dangerous pathogens, such as coronaviruses, are worth the risks and that proper safeguards are in place. The NIAID opted not to flag the Ecotealth Alliance grant for PCO after determining on its own accord that the project “did not involve the enhancement of the pathogenicity or transmissibility of the viruses studied,” a National Institutes of Health spokesperson previously told the DCNF. (RELATED: Us Grant To Wuhan Lab To Enhance 8at-Based Coronaviruses Was Never scrutinized By HHS Review Board, NIH Says Fauci said during a congressional hearing in May that the NIH and NIAID “categorically has not funded gain-of-function research to be conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” claim that ed Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in July to send a criminal referral to the Department of Justice to investigate whether Faucilied before Congress. The P3CO framework defines an “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen as any lab-created virus that exhibits any level of boosted transmissibility and/or virulence. Funding agencies such as the NIAID are required to flag any research grant thats “reasonably anticipated to create, transfer, or use enhanced PPPS” for P3CO review. 0001797 

Despite this, documents released by The Intercept suggest that the NIAID authorized EcoHealth Alliance to conduct gainof function experiments on bat coronaviruses up to 3 certain threshold. The NIAID informed EcoHealth Alliance na June 2018 award notice tat it must notify the agency only ft creates a virus “with enhanced growth by more than [10 times] compared to wild type strains,” according to documents released by Th Intercept. The NIAID linked to the P3CO review process which contains no such mention of 10 times allowance, inthe very ext sentence, the document shows. <image006.jpg> NIAID noice to EcoHealth Allnce in June 201 saying it must notify the agency only ft produces a ab virus that ‘exhibits more than 10 times enhancement over wild-type strains. (Screenshot) An NH spokesperson told the DNF the agency “never approved any research that would make a coronavirus more dangerous to humans.” “The research we supported in Chia, where coronaviruses are prevalent, sought to understand the behavior of ‘coronaviruses circulating in bats that have the potential to cause widespread disease,” the spokesperson said. “The body of science produced by this research demonstrates that the bat coronavirus sequences published from that work: NI Supported were not SARS-CoV’-2 More importantly, because of similar research to understand coronaviruses, we were able to move swiftly to develop vaceines against SARS-Cov-2 and save Ives” Content created by The Daly Cale News Foundation s availabe without charge to ary eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please Contact lcensing @dalhcallerewsfourdation.org Cheers, peter peter Dasa President Ecoteatth Allance 520 Fighth Avenue, Suite 1200 New York,NY 10018-6507 usa Tel. IN Website: wi econeaithaance org Twitter: @PeterDaszak 001798 

rn... Tos Garry, Robert Kristian G. Andersen’ ven Ebert pence —_—_ _ en. en TE a ee er Win rt teen, on ter pema ait osaatontoes Neto tn 4307 oy 017% 

From: Garry, Rovert + [ rm ——— To pote seo I + oe E— Ft, I tam —— EE a ——— quite a number that could be considered “risky” at least by a Relman/Ebright definition. Selecting drug resistant. TE Date: Wednesday, September 8. at To: Kristian Andersen Cc: David Morens. Robert Garry Edward Holmes Jason Gale asmussen, Angie" obrt Kosslr . S'°7"" Goldstein ‘Subject: RE: The Intercept report on coronavirus research at Chinese labs = mr ee -— Cross ios ony Til oposite som ing reo ee: raiding aan tin rr —— em er yo —————— rr ——o em soi we ore hes on Gt nto eked Toe Seas se co 4 SARC on a wht the same dv wee on son 001500 

