Dalelorenzo's GDI Blog

Fauci Exposed: Historical Research of COVID

By now, many have heard that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases( NIAID) -- an weapon of the National Institutes of Health( NIH) -- has funded contentious gain-of-function( GOF) investigate on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology( WIV ).

Dr. Anthony Fauci, NIAID director, told a House Appropriations subcommittee that $600,000 was given to the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, which funneled the money to WIV over a five-year period for aims of studying at-bat coronaviruses and whether they could be transmitted to humans. 1

Fauci has repudiated fund GOF research, even though evidence establishes he did fund it, 2 but it exits much more profound than this. Now that it’s been proven beyond a rational fear that SARS-CoV-2 is laboratory deduced -- the likely result of GOF research -- we must look back on Fauci’s early pandemic response under a different lens.

Fauci Censored Science, Stymied Research to Protect Himself

Charles Rixey, a COVID-1 9 psychoanalyst, combed through 100,000 sheets of FOIA documents and reviewed more than 1,000 investigate sections, wording a conclusion over six months of investigation that “one of the worst bloomings of the pandemic is the evaporation of public trust in scientists.”

This erosion of trust came at the sides of “America’s doctor, ” Fauci, who leap to action at the start of the pandemic -- not to protect the public, as his duty necessitated, but to protect himself, Rixey alleges. Rixey wrote on Prometheus Shrugged: 3

“Fauci quietly but instantly ensured that scientific censorship was implemented, in big meter, to prevent public awareness of the extent of his role in GOF research and the contentions bordering it. The sign proves that, at the start of the pandemic, Dr. Fauci and many preceding scientists moved to protect themselves -- not us, who weren’t yet aware of the potential calamity at our doorstep.

Fauci LED the efforts to obstruct research into COVID's origins, colluding with the President's Science Advisor Kelvin Droegemeier and Wellcome Trust head Jeremy Farrar, to proactively threaten consideration of the evidence that instantly restrained their world-wide experiment initiatives to the lab at the center of the COVID-1 9 pandemic.

To date, all of their efforts have been focused on preventing disclosure of embarrassing ties-in -- not foreclosing another tale pathogen from triggering a world-wide pandemic; to prevent future scrutiny , not future tragedy.”

Fauci Pushes Natural Origin, Despite Evidence of Engineering

One of the major pieces of publicity is "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2, "4 a newspaper published in Nature Medicine in March 2020 that became the preeminent "proof" that SARS-CoV-2 had a natural start and couldn't maybe have come from a lab.

It was later revealed that Fauci, Farrar and Dr. Francis Collins, NIH director, had a hand in the paper, as one of its writers wrote a March 6, 2020 email to the trio and colleagues, thanking them for their "advice and leadership."

According to Rixey, however, the five journalists of the Nature Medicine paper, who he refers to as “the Proximals, ” were aware of the existence of a furin cleavage locate( FCS) on the virus as early as February 1, 2020, the working day a conference call was organized by Farrar and Fauci “to address several aspects of the SARS-CoV-2 genome that pointed towards an artificial start, by means of generating adaptive alters through passaging and/ or direct manipulation of the genome.”5 He lends: 6

“Also fully overshadowed comes from the fact that at least one, and very likely all, of the person or persons on the conference call were aware of the existence of the FCS ... It’s even worse when you believe that 18 months later, they still can’t explain it -- the Proximals refuse to respond to the fact that the FCS doesn’t exist within the sarbecovirus sub-genus that SARS-CoV-2 falls under.

This is a problem, because members of the sub-genus are too distinct to recombine with the varieties of SARS-like viruses from other disciplines that do contain the FCS.”

The FCS is significant. To gain have entered into your cadres, the virus must first bind to an ACE2 or CD147 receptor on the cadre. Next, the S2 spike protein subunit must be proteolytically cleaved( reduction ). Without this protein fissure, the virus would simply attach to the receptor and not get any further. “The furin site is why the virus is so transmissible, and why it occupies the heart, the intelligence and the blood vessels, ” Dr. Steven Quay asked. 7

While furin cleavage places do exist in other viruses like Ebola, HIV, zika and yellow-bellied excitement, they’re not naturally found in coronaviruses, which is one reason why researchers have called the furin cleavage site the “smoking gun” that proves SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab. The entire group of coronaviruses to which SARS-CoV-2 belongs does not contain a single precedent of a furin rift site, Quay said.

Fauci’s Noble Lie

The concept of the royal lie was first described by Plato. It refers to the notion that, in the case of high-status individuals or nominated public chairwomen, it’s acceptable to lie if the lie is induced in the interest of the common good.

Fauci’s lying is a prime example of this concept, as his expertise has been held as indisputable by mainstream media since the beginning of the COVID-1 9 pandemic. He’s been caught lying to both the public and the U.S. Senate on a number of issues, but nothing has been done about it.

Fauci hasn’t acted alone, but he’s been one of the most prominent faces behind what could amount to one of the greatest royal lies of all time.

“The world’s preceding experts in virology and public health called attention to a threat by setting the world on fire, rather than themselves -- and then blaming us for being too simple to believe their noble lie, ” Rixey writes. 8P TAGEND

2015: Novel Bat SARS-Like Virus Created to Infect Human Cells

Rixey makes books back to January 31, 2020, when virologist Kristian Andersen -- one of the Proximals, whose newspaper received the virus could not have been created in a lab -- emailed Fauci, cc’ing Farrar, stating, "The unique features of the virus make up a really small part of the genome (< 0.1%) so one has to look really closely at all the strings to see that some of the features( potentially) seem engineered."9

This exchange was a precursor to the February 1, 2020 conference call mentioned above. Another big-hearted musician in the princely lie is Ralph Baric, Ph.D ., at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who developed humanized mouse is set out in GOF research by WIV. 10

Baric worked closely with Shi Zhengli, Ph.D ., the director of WIV’s Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases, also known as “bat woman, ” on study expending genetic engineering to create a “new bat SARS-like virus ... that can jump immediately from its bat emcees to humans.” According to Peter Gotzsche with the Institute for Scientific Freedom: 11

“Their work focused on enhancing the ability of at-bat viruses to attack humen so as to' examine the emergence potential.’ In 2015, they created a fiction virus by taking the backbone of the SARS virus replacing its spike protein with one from another bat virus known as SHC0 14 -CoV. 12 This manufactured virus was able to infect a lab culture of cells from the human airways.