that we broke the rules in chain with Alina Chan and the “Seeker”. Im not sure whether to respond at al, but | might just let him know that al SARS-CoV sequences we had are already published in our 2020 paper in Nat. Comm. Again the problem with these accusations s that ust being accused of this by the press causes us seven levels o hel, and arguing backis even worse. Cheers, peter Peter Dasiak president EcoHealth Alance 520 Eighth Avenue, Suite 1200 New York, NY 10018-6507 usa Website: ww. cohealthaliance org Tuitter: @PeterDaszak EcoHealth Alliance develops science-based solutions to prevent pandemics and promote conservation From: Kristian G. Andersen IEEG_—_—_— Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 10:30 PM To: Peter Daszak Cc: David Morens Garry, Robert FS ard Holmes jason Gale Rasmussen, Angie [Robert Kessier tephen Goldstein Subjoct: Re: The Intercept report on coronavirus research at Chinese labs Its harassment, plain and simple - t has absolutely nothing to do with trying to find the truth of how ‘SARS-CoV-2 emerged in the human population. The way | see it though, we now have (a) the entire US IC having completed their investigation, (b) unredacted grants and annual reports from EcoHealth, and (c) old theses from the WIV. 001501 

This is exactly the type of information that Ebright, Metzl, Reiman, Bloom, Chan, and the rest of the ot have been requesting. Now this work has been completed, what was unearthed? Nothing. Nada. Zich. No evidence of the virus (or sequence) at the WIV (or anywhere else) prior to the pandemic. No gain-of-function work (despite what Ebright says). The same cloning system used again and again (WIV), Vero cells used for virus isolation (SARS-CoV-2 loses the FCS in those cells), and no. previously unreported viruses isolated (although | note the repeated use of isolates" in one of the annual reports to describe 11 samples - | myself have made that mistake before). So again, there's nothing. This absence of evidence is in fact evidence of absence in this particular case - there would have been some evidence for SARS-CoV-2 in some of these documents had it been at the WIV. Yet, nothing. As for GOF work, again nothing. | note the mention of work with recombinant MERS in the year 3 report for work proposed in year 4 - depending on the nature of work, that could be considered GOF/DURC. However, when reading the year 4 report, | don't see any of that work mentioned - just work with pseudotyped viruses, which is clearly not GOF (or DURC), Of course, people wil take stuff out of context to make anything fit a particular narrative. However, there's an expiration date on bullshit and | suspect we're well past due. K On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 6:28 PM Peter Daszak I Here's one ofthe “Journalists” who got the “Scoop”. Basically tney Just then sued when NIH refused to release, then dumped the documents online and asked for “people with relevant expertise to get n touch’. Cue Drs. Ebright, Relman, Chan, Bloom and others to start their attempt at a character assassination... Mara Histendahi @Maratvistendahl 130 NEW: We obtained hundreds of pages from NIH detailing Ecobieaith Alliance's work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. We are publishing them in full. With @fastierner and @theintercept egal team, which fled a FOIA lawsuit for the documents’ release <image001.ipg> New: Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab More than $00 pages of material related to US. funded coronavirus research in China were released following a FOIA Iawsui by The Intercept. —o001802 

theintercept com <image002.og> Mara Hvistendah @Marathistendah 15h The full documents are here: “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus. Emergence” hips: /documentcloud.org/ documents 21055385-understanding rsk-bat-coronavirus-emergence rant: notice.. "Understanding Risk of Zoonotic Virus Emergence in Emerging Infectious Disease Hotspots of Southeast Asia"hitps//dacumenteloud org/docurents/2 105588 risk. roonoticirus-hotspots grantnotie.. <mage002 o> ‘Mara histendah @Maratvistendahl n There is alot here. @fastierner and | ar interested in hearing feedback from people with relevant expertise. Cheers, peter Peter Daszak President Ecottelth Alliance 520 Eighth Avenue, Site 1200 New York, NY 10018-6507 usa 001803 

Tol I Website: wecoheahhallanee.org Twitter: @PeterDaszak EcoHealth Alle develops science-based solutions to prevent pandemics and promote conservation rom: avid Morens IN Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021907 PM To: Peter Daz Ce: Gary Robert \istianG. anderson Eduard Holmes eson Gaia pry 8 Robert Kessler 16025680] Subiect: Re: The Intercept report on coronav rus research at Chinese labs Do not rule out suing these assholes for slander. d Sent from my iPhone David M Morens OD, NIAID, NIH On Sep 7, 2021, at 20:39, Peter Daszak | t=: To be hones, this whole process beyond joke. We're spending a huge amount of staf time dealing withthe 85 from these Fol requests even though th grant been terminated, suspended and funds are stl unavailable. The ableakers are already tring up bullshit lines of attack that will ring more negative publicity ou way — whichis what tis is about -a way toline up the GoF attack Fauci orth risky researc attack nall of us. Jesse Bloom's now trying to claim we weren't following our proposed rules for data release (not true — all SARSr-CoV' Rp sequences on Genbaniin summer 2020, despite the gran beng terminate) he's aging Alina Chan nd The Seeker on Twitter, Eights trying oc we were working on ERS 25 a‘shadow line of work. There be more to come - usta free-for-all efor to find a few sentences that they can take out of context Cheers, eter peter Daszak president | 

EcoHsith Aliance 5206Eighth Avenue, Site 1200 NewYork, NY 10018.6507 usa Te: 412123804474 Website: wa ecsheathallance org a — From: Garry, Robert F Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 808 PM: To: ristan . Andersen = o's I Ceacncalc angela rasmussen asta co p wstnses) Subject: Re: The IrEept report on coronavitus research at Chinese labs Totaly that the rea tory of the FOlAed grants - no SC2 or anything close that could have been converted wit. Metz, Chan and others wanted a “forensic Investigation. The grants tht they thought would be private and written before the pandemic do not mention a new SARS-lke virus. YOu can be sure that a new virus 76% similar to SC1 would have been front and center in the applications and progress reports. My guess this s part of the nfo the IC used to conclude no bioweapon, likly no engineering - NO SC2 before the pandemic. nis Gof debate now very clearly has nothing to do with the origin of SC2. som tans snore Sant: Tuesday, September 7 Teogarars cess Ge iazonGole rp pe dmorens ic Gory Robert F usozsias SUbJec: Re: Te INLTCepR EDO on coronavirus esearch at Chinese 1365 001805 

— Extemal Sender. Be aware of links, attachments and requests. Going through it carefully as we speak (already wasted a few hours) - because that's how idiotic this has become. Nicely detailed annual reports - makes it easy to show that there's in fact no SARS-CoV-2 in there... People have lost their minds with this 5". K On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 4:50 PM Edward Holmes | ©'c Yes, just more like evidence that they never had SCZ in the lab. Professor Edward C. Holmes FAA FRS. The University of Sydney On 8 Sep 2021, at 9:43 am, Jason Gale (BLOOMBERG NEwsroom:) | wrote: Just FYI https: //theintercept.com/2021/09/06/new-details-emerge-about= coronavirus-research-at-chinese-lab/ Disclaimer Te Information cotaned in tls communication fom th sandr 1s congenial kad sey for use by th recent ard oer acrned ta ace I yg ark econ You ars ety noi Im ay Gece, copying: to or Shing acon lato of he Coram of 1s matin SC romoRes and may be nowt. is emai has ben scanned fo viruses and maivare, and may have been automaticaly arched by Mmecat, leader i emai ey at ot Tosbanea: HEVGCRS eas rh Seonics wih Bar FrCESoT, Ser renee gi web separ: optus and ter earl capaiies. Mmecas hs rect TOe nd aml orGanaatons or malicious Si human Tor 3nd echncogy aur; and 4a ead the movement toward Dung 8 more rESHent work. To ind ut more, Vout WABELe Disclaimer Tr ——— ers authorized 1 rece I you aro 96 eGlen, ou a0 hare noted ha any Aacosre, pYIN, ARETBLAON ing action In relation of he Contato is formation icy ronRed and ma be craw. 11 ml nas been scanned for viruses and maiware, and may have been automaticaly sched by Mmecast, 3 leader in emai cur an or TosRares PHVGCRS Iho aRSs Sr SeTnata wih rare BovachoT, Secu Swareness Fag: web seours omar and her Scena CapaDITES: PRGCIS RI Dota arOs and smal rgaEatons fom malicious HUY. rman To A eh are; 31 3 680 he ve ovard BANG 8 mor Teen Word T Tn toe, I it WADERS. Disclaimer 001806 