They wrote that scientific review boards might regard their study too risky to pursue but argued that it had the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks. Nonetheless, the value of gain-of-function studies in preventing the COVID-1 9 pandemic was negative, as this research highly likely developed the pandemic.”

February 3: A Mandate to Control the Narrative Is Issued

Adding to the puzzle, COVID-1 9 inoculation producer Moderna, together with NIAID, moved mRNA coronavirus vaccine campaigners to Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on December 12, 2019 -- prior to the opening of the pandemic, raise significant red flags. 13 Meanwhile, Rixey’s research guided him to conclude: 14

“The Proximals were gathered by Farrar& Fauci explicitly to compare emerging rationales with what was known of Baric's work, the spectrum of experiments conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

After the February 1 conference call, a February 3 assemble was held by Fauci, Droegemeier, Chris Hassell, elderly discipline adviser for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Business, and National Academies’ policy director Alexander Pope, during which the “group slapped the table on what the narrative was going to be -- not what the science indicated.” Rixey writes: 15

“Therefore, the signal was sent to all scientists that engaging the laboratories inceptions tilt intended career fatality( no establishment body ), no fund( via Fauci or Ross or Farrar ), no publication in the big 4 gazettes during the historic pandemic( NEJM, Science, The Lancet& Nature[ by virtue of their publishing of the tone-setting sections ]), no executive patronage for things like generic medicines, etc.”

Fauci Censors Public GOF Discourse He Called for in 2012

Fauci has long corroborated controversial GOF research, which he spoke about at a hearing before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs at the U.S. Senate, comprised April 26, 2012.16

That year he used to call open debate about GOF research and its risks, and a standstill was is available on U.S.-funded GOF research in October 2014, after a cord of concerning events, including book of controversial GOF studies and high-profile “incidents” at U.S. biocontainment laboratories, led to more than 300 scientists launching a petition calling for an end to gain-of-function investigate. 17

But that standstill was promoted by the NIH in December 2017,18 without any action of the public or the president/ representatives they elected. As Rixey greenbacks: 19

“The recent Congressional images by Fauci, however, have shown that he is willing to drag this fight out forever in defense of his gift, and numerous legislators are supportive to his plight.

Thus, it’s clear that better questions are needed to build the suitable level of awareness amongst the public to the full implications of Fauci’s concerted effort to prevent that same public discourse he claimed to support in 2012. ”

Fauci Should' Resign Immediately’

“The only proper action for Dr. Fauci to take at this point is to resign immediately, ” Rixey writes, “and apologizing for prioritizing the suppression of mortifying& extended conflicts of interest, double standards and political decisions masked as clang policy.”2 0

Along with his acquiescence, a retraction of “Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” is called for, as “each of its five authors intentionally framed the COVID origin debate around' evidence’ and' facts’ that they couldn’t prove, and a finality of the agreed conclusions that the known details couldn’t justify, ” Rixey says. 21

Rixey compiled a index of 10 questions he conceives should be formally answered by Fauci. Among them are much-needed explanations for apparent subversion, selective inclusion, redactions, diverging narratives and secrecy, including: 22

When did you first learn of the existence of the furin fissure website within the genome of SARS-CoV-2?

Why were emails with special topics heading “humanized mice” redacted?

Why did the world’s leading virologists/ microbiologists and surface American/ U.K. officials refrain from releasing their knowledge of the existence of the FCS when they firstly learned of it?

“The truth, ” Rixey says, “ ... is that our generation’s most prominent infectious disease expert is gaslighting our fellow citizens of "the two countries " he swore an oath to protect.”2 3

Read more: articles.mercola.com


5 Ways Audience Research Helps You Customize Your Landing Pages

Before you can accomplish your goals, you’ve gotta help your audience accomplish theirs. Makes sense, right? But too many times, marketers fall into the trap of creating landing pages with only their own goals in mind.

It’s no wonder visitors aren’t clicking on that CTA.

Building a landing page that converts like crazy shouldn’t be left up to chance—it’s the result of using detailed information about your audience to create a persuasive combination of copy and imagery.The key to converting visits on your landing page?Audience research.

“How Can I Make Sure I Appeal to Every Customer Demographic?”

Marketers are often taught that if you’re talking to everyone, then you’re talking to no one.

It’s true! A one-size-fits-all approach to your campaigns will never be as effective as one that’s both specific and highly relevant to your prospective customers and their needs.

For example, your company might be selling a SaaS product and dump your customers into buckets marked “marketers,” “founders,” and “business owners.” But so much opportunity is lost from this approach!

Demographic segmentation can be a stronger starting point that can make your landing page strategy more specific.

Think about how their location, age, and place of employment might help you personalize your messaging and tighten your advertising efforts.

On the page below, for instance, the location might not be as targeted, but other demographics like age, family status, and gender were clearly used to appeal to a specific persona (type of person).

Image Source

When you consider these types of details, your landing page takes the form of 1:1 communication, instead of an impersonal 1:many blast that speaks to nobody in particular. Your customers will feel the difference, even if they don’t know the experience has been tailored just for them. 

Sometimes, though, you don’t start out with the audience insights you need to create a landing page with the exact effect you intended.

That’s when you need to do a little diggin’.

Getting to know more about the customers you already have (and what makes them unique) can be advantageous to your strategy. You just need to do is put in the work to discover more about them…

5 Methods Of Audience Research

1. Conduct Customer Interviews/Surveys

Customer interviews are usually viewed as a preliminary activity. You reach out to ideal customers to get feedback on your Minimum Viable Product (MVP), and that’s it. 

*See ya next year!*

The problem here is that it leaves behind a great deal of opportunity. Customer insights can provide a ton of value between your launch and development stages. 

To improve the product for your customers, you need to make sure that they’ve got some skin in the game. By using continuous research, you can co-develop a product that your community loves, especially because they helped inform it. 

You need to be talking to your customers all the time.

Here are a few tips to help your next interview be short and deliberate as opposed to long and aimless. 

Start with the big picture.

It’s tempting to create surveys and interview questions centered on a product feature you think will be helpful. But this sets you up for confirmation bias. Instead, focus your questions on the user experience. 

If your product is meant to make content distribution more simple and scalable, resist asking about tools your customers might already be using. Ask questions that help you understand their barriers and needs to execute at a high level.