ne infomation anand n comm caton fom the senders Confers. It encase for se by te ecient ana Ors autores 1 eee 1 you a hth Fp. 7ou ar hry TO hak ay Gr, copying: dsb IDeen of in acon i eat of Crvansof norman Ey pron Bod 4nd ay oe orl 4s cml ns ben scanned for viruses and malware, and ay have been automatically archived by Mimecas, aesder in email Set and ye resin, Mamacas agra eal GEFEOES ran pORCURTY Sect Saas Sin: we secur, Complaren an ota: acl hpSaIaE WTACAR RE otc 3 and Sa IGANGA fom melons ki Fran ror and eChnoloy {burs and 3 ad ie ovement iad Ging & more resent wo. To nd ut ore, SE Gu NEDSS. Disclaimer The informotion contained in tis commuricain fom the sender is Cofideril. ts ended sly for se by te ecient 1nd Others aharze 1 reco I you a1 10k the repent, you ar here rfc hat any GRCIERU, coying, GTIDAIEN of aking acon in relator of 1 Corker of rman 1 cy pron Bad and may brawl. | This email has been scanned for viruses and mahware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast, a leader in emeil Secor Sr he reshance, Whecast Iagares el deans wi brand povaChaT Soc Smirenecs BAIN: web Secu, | Compan and ihc essartil Capagvies. MECH: helps rect frge and mol GNIAR rom allo acy, Puan CaF and temoloy atures 13 5d hE OVER rd DUI 5 ore reheRe wad. To fod At or, 1 Ot eBARE Disclaimer The formation contained in ts communication rom te senders confidential. I nnd sole for uss by te eciens and SEhrS UNO 1 TES I. I You are Toke CEN, yo 316 hers AEG ha any SIGS, opyIn, ASHTDUION o akin action n relate of te conkers of moi 3 cy Bron SRed 32d may 0 ant This ema has been came or viruses and malware, and may have been automaticaly rcived by Mimecast, a acer In emai eC an cyber reshane, Mihacot grates nil Geenses brand YORESan, Say SATEZS HAIG, 46 Secu, Compares an ut Exel Copaniles. Nmeces Ppa rock Brg ad all or gaaetons Tm melo ty Haman oF Sn ERGY atures ahd a ac ovama oward Bulking 8 ore SSR work. To AG uk more, wl ut WebHRS 001507 

ewe EE — a CER A —r— Cc earmnon S rt on Extemal Sender. Be aware of links, attachments and requests. kga197¢ ER Gary, rE or mroren SE sues Te tachment PnglSercopy NG2021- ja Thanks, Eddie. Foran tre Shits poste will Ye tmighil sonterh Boz vier Deter Davos ob Sh Poluts Tarty Lanes Tests un Th0 SevtarEay OF DECITE I Seta, Br Semon From: etvard.hoined At: 08/21/21 07:25:20 UTCH10:00 sor Gnorens Co: Jason Gule (DLOOMDERG) NEWSROOM: ) ; rfgarry 1 kga1978 I Th. [ on Kessler y as0zsey = Subject: Re: It's diabolical nonsense David. Irrespective of what they state in that ‘paper’, Linfa has found serological evidence for closely related viruses in pangolins dating back several years and the HKU team have similar data (see attachment). Plus the Guangdong pangolins have been my multiple groups in different ways and there is an independent lineage in Guangxi. The attempt to undermine the pangolin data and the people that generated it one of the shameful examples of anti-science | have ever seen. The reality is that is because the RBD of the Guangdong pangolins is genetically similar to SARS-CoV-2 it becomes an inconvenient data point for those who believe the virus came from a lab in Wuhan hence their attempts to undermine it. Cheers, Eddie PROFESSOR EDWARD C. HOLMES FAA FRS ARC Australian Laureate Fellow _ 

THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases & Biosecurity, School of Life & Environmental Sciences and School of Medical Sciences, The University of Sydney | Sydney | NSW | 2008 | Australia 3 E On 21 Aug 2021, at 1:03 am, Morens, David (NIH/NIAID) [E] TE Thanks to both you and Kristian. Very heelpful to know what the experts think, because 50 us mere mortals, phylogenetic and sequencing interpretation is a bit inscrutable. Yes, although | don't know her personally, | know OF Alina Chan based on two papers of hers | came across, one of which was a screed against Eddie's recent review. It seemed biased, cherry-picked, and not the work of a scientist with integrity. <tmage00¥ gif> David M. Morens, M.D. CAPT, United Sates Public Health Service Senior Advisor to the Director Office of the Director National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases National Institutes of Health Bethesds, MD 20892-2520 o coe Tsoi ined rh civ fhe) sor Ky Gentoo us PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, od CONFIDENTIAL 1 abe oe be mint die, oped ee hed ce och moron Al cients tb ope od er mein Yc yu ed et. meee. 1 5 FSSA. Hoe ae ert mr re oat oe eo be pe ote lw ti <imags005 jog> rom: ar. for Sant: Friday, August 20, PLTOY To: Morens, David (i/NA) (6) I + - Ancien oss 

ce jcon ale angelasussen penembare] dasa — yr a weorsess bao Subject: Ke: David This from a realy super young investigator Alex Crit Christoph. The authors concluded: (a) the pangoln cove are actualy from mice (0) actually, they were actually cloned artificial constructs, (c) actualy, hora ware othor viruses i 10 samples as wo (oh nol who'd hava thought (0) actual, ts ai Comaminated with cog dna.” wy ake It garbage and no they [ine authors] are not ok - altvough my supposition is that they are being Wel compensated for generating tis nonsense. Alina Chan [who a quta cangerous INO young Investigator and fs ring a book] Is using the very Same approach - spouting a ft of pseudoscientfic garbage, arguing from “authority.” ec. bu finding a receptive [and ikely wealthy] aucience that can put the garbage to work. The whole Dr. Yan/Steve Bannon saga is but one of the examples of this approach. b From: "Morens, David (NiH/NIAID) (<]" [EE Date: Friday, August 20, 2021 a 8:36 AM To: Kristian Andersen [EE Ce: Jason Gale “angela.rasmussen| "penambarel daszat "460250 . , Subject: <n® TU% Do you all know these data? see link below... 210808165] Cling vectors and contamination’ metgencmic datasets rae concerns over panglin CoV genome <ieage006 gif> David M. Morens, M.D. CAPT, United States Public Health Service Senior Advisor tothe Director Offic of the Director Notional Insticte of Allergy and Infectious isases Nacional Insitute of Health ‘Bethesda, MD 20892-2520 001619 

o I ——— CONTINUA fh ite fk pb ome mittee bis Al ie best rl et ee em ep en i wo PA Heme eet Ty amage007 og roms stan. Ancersen JN Sent: Thursday, August 1, 020 EXEPT Tor orens avi (w/w) tc Ce ason Ge TW Janel esi Garry Robert 46025689. Vankerkhover SEE ‘Subject: Re: The story behind the mi about the story behind the missing raccoons: ear La Jolla as some prtty ic hase. us saying Oh wait ie here - he's whats outside my office imagens pg Happy to save you spt you know, eld research, « On, Aug 12,2021 25:09PM Miorens, Davi (iw) tc I t=: You deserve tht bach! Reminds me of that Warten Zevon song about “pp Fosters nthe shade”. Mr Bad cre ned Sent rammy hae Dard M Morens Ob, WIAD, NIH on ug 12 2021, 200, san clo coma newssoon NNR ~~ Thanks, David. I've actually been tied up with a podcast series on long Covid (while trying fo stay on top of the usual vaccine effectiveness stuff. Busyness with which y'all are only too familiar!). But it helps to vent. sometimes about you can feel pretty defeated by your job. Thanks for the support. There will be a beach for me to lay on somewhere some day... a6 erons anorers {EN Ac: 08/13/21 0:05:19 UTC+10:00 Tor dason Gato IoOOR S00: EEE ccvard.holmes kess18r | kga1976 001620 