Decide how the feedback will be used. 

You want to respect your customers’ time by asking questions focused on them. A common mistake in customer interviews and surveys is asking questions about making your company’s messaging better. Yes, that will always be the end goal. 

However, language is important. Your customers want to know how you can help them, not the other way around. So, before you script your questions, decide which area of the business you want responses for. This will help you be more strategic and help you script questions that give you actionable feedback.

Image Source

Write your questions, then write ‘em again. 

First drafts are rarely perfect—although they’re incredibly helpful in getting your ideas down on paper. The next step is to organize those ideas and refine them into smooth, targeted, and impactful sentences. 

At first, your technical knowledge of your product might naturally find its way into your document, but you’ll want to avoid jargon and keep it simple for your customers. Write like you’re talking to a colleague or having a conversation in a coffee shop. Consumers are much savvier at picking out sales pitches and inauthentic copy in the digital age than they were 10 years ago. 

Write with empathy, tell your customers exactly how this data will be used, and try not to leave anything up to interpretation.

Curated Tip: It also helps if you can offer an incentive in return for their feedback. Something like a gift card, small cash reward, or donation has been known to increase response rates by up to 50%.When you’re ready to start framing your questions, use our customer feedback tips to help you optimize your campaign for a deeper understanding of your customers’ needs.

2. Monitor Social Media Platforms

One of the best ways to engage in audience research is to go where your audience hangs out online. 

There’s a tendency to rely only on Google to find answers that provide more insight into your customers’ interests, online behaviors, and patterns. You might also look at competitors to see what they’re doing or review studies from industry-leading companies to see what’s worked in the past. 

But there’s a TON of insights circulating on social media platforms that you can also learn from.

Facebook You might not have access to Facebook’s old beloved audience insight tool anymore, but that doesn’t mean you can’t learn more about how your customers use the platform.

You can still:

Look at the insights on your fan page: Track which posts have the most engagement and what demographics that engagement is coming from.

Search for groups discussing topics relevant to your brand: More than 1.4 BILLION people are using Facebook groups every month. These groups usually focus on a hobby or activity which can give you more insight into the daily lives of your target demographic.

Use Lookalike Audiences in your ad campaigns: This pixel helps you reach new people who are likely to be interested in your business due to similar characteristics of your existing customers.

Other Social Channels

Jump on Quora, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, LinkedIn, and YouTube to find out what your audience is curious about and how they engage with those topics online.Many of these channels have analytic reports built into the platform but you can also use social listening tools like Keyhole to track mentions of your brand, monitor conversions about competitors, and spot opportunities for relationship building.

Building a community online means showing up, participating, and adding value.

To understand how you can add value, you can use social listening to be a fly on the wall who observes the typical interactions in your industry. With these insights, you can craft strategic messages knowing what works and what doesn’t.

3. Competitive Analysis

You might want to focus solely on your brand and avoid looking at competitors to prevent being influenced by their tactics or—in all honesty—getting a little intimidated by their presence.

But the reality is that understanding your competitors’ positioning helps you better refine your own. Your main goal with competitor research should be to understand the sentiment consumers have towards competing brands and products.During your research, you should be seeking answers to questions like:

Why do people like their product? Examine the social activities that get the most engagement and study the reviews for content ideas that position your differentiators as a strength.When do people use their product? If you can pinpoint when a consumer shifts from a learning mindset to a buying mindset, your landing page copy can be used to speak specifically to the trigger event that encourages a purchase decision.What do people like/dislike about their product? This is where the full user experience of a competitor product can help you optimize your offering. Capitalizing on what’s different is great but you don’t always need to reinvent the wheel. If there’s a feature of a competitor product that users appreciate having the ability to use, you have an opportunity to repurpose how that can be used uniquely to your own product.How much would a customer spend on their product and why? Competition-based pricing works for businesses competing in a highly saturated market, but your strategy ultimately comes down to the elasticity of consumer demand. Be mindful of how competitors use geography, psychology, and premium offerings to determine their pricing.Are they a go-to resource when it comes to buying a solution?Make a list of the reasons a prospective buyer might purchase your competitor’s product above other solutions in the market. Think about this in relation to the points mentioned above: social presence, problem-focused storytelling, pricing, product features, and customer service. Try to source customer testimonials that speak to your product in each of those areas. If you can’t find any, you know exactly where you need to double down.

But the most important question your messaging must reflect on is, what sets us apart from the competition?

4. Google Analytics or Site Performance Reporting Alternatives

When you’re seeking to connect with your audience online, you need Google Analytics.

This is one of the first tools many marketers integrate into their tech stack to get a solid understanding of the traffic they drive to their landing pages.

Google Analytics helps you capture demographic data from the composition of your audience, but it goes a step further by segmenting high- and low-value users so you can modify your spending to target a larger group of interested consumers.  

The power of a paper trail can also never be underestimated. Google Analytics brings you into the user journey of each demographic to see how they’ve landed on your page, which pages they’re spending the most time on, and the Customer Lifetime Value of users acquired through specific advertising efforts.

These types of metrics give you the knowledge to create more intentionally and spend more efficiently.  

5. Use Audience Research Tools

There are many tools available today that can help you streamline your research efforts to create continuous feedback from your desired audience.

Here are a few of our favorites:

Spark Toro: Helping people do better marketing by making the audience segments of publications, people, and media sources more transparent.

Buzzsumo: Uses one of the world’s largest index of social engagement data to help you discover content types and formats that your audience shares to create better content.

Audiense: Audience intelligence software that helps marketers and consumer researchers create audience-centric strategies through social consumer segmentation.

Smart Traffic: AI-powered tool that eliminates guesswork by creating page variants for segmented users most likely to convert. You can learn about your audience as you build!

Analyze Your Findings

Now that you’ve traveled far and wide to collect data on your target audience, it’s time to deconstruct what it all means.

Not all users in your audience will be the same. Splitting them into subcategories based on similar patterns will help you deliver campaigns in a way that feels personal to each segment.

Aside from demographic data, you can also group users together based on:

Lifestyle/Psychographics: Through your social listening tool, you can pinpoint particular traits and cultural trends that users in your audience relate to online. Though this isn’t as clear-cut as age and location data, these aspects of your audience are key to scripting messages in the context of their problems. This helps you build relationships with an audience that feels you know exactly what they’re going through.