SNSCUNRE: The story penind the 2 the stor the missing raccoons Jason, yikes, but itis a mirace that with all that work you have still been able to crank out multiple high-calibre articles. | have no idea why anyone up your chanin would jerk you around. Who are these guys anyway???? Just keep doing it and overcome, OK? <tmage006.gif> David M. Morens, M.D. CAPT, United States Public Health Service Senior Advisor to the Director Office of the Director National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases National Institutes of Health Bethesda, MD 20892-2520 ‘Il | s______ Dicer Thi map ded fr cvs fei) med ser. ny tin form ds PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, nd CONTI ct hot er ei, dt pio ees Ade ee ch ta, Al id ot Terao breton tet Br emotion yest tbe st Poo Hoo mi ee ors ve Beat emir marten tame <image007 jpg> From: Jason Gale (BLOOMBERG! Newsroom.) | EEN Sent: Thursday, Augus 53 PM ie enembarck of coco Moro. David (NIH/NIAID) [E] = I ———— 8 Garry, Robert F |,u6025689 sje A ubject: The story behind the missing story about the story behind the missing raccoons Hi everyone, Just letting you know that my story has been turned into a shitshow internally. My long awaited feature on why the raccoon dogs were there in Wuhan one minute, gone the next and why we waited 18 months to find out for sure that they were there in the first place, has taken more twists ooo 521 

and turns than any Olympic diver, thanks to some egomaniac editors. (Please keep that bit to yourselves). I have even more sympathy for Xiao et al. I'm told now Tuesday for publication, but I wouldn't be surprised if some a-hole higher up the food chain spikes it. To say I am exasperated (and a tad emotional after working 13 days straight) is an understatement. Kindest regards, Jason 01622 

Message rom: Edwardiioimas Sent: 7/28/2021 6:47:58 PM fo: Stephen Goldstoin I cc: Jason Gale — External Sender. Be aware of inks, atachments and requests. morens EE Garr Fobert - INE Subject: URGENT: Seeking comment on paper in Nature: Scenific reports Pangolins were all the rage in Feb 2020 - that's when that link was found. So, think focus on those species at that time is fully understandable. PROFESSOR EDWARD C. HOLMES FAA FRS ARC Australian Laureate Fellow THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases & Biosecurity, School of Life & Environmental Sciences and School of Medical Sciences, The University of Sydney | Sydney | NSW | 2006 | Australia T - I On 29 Jul 2021, at 9:45 am, Stephen Goldstein | NE NNER + ~: Yes ts the focus on bats and pangolins that throws me of. Chis seems to think the lack of those animals are the maior findings, whereas i's the presence of the other animals. But, perhaps I'm just misreading it. No coubt they are no very aware the importance of the paper regardless. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 28, 2021, at 4:45 PM, Jason Gale (BLOOMBERG! NEWSROOM: EN rote: Thanks, David. Your observations and thoughts are always much appreciated! (There was a time once when I would drop Tony an email and he would respond almost immediately. Ha!) Thanks, Eddie. I will get back to you if there's a quote that would be useful to use. I'11 see if Chris Neuman would be willing to share the paper -- it's 2 months earlier than his colleague in China said it was drafted (and three 001346 