Keywords: In tandem with understanding the language your audience uses, you can also segment based on keywords. However, you need to be careful with the words you use. A simple mistake is using market keywords to define your customers. Nuh-uh.

By doing that, you’re still casting a wide net. As we learned above, if you’re selling to everyone, you’re selling to no one. Instead, use long-tail keywords to get specific on your audience segments. Search Engine Results Pages (SERP) can help you segment main commercial keywords with either transactional or informational content which serves as a helpful guide to determining your audiences’ search intent.

For example, if you’re selling coffee, rather than just using “coffee” try:

Coffee near meCoffee [location]Decaf CoffeeLocally Sourced CoffeeFair Trade Coffee

You want to put yourself in the shoes of the customer and target search entries from a first-person perspective. 

Cross-reference the data you’ve gathered with what your brand offers to capitalize on industry gaps and opportunities. Research can truly be your best friend.

Optimizing Your Landing Pages Based On Research

Alright, you’ve done the research. You’ve analyzed your findings. You’ve segmented your audience groups. 

Now it’s time to put those insights to work and make some magic happen by optimizing your landing pages based on what you’ve discovered.

Want to build a perfect landing page without support from a developer? Start your free trial of Unbounce’s Smart Builder today.

Tailoring Copy

With a firm understanding of your audiences’ search intent and the phrases they use, make sure your landing copy reflects that same communication.

It helps to have a checklist to ensure you’re focusing as much as possible on the customer perspective, rather than your own. 

✅ Is there a common experience you can use that illustrates the pain point that you solve?

✅ Are you naming your customer demographic in the copy? (e.g., dog owners, millennials)

✅ Do you have a strong value proposition?

✅ Are you avoiding complex jargon?

✅ Are you encouraging action?

It also helps to add statistics that complement your value prop throughout your copy and use social proof to show the benefits of your product. People are more likely to believe what they can see.Use this full list of tips to make your landing page copy more persuasive.

Wondering how your landing page copy performs compared to the competition? Try the Unbounce Copy Analyzer.

Tailoring CTAs

Your research will give you a better understanding of where your audience is in the buyer’s journey when they come in contact with your brand.

With this insight, you can tailor your CTAs to move that prospective buyer to the next stage.Leave the “learn more” CTA for the top of funnel folks. As consumers move further along their journey, try CTAs like:“Put me on the list!”“Send me the report!”“Talk with an agent”Remember that using first-person phrasing can help you boost your click-through rate, just like ContentVerve saw a 90% increase in their CTR by using “Start my free 30-day trial” instead of “Start your free 30-day trial.”

Just sayin’. 👀

Refining Imagery

The images you use also have a major impact on your audience. Consumers are more likely to spend more time analyzing the imagery on your landing page before moving on to reading your copy.

So, make sure your images reflect who your audience segment believes themselves to be.

If it’s a coffee-loving millennial, reflect that in the imagery.

If it’s a digital nomad, reflect that in the imagery.

If it’s a creative SaaS entrepreneur—well, you get it.

Image Source

Setting Up Before You Go Heads-Down In Research

Your first thought might be to dive straight into research. As a marketer, your mind is already wired to:

Understand what’s happening in the marketGenerate content ideasInfluence perceptions 

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. The foundation of any productive research is having a solid understanding of the specific purpose of your landing page.A 2018 Google survey showed that less than 40% of marketers were using consumer research to drive their decisions.

Starting with the right value proposition can save you hours building a landing page you think your audience will care about.You may have overarching value props for your product as a whole—and that’s great. But every single landing page you publish also needs to have a value prop tailored to that particular product, service, offer, and/or audience.

Your value prop is a clear message that communicates the primary value you provide to your customers.It’s not about being quirky or using heavy jargon to sound professional. Think of it like you’re offering assistance to a friend with a solution you know can solve their problem. Knowing how your value prop can benefit your business is one thing, but to really show how it can impact your customer. You’ll need to be specific, problem-focused, and exclusive.

Here are a few ways you can do that:

Use voice of customer copy: This is where you use intent data and social listening research to leverage the exact words your customers use when talking about their problem. Your value prop then carries more context, and you won’t need to rely on sounding sales-y.Embrace clarity: Before finding creative phrases to use or animations to add, make sure you provide clear responses to what your product is, who it’s for, and how the product will improve your customer’s life.Focus on benefits: Talk about what makes you different from competitors. Your differentiators and added benefits can be the decision-maker between a sale and a bounced visitor. Remember, people can see through the hype. Instead of claiming to be the best in the world, give the visitor an in-depth look at your specialty.

Right Time, Right Place

With the help of your audience research methods and tools, the next step is to analyze the customer journey you’ve mapped out to predict where consumers are going to interact with your landing page, and how.

You might think that a similar model—the marketing funnel—is enough to understand the user journey, but the following two frameworks have one major difference to keep them separate…The driver.Funnels are driven by assets created by your marketing and sales team. Journeys are driven by the learning experiences and specific needs of the consumer.

Much of the buyer’s journey is now completed online and, in the B2B world, buyers expect to receive unique content aligned with where they are in their journey.

This is where your audience research comes in.Consider designing variants of your landing page with custom headlines, visuals, resources, and CTAs that target a specific demographic of your audience.

This allows you to match content with critical touchpoints throughout your funnel.

Put It All Together and… Voila!

Don’t let your extensive research dive go to waste. Your audience insights will definitely help you optimize your landing page, but they can also help you optimize other parts of your marketing strategy.Start experimenting in social channels, niche communities, and with your advertising campaigns to further understand how consumer behaviors change along their buying journey. The goal with research is to consistently learn about the factors that influence your audience.Even though you have a solid understanding of them now, nothing stays the same forever as new solutions, competitors, and market trends are introduced.Show up where your community is online. Observe what they’re drawn to, talk to them, and grow with them.It’s these activities that make research feel more like an exciting process rather than a required chore.

Read more: unbounce.com


Government Wants to Dictate Truth

“Misinformation is much more destructive when it emanates from a monopolistic' Ministry of Truth, ’” Hannah Cox, material manager for Foundation for Economic Education, writes in a July 25, 2021, commodity. 1

“[ Anthony] Fauci can’t get his own details straight-out, yet the government wants to decide what’s' misinformation’ on social media, ” she adds, pointing to National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases( NIAID) lead Fauci’s information during a recent Congressional committee hearing in which Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky ., questioned him about his funding of gain-of-function research on coronaviruses. Cox writes: 2

“In his opening statement, Paul invoked an academic paper3 that further are questioning the causes of the COVID-1 9 variance that upended the world.