months after Xiao Xiao's last monthly survey), which makes me think they understood the urgency of their findings. Kindest regards, Jason eron: ancrens {NNN At: 07/29/21 07:38:47 To: Jason Gale (BLOOMBERG) NEWSROOM: ) , xfoarry[EEE edward. oTnes SE cos co MRM Subject: RE: Fud:Re: URGENT: Seeking comment on paper in Nature: Scientific reports Jason, | can almost always talk on background or off the record, and if needed | MIGHT be able to speak ON the record. In the US government we all have to get approval from HHS or the Whitehouse to speak to the press. Sometimes they are touchy about certain issues and say no. For many months, | have not been approved to talk about “origins” on the record. But today, to my total surprise, my boss Tony actually ASKED me to speak to the National Geographic on the record about origins. | interpret this to mean that our government is lightening up but that Tony doesn't want his fingerprints on origin stories. Bottom line, | can speak to you on background and, if you need or want quotations or attributions, you can request to speak to me formally. They can only say no or, better yet, steer you to Tony... Have you asked Dr. Newman when he bmight be able to share the paper he mentioned? | would love to see that... <mime-atiachment i> David M. Morens, M.D. CAPT, United States Public Health Service Senior Advisor to the Director Office of the Director National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases National Institutes of Health I A727 

ld Bethesda, MD 20892-2520 * -- — “ — Diime Thi memgsedodr he excise ob cin) ued hos, ay coi norton ht PROTECTED, PRIVILEGED, sd CONTDENTIA sn ah Ste do po Pest ered ce mh A ie Gan mt FP bcd fre dvmineionin yex ree be cded cit oy dma, fico, ong <H entn yo hae sed mini mre ot co oe ep ee 1 RA, <mime-attachment jpg> From: Jason Gale (BLOOMBERG/ NEwsRooM:) | Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 4:54 PM To: Morens David (NIINIAID) [E] ; Garry, Robert F ; edward.holmes| 6025689) Subject: Fwd:Re: URGENT: Seeking com! lature: Scientific reports Ahhh. This (below) makes more sense! Btw, I'm making some progress with my story, somewhat distracted by the Olympics... Eddie and David, I'm assuming your comments are off the record. Cheers, Jason = Original Message From, Cova Nowra [EE To: JASON GALE CC: I At: 07/29/21 00:13:38 UTC+10.00 Dear Jason, Thanks for your interest. Yes, it was unfortunate that this paper had a chequered publication history. In brief, we had submitted this manuscript to a different journal in Feb 2020, anticipating support and swift publication — job done, data out there to share. Instead, said journal came back with review comments that cast aspersions onto the veracity of our dataset, both in terms of Dr. Xiao’s surveying and the extent to which these data might accurately reflect all species sold in the markets. We responded with a revision, but got a second round of review, until at the end of Sept 2020 the journal rejected our paper saying they did not think it would have widespread appeal. This had three consequences: 1) It significantly delayed intended urgency to publish 2) It caused us, especially our Chinese co-authors, concern that these data would not be taken seriously / dismissed unless they were properly published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal. 3) It caused us to write a revised version of our manuscript that incorporated more data on pangolin rade networks in China. 0001348 

We were very grateful that Nature Scientific Reports ultimately published our paper — where they, as per all journals currently, struggled to find reviewers, ironically due to covid impacts on academics, teaching, research, etc. They then recommended we ditch the pangolin trade element and (re-}focus on the market trade, which we did (our now re-separated pangolin trade network paper was provisionally accepted elsewhere today, subject to some revisions). And so we ended up where we gotto. As to why our Chinese authors did not take these data directly to the WHO, my interpretation (no that they ever said this themselves) is that thay were comfortable writing a report on market surveys to publish in a journal (where we've published dozens of papers on IWT in China with Dr. Zhou), but to take their data to the WHO directly would have required them to go through line management channels that would not be typical to their normal roles in their universities. | might add, however, that although one might speculate that these data would interest the WHO team, where our report corroborates a lack of bats and pangolins (chief covid culprits) for sale in these markets (pangolins. are sold much more extensively in southern China), no one from the WHO has subsequently approached us for more details. Drs Xiao and Zhaomin are currently seeking permission to share their raw dataset, awaiting a decision from their institutions Please let me know if | can be of further assistance. Regards Chris Or. Chis Newman Widife Conservation Research Unit University of Oxford From: Jason Gale (BLOOMBERG/ NEWSROOM.) | Sent: 27 July 202104:03 A — enrstina buesching ubject: dng comment on paper in Nature: Scientific reports Dear Drs Buesching and Newman, I hope you're well. I saw somewhere some information that indicated you are collaborators/colleagues as well as partners, so I hope you don't mind me emailing you both. As a way of introduction, I'm a journalist based in Melbourne, Australia, reporting on the pandemic for the international news organization Bloomberg News. 0001348 