'We hypothesize that the direct progenitor of SARS-CoV may have originated after sequential recombination happens between the precursors of these SARSr-CoVs, ’ stated the numerous scientists and doctors who authored the research.

The data is the last in a long line of evidence that has emerged indicating the viability of the theory that the disease not only came from a lab, but that the NIH actually funded the laboratory and research that may have displayed it.

But in a May hearing, when primarily pressed on it by Dr. Paul, Fauci denied that his agency funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology( WIV ).

Those evidences were brought into doubt. The NIH did fund experiment at WIV that analyzed bat specimens collected from caves in China to study their potential for infecting humans. The subsidy was uttered in a roundabout way through a nonprofit announced EcoHealth.”

When pulped, Fauci contended "hes never" lied before Congress, and would not retract his May 11, 2021, word in which he claimed the NIH has “never funded gain-of-function research.” According to Fauci, the PLOS Pathogens paper4 Paul interposed as evidence has been “judged by qualified candidates, up and down the series, as not being gain-of-function.”

“It appears that instead of arguing the actual data, Fauci is now resorting to semantics around the definition of' gain-of-function, ’” Cox writes, 5 “but even to a scientific amateur it is becoming increasingly clear that Fauci misled the American public for some time on this matter. He knew he allowed the funding required and was not forthcoming on that fact -- even when asked by a sitting Senator.”

Paul Highlights Verbatim Admission

Paul performs nothing more affected with the semantics defense and has publicly announced Fauci out as a storyteller. In a July 20, 2021, tweet, Paul said, 6 “Yes, Dr. Fauci’s NIH did fund the Wuhan Virology Lab. Here’s the verbatim admission from their prime scientist Dr. Shi Zhengli.”

plos pathogens

In a follow-up tweet on that same day, Paul territory: 7

“MIT biologist Kevin Esvelt evaluated this paper that was published with financial assistance from Dr. Fauci’s NIH/ NIAID and concluded' particular skills that the researchers used seemed to meet the definition of gain-of-function.’”

July 20, 2021, Paul went on the Hannity program, 8 announcing he “will be sending a letter to Department of Justice asking for a criminal referral because he[ Fauci] has lied to Congress, ” a misdemeanour punishable by up to five years in prison, supplementing “We have scientists "thats been" lined up by the dozens be mentioned that the research he was funding was gain-of-function.” A month earlier, May 12, 2021, Paul offset the same argument, telling Fox News: 9

“What Dr. Fauci said yesterday was verifiably false. He said no NIH fund came to the Wuhan Institute for advantage of perform. Well, the primary physician there, the one they announce ... the bat girl ... wrote a paper that MIT scientists have look back that they said was advantage of part -- signifying juicing up these viruses to meet them very potent and foul humans.

She wrote this paper and, in the present working paper, recognise her funding came from Dr. Fauci’s group, the NIAID, which is part of NIH. So, he is verifiably telling you something that is not true. In the concession application ... it says it is for gain of part ... So, Dr. Fauci came to Congress yesterday and lied.”

WIV Deleted US Research Partners from Website

Before March 2021, NIAID collaboration and funding of research at the WIV could easily be verified simply by visiting the WIV’s website where it scheduled its research partners. However, shortly after Fauci certified in a Senate hearing in March 2021,10 the WIV unexpectedly deleted mentions of its cooperation with the NIAID/ NIH and various other American research partners.

As of March 21, 2021, the lab’s website scheduled the following U.S.-based research partners: University of Alabama, University of North Texas, EcoHealth Alliance, Harvard University, the National Academy of Health( NIH ), the United States, and the National Wildlife Federation. 11

The next day, merely two remained: EcoHealth Alliance and the University of Alabama. 12 At the same time, the WIV likewise removed studies with hallmark descriptions of gain-of-function research on the SARS virus. 13

According to investigative journalist Ben Swann, 14 the NIH/ NIAID has funded gain-of-function research to the tune of at least $41.7 million. Up until 2014, this research was conducted by Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina( UNC ). In 2014, the U.S. government issued a postponement on federal gain-of-function research funding due to safety, ethical and moral concerns raised within the scientific community.

At that quality, NIAID funding for this kind of research started being funneled through the EcoHealth Alliance to the WIV. Swann scrutinizes certificates he imagines is proof that Fauci lied to Congress, including a paper1 5 entitled “SARS-Like WIV1-CoV Poised for Human Emergence, ” submitted to PNAS in 2015 and subsequently be made available in 2016. In this paper, the authors be said that 😛 TAGEND

“Overall, the results from these studies foreground the utility of a platform that leverages metagenomics findings and reverse genetics to identify prepandemic threats.

For SARS-like WIV1-CoV, the data can inform surveillance curricula, improve diagnostic reagents, and promote effective therapies to mitigate future coming occurrences. However, structure new and chimeric reagents must be carefully weighed against possible gain-of-function( GoF) concerns.”

At the end of that paper, the authors thank “Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology for access to bat CoV sequences and plasmid of WIV1-CoV spike protein.” They likewise specify that the research was supported by the NIAID under the grant awards U19AI109761 and U19AI107810, which together total $41.7 million.

Grant Letter Dispels Semantics Defense

A letter1 6,17 from the Department of Health and Human Services( DHHS) to the director of propositions at UNC Chapel Hill, discussing grant U19AI107810, too keeps a crick in Fauci’s attempt to change the definition of gain-of-function, and stands in direct challenge to its statement of claim that the NIAID has never funded gain-of-function research, and that Baric’s research never involved gain-of-function. The October 21, 2014, symbol states, in part 😛 TAGEND

“NIAID has determined that the above referenced grant may include Gain of Function( GoF) investigate that is subject to the recently-announced U.S. Government funding pause ...

The following specific targets appear to involve research covered under the pause: Project 1: Role of Uncharacterized Genes in High Pathogenic Human Coronavirus Infect -- Ralph S. Baric, PhD -- Project Leader. Specific Aim 1. Novel Functions in virus replication in vitro. Specific Aim 3. Novel operates in virus pathogenesis in vivo.”

' Fauci Found It Appropriate to Lie’

“This would certainly not be the first time Fauci has been caught giving the American people false information, ” Cox writes. 18 “From the very beginning of the crisis, Fauci noted it appropriate to lie to the people and control valuable report in various regions of the pandemic.”

She goes on to highlight Fauci’s ever-changing opinion about cover-up wearing. Scientific evidence pictures face masks do not prevent viral afflictions. 19 This includes COVID-1 9-specific research2 0,21 from Denmark, which pointed out that mask wearing may either reduce your risk of SARS-CoV-2 illnes by as much as 46%, or increase your risk by 23%. Either way, the vast majority -- 97.9% of those who didn’t wear cover-ups, and 98.2% of those who did -- remained infection free.

Among mask wearers, 1.8% ceased up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% among limitations. When they removed those who did not adhere to the recommendations for use, the research results remained the same -- 1.8%, which suggests adherence stimulates no divergence. Among those who reported wearing their face mask “exactly as instructed, ” 2% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 comparison with 2.1% of the controls.

Back in March 2020, Fauci was on the right track, publicly be said that cover-ups cannot prevent viral infection. The video above boasts one such expression. At the time, Fauci stated2 2 that “people should not be walking around with masks” because “it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is.” Merely symptomatic individuals and health care workers were urged to wear them.

Fauci even pointed out that mask wearing has “unintended consequences” as “people keep fidget with their mask and they hinder touching their face, ” which may actually increase the risk of contracting and/ or spreading the virus.

In February 2020, Surgeon General Jerome Adams too sent out a tweet pushing Americans to stop buying masks, saying they are "NOT effective."2 3( He has all along been removed that tweet .) Adams likewise points out that if tattered or directed improperly, face concealments can increase your risk of infection. 24

Fauci Admits Issuing Intentional Misinformation

By July 2020, Fauci declared his initial dismissal of face cover-ups was an intentional fib, as there was a shortage of personal protective material( PPE) at the time and he wanted to ensure there would be enough for frontline employees. 25 “If we listen to Fauci’s account, he basically believed it was alright to prioritize some men over others and lie to parties in the process, ” Cox writes. 26

This is a classic portrait of the use of what Plato calls the Nobel Lie. It is fine to lie as long as it is for the greater good. Fast-forward a few weeks, and by the end of July 2020, Fauci indicated lending goggles and full face shields, in addition to a concealment, ostensibly because the mucous membranes of your eyes could potentially serve as entryways for viruses as well. 27

Interestingly enough, a March 31, 2020, report2 8 in JAMA Ophthalmology observed SARS-CoV-2-positive conjunctival specimens( i.e ., specimen taken from the eye) in exactly 5.2% of shown COVID-1 9 patients( two out of 28 ). What’s more, taint of the eyes is likely chiefly the result of touching your eyes with contaminated fingers, and if "youre wearing" goggles or a face shield, you may be more prone to touch your eyes to rub away sweat, moisture and/ or scratch an itch.

Fauci’s destructive track record of misinformation, laid bare throughout his numerous rounds with Rand Paul, demonstrates why the government has no business trying to be a monolithic source and judge of truth.~ Hannah Cox, Foundation for Economic Education

Around December 2020, recommendations for double-masking emerged, 29 gaining impetu through substantial media coverage as we moved into the first weeks of 2021,30 at which occasion Fauci agreed that wearing two disguises instead of merely one was “common sense” as it would likely ply greater safety. 31

By early May 2021, Fauci introduced the suggestion that we might also start wearing face cover-ups during influenza season after the COVID-1 9 pandemic fades “to help avoid spreading or contracting respiratory illnesses like the flu.” Mid-July 2021, Fauci also insisted mothers should continue to mask children aged 2 and older, saying: 32

“Unvaccinated children of a certain age greater than two years old should be wearing concealments. No doubt about that. That’s the way to protect them from get infected, because if they do, they can then spread the infection to someone else.”

No brand-new scientific suggestion to carry disguising against respiratory viruses has been presented, however. Cox likewise points out that Fauci recommended national institution closes even if they are published science depicted children are predominantly immune3 3,34 to SARS-CoV-2 infectious diseases and are not significant vectors for spread. 35 More recent research3 6 depicts children, when infected, likewise have a survival rate of 99.995%.

Government Nominates Itself as Ministry of Truth

“To add insult to injury, the government has nominated itself as the sole umpire of truth when it comes to information on the coronavirus, ” Cox writes, computing: 37

“The Biden Administration has claimed misinformation on social media platforms is' killing people’ and has openly been persuading Facebook to remove poles that do not align with their narrative ... This is concerning for several reasons.

First and foremost, it is a violation of free speech and the free market for the government to tell any private business how to run its operations. Plain and simple.

Additionally, the government has no business being in a position of determining what the truth is or is not. They’ve been caught lying more meters than we can count and are likely to continue, established how misinforming the public often serves to increase their own power.

The government’s track record of correct by no means begins with COVID, but has certainly grown with it. This is the last entity we should rely with a monopoly over information.

Fauci’s devastating track record of misinformation, laid bare throughout his many rounds with Rand Paul, indicates why the government has no business trying to be a monolithic source and expert of truth.”

Senator Introduces Bill to Force Online Censorship

July 22, 2021, The Wall Street Journal3 8 reported Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn ., first introduced a statement “that would strip online programmes such as Facebook Inc. and Twitter Inc. of their indebtednes armours if their engineerings spread misinformation related to public-health emergencies, such as the Covid-1 9 pandemic.”

Section 230 protects internet stages from suits arising from content generated by consumers and third parties. Klobuchar’s bill would create an exception to this law, the Health and Human Services department( HHS) would be responsible for dictating what state message are accurate and what is misinformation.

Internet pulpits would then be required to censor accordingly or face possible prosecution. Time will tell if this bill will pass and stand up to law scrutiny.

As noted by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in an April 5, 2021, ruling3 9 in which he weighed in on the ability of social media beings to control free speech, “The government cannot accomplish through threats of untoward government act what the Constitution proscribes it from doing directly.”

After Censorship, Will Social Credit System Be Far Behind?