I note with interest the paper in Scientific Reports in June of which you are two of the five authors. (I have separately emailed Prof. Macdonald and Dr. Zhou in China. The paper created quite a rumble since it confirmed what many scientists researching the origins of Covid-19 had previously speculated: that markets in Wuhan (including the Huanan wholesale seafood market) were selling live animals known to be susceptible to SARS-like coronaviruses before the emergence of SARS-CoV-2. My reason for contacting you is to see if you might be able to assist me better understand to what extent local, national and international authorities knew about this, and what was done to alert them. Your co-author Zhou Zhaonin told me in an email in June that a draft of the paper was initially completed in April 2020. After rejections by several journals, it wes submitted to Scientific Reports in October 2020, he said. Dr Zhou said: "We were unwilling to disclose it to any other parties, unless the peer reviewers think the paper is almost ready." He said further "I don't think it is about the level of openness and transparency. In the paper, we have discussed why it was difficult to ascertain which species were on sale, even to the genus level, relying solely on the responsible market authority's official sales records and disclosures." Springer Nature told me they submitted the paper as per their procedure to the WHO almost immediately. Maria van Kerkhove at WHO confirmed she received a copy titled "Pangolin trading in China: Wuhan’s alibi in the origin of Covid-19" in October, however, it got buried under the heavy weight of submissions and pre-prints that sho was receiving via email, and it was essentially overlooked. Dr Van Kerkove expressed regret that neither the journal nor the authors made direct, more overt contact with the WHO research team alerting them to their findings ahead of their well- publicized field trip to Wuhan in January-February 2021. I appreciate that research into the origins of Covid-19 has become a hotbed of political posturing and accusations, mostly based on rumors, and circunstantial and unfounded "evidence". That's mostly why I find your research on the animals found to be sold live in Wuhan markets so interesting and compelling. Dr Zhou mentioned reliance on the responsible market authority's official sales records and disclosures for obtaining information on the types of animals sold in Wuhan markets. This would indicate records may have been available to local and provincial authorities, who may have been able to identify possible animal vectors in Wuhan for further analysis and trace- back. Yet, the operator, vendors and regular customers of the Huanan 001350 

market denied being aware that such live animals were sold in the market when they were interviewed by the WHO-led research team on Jan. 31. I suspect it's difficult for researchers in China to discuss freely the level of awareness that existed in Wuhan of the presence of live SARS- pernissive animals sold in markets there, so I am hoping you might feel more comfortable discussing the information you have. Specifically, could you please tell me what you know about: + the extent to which your research findings were shared ahead of publication with local, provincial and national authorities in China? + Whether you considered sharing the unpublished research findings with the WHO personally, and, if not, why? And if you did, why you didn't do so in the end? Please don't take my questions as an accusation of any neglect or wrongdoing on your point. That's not at all my intention. What is clear to me is that valuable information wasn't in the hands of researchers working on the WHO-led mission as early as it could have been, and that at some point, critical information wasn't passed on to them or (supposedly) to their Chinese counterparts. What I am not clear about is whether there was a deliberate attempt to obfuscate the facts about the presence of live animals in Wuhan markets, and, if so, who is responsible? Your earliest assistance in helping to shed some light and clarify what you know about this will be much appreciated. Kindest regards, Jason http://www linkedin.com/publjason-gale/6/249/a56 <ATTO0002 jpg><ATTO0001 gif 001351 

001352