If government censorship becomes law, will a social approval plan based on government narrative adherence be far behind? “We need to act now to block Britain’s social credit system, ” columnist Ross Clark writes in a July 24, 2021, Spectator article. 40

While Clark, exactly 12 daytimes earlier, had estimated it might take two to five years for a British COVID vaccination passport scheme to transition into a full-blown social ascribe plan like that of China, in reality, it’s already being reeled out.

“This morning it was reported that the government is planning to introduce a health app in January which will observe our supermarket, our practise positions, or intake of fruit and vegetables -- and reinforce us with righteousnes stations which we can exchange for deductions, free tickets ... and other goodies, ” Clark writes. 41

Considering the whole world is acting in lockstep -- as was indicated and therefore recommends the Rockefeller Foundation’s 2010 “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” report4 2 -- it’s probably merely a matter of time before the same types of social ascribe composition “carrot” comes dangled in front of our faces here in the United States.

First Comes the Carrot, Then the Stick

Looking back, it’s easy to see how the carrot and the affix have been intermittently used to herd the population toward a wanted objective. While coming everyone injected with SARS-CoV-2 spike inducing mRNA is clearly one goal, it’s not the only one.

As indicated by Clark, a social recognition organization that gifts outside organizations complete control over your life is also being introduced, one tiny stair at a time. And, like with the COVID jabs, carrots to get parties to freely embrace this social credit system are deployed firstly. The stick will come out last-minute, as it has with the COVID shots.

ABC News panelist Margaret Hoover recently told George Stephanopoulos she visualizes government ought to reach life “almost impossible” for people who reject the COVID shot. 43

To that intent, she proposes acquiring COVID injectables a requirement for government-provided health and financial services, such as VA treatment, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security remittances, “because ... we are going to have to take care of you on the back end.”

PayPal to Block Certain Financial Transactions

Those relying on Social Security aren’t the only ones who might begin to feel the sting of the put. More than 150 health care workers were recently burnt from Houston Methodist for refusing the experimental COVID jab, 44 and many other professings face the same “jab or job” dilemma.

PayPal is also use the stick against the self-employed and small businesses that aren’t toeing the desired line. It recently partnered with the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism “to investigate how extremist and hate changes in the United Regime take advantage of financial programmes to fund their criminal activities, ” Reuters reported, July 26, 2021,45 with the aim of “disrupting” such transactions.

The headline, “PayPal to Research Event That Fund Hate Groups, Extremists, ” had originally included the word “Blocking.” Perhaps announcing that PayPal will actually block the financial transactions of those suspected of harboring anti-government feelings was too great a truth bomb for the average Reuters audience?

Targeted entities include individuals and companies suspected of supporting white supremacy and anti-government narrations, and anyone spreading information materials and/ or profiting from antisemitism, islamophobia, racism, anti-immigrant, anti-Black, anti-Hispanic and anti-Asian bigotry.

The information collected will be shared with other international financial institutions, law enforcement and policymakers. It doesn’t take a genius to deduce where this might end up, considering intelligence agencies are already deploying sophisticated cyberwarfare tools against civilians. 46,47, 48 As reported by independent investigative reporter Whitney Webb in an section for Unlimited Hangout: 49

“British and American state intelligence agencies are' weaponizing truth’ ... in a recently announced' cyber war’ to be required by AI-powered judges of truth against information sources that challenge official narratives.”

While it can cause discomfort, the best defense is a serene pique. If you don’t like where things are headed, pleasant insubordination is likely to be the most effective way to push back, be it against concealment authorizations, action vaccinations, a two-tier society of injected/ unvaccinated with unequal rights and advantages, obligatory inoculation passports, a social recognition system, or all of the above.

Read more: articles.mercola.com


Peer Learning Among MLB Umpires

A stretching group of social scientists are researching peer learning, looking to answer the question" does an individual learn from their network ?" In this post, I'll present some evidence that MLB umpires "learn" from their peers in their allocated crews.

To quantify this, I calculate" label character" for each adjudicator in each season from 2008 to 2019. Call quality is determined in a similar way to countless umpire composition card appraises: I make PITCHf/ x data for each competition that a opened umpire was assigned to home plate, subset to all called strikes and called missiles, and overlay the real strike area to calculate the proportion of correct calls.

I'm specifically interested in whether an umpire's bellow tone is driven by the call quality of adjudicators they have been assigned to work with in the past.

Crew Assignment and Potential for Learning

MLB umpires acquainted an excellent testbed for investigating peer understand. To study peer learning, there is a requirement to massive amounts of data in order to be able to 😛 TAGEND

Track mortals over age and across many different units/ peer systems. Relate individual-level misstep or character.

Umpiring in the majors has both: adjudicators allocated to crews at the start of the season and are frequently " shuffled" within seasons( due to vacations, hurts, disabilities, etc .) and we can use pitch tracking to determine quality for every call made.

There are also a few different channels through which peer learning might work with adjudicators. Although the final strike or dance call is made by a single home-plate umpire, the umps in a crew travel together, evaluation competition footage and calls together, and are encouraged by the league to work as a legion to preside activities. This creates a decided in which umpires( particularly umpires brand-new to the majors) might pick up on tools of the trade from high-quality peers and generally improve their accuracy.

As a particular example, experienced and high-quality adjudicators might have a lot of knowledge about pitch-framing and how how catchers can try to manipulate the summon. A new umpire working together with a good group of elderly umpires might learn more about how to deal with pitch-framing and hence make better calls in the future.


As I mentioned before, my measure of umpire call quality is the fraction of "correct" calls( true-life strikes called strikes or true-life pellets announced missiles) when a applied adjudicator is behind the plate, based on PITCHf/ x data. I calculate this game-by-game and then aggregate into an average call quality for a returned umpire in a leaved season. Below is a histogram of this call character, with 1,047 umpire-seasons in the data and an average season-level call quality of 0.885( i.e. the average umpire gets 88.5% of strike/ projectile announces correct across the season ).

I'm interested in whether there is a relationship between summon tone of a made adjudicator and the average call quality of the network of adjudicators that they worked with in sports in the previous season. There's one prime matter to take care of -- a general trend of improvement of umpires' orders over day. To account for this, I convert the umpire summon quality calibrate into a z-score by season so that in each season the average adjudicator has a call quality of 0 with a standard deviation of 1.

I then operated a regression of bellow aspect of an umpire on the average call quality of adjudicators they worked with in the previous season. I'd expect the regression coefficient to be positive if there is peer learning, and that is indeed what I ascertained. The coefficient on past-network quality is 0.1442( with a standard-error of 0.0549, for a 95% CI of[ 0.03649, 0.25198 ]). In practical terms, that means that improving the average quality of an umpire's network last-place season by one standard deviation conjures request quality by 0.1442 standard deviations.

Is It All Just Noise and Mean Reversion?

While I study the results are interesting, there are some other things to consider. For example, it could ever only be noise or planned reversion. Consider a hypothetical organization in which there's no peer learning among adjudicators, but umpires sometimes have good or bad seasons, and the league likes to match bad umpires with good adjudicators so that the average quality of a crew is roughly equal. In such a situation, an adjudicator who has a bad year will be matched with umpires "whos had" good times. If there is mean reversion, we would expect that in the following season, the umpire who did inadequately will improve and hence we will see a( specious) relationship between good adjudicators in the past and good adjudicators today. This is the main concern, and I can measure for it in two ways.

Firstly, I can check whether there's any bellow excellence liaison in duty. Using information from Retrosheet and Steve O's Baseball Umpire Sources, I can see the start-of-season crew allocations and in-season crew allocations( after "shuffles" to gangs for various reasons ). I can test for call-quality-based works by operating a regression of an umpire's last-season call quality with the average last-season call quality of adjudicators in the gang( s) that they are assigned to. If MLB assigns umpires based on call quality, there should be a relationship there.

But there isn't. The coefficient is 0.00267( with a standard error of 0.00233, for a 95% CI of[ -0. 001896, 0.0072415 ]), which means that when an adjudicator is assigned to a brand-new gang, a better quality of that gang is virtually random.

Secondly, I can do a placebo experiment by operate a regression of the announcement aspect of an adjudicator on the average call quality of umpires they worked with in the following season( instead of the previous season ). If there is season-to-season mean reversion and quality-based crew naming, then an umpire who does well one year will tend to be assigned to a crew with umpires "whos been" poorly. If there is mean reversion, then we'd expect those who did inadequately to improve, and so there will be a positive relationship between doing well one year and having a better crew next year. Of track, if the result is driven by peer teach, then we'd expect there to be no liaison -- you can't learn lessons from people you haven't worked with yet!

And the regression shows there's no relationship. Running this regression produces a coefficient on next season's structure excellence of -0. 00407( with a standard error of 0.0594, for a 95% CI of[ -0. 12059, 0.11245 ]).


It searches as though umpires learn lessons from their peers in their appointed gangs, so an adjudicator to designate a gang that attains better strike and lump orders will tend to have better quality bawls in the future.

Jed Armstrong is currently working on a PhD in labor economics and writing up these sees into an academic essay. If you have any suggestions or observations, or would like to see the draft, feel free to get in touch in the comments or on Twitter.

var SERVER_DATA= Object.assign( SERVER_DATA || );

Read more: community.fangraphs.com


Speed is not the solution to our stuttering green home retrofit roll-out

Speed is not the solution to our stuttering green home retrofit roll-out

Quick, inefficient initiatives to stimulate a booming market for home retrofits risk stealing treasured go and stimulating to delay, interprets Kelly Greer of the Association for Decentralised Energy

The potential for energy efficiency has were determined by countless stakeholders, and high-level net zero policy targets are in place or making mold, yet - frustratingly - delivery continues to stutter.

The tendency can be to throw lots of money at the problem in a short space of time in order to kick start the market. But our studies show that a steady ramp-up is much more effective.

Last month BEIS published a systematic review of international proof on dwelling retrofit give chains, discovering that there is no single country delivering constructs exertion retrofit at the scale needed.

Led by ACE Research at the Association for Decentralised Energy( ADE ), the project involved summarising the most relevant literature from outside the UK and undertaking interviews with extending experts to draw out emerging themes from their experience in the sector.

Increasing involve

To generate the level expected, supply bonds both in the UK and abroad will need to significantly expand to meet demand.

However, the report contains barricades in the way supply orders operate that make it particularly difficult to initiate lasting change, such as the division of labour between retrofit crafts. Existing policy and programme support is also inadequate; it's too short-lived, too incoherent, and too easily side-lined by marketplace actualities.

The development of a self-sustaining, large-scale market for depth energy efficiency retrofit requires support from a stable policy framework over a significant period - perhaps a decade or more - together with sustained a multi-year funding strategy to avoid past 'boom and bust' chapters.

Retrofit therefore remains an immature market compared with the dominant Repairs, Maintenance and Improvement( RMI) sphere, with most firms( and their clients) continuing to carry out renovation assignments with limited attention to energy efficiency opportunities.

However, the desegregation of energy retrofit with broader RMI hypothesis offers a real opportunity to build the retrofit supplying order and encounter the UK's stringent net zero targets.

Patron rely

Our study pointed out that, as well as increasing awareness and understanding of the accessible retrofit alternatives, establishing and maintaining consumers' trust in the equip order is also essential.

There is evidence that schemes and brand-new sell approachings are tackling the issue of trust by exercising co-ordinators or contract overseers who provide initial advice to a householder, connect them with caliber assured installers, help them through the whole retrofit process and, in some cases, character check the work. This not only structures greater trust, but it can also improve the householder's overall know-how of the whole retrofit process.

A lack of skills and training will likewise be an issue, including the UK where there are no formal entering requirements for construction jobs and the sector is very fragmented. Program that do not recognise this aspect of the furnish order are unlikely to be sustainable.

No country has yet overcome these hindrances fully, but there is evidence of promising small-scale initiatives that begin to address them that the UK could learn lessons from to scale up energy efficiency investment.

Slow and continuous

We know that retrofit is complex and sloppy; service delivery is scrapped. Yet, the same can be said about the RMI market, which delivers billions of pounds worth of employment every year in UK homes.

There is a dilemma now for policy makers( and manufacture ). They demand, and need to see, a functioning, large-scale retrofit market. Will this busines reflect the RMI market, but with vigour retrofit acts bolted on? We have found that this is proving to be a deceptively difficult task to achieve.

A culture change is therefore required across the supply chain. The concern that the research team has is that this task will inevitably be sluggish, and it will be messy.

In the face of urgent climate targets, it may sound contradictory to are in favour of slow conversion, but the alternative seems to be something quick and ineffective. And each inept initiative merely takes cherished meter and generates further delay.

Kelly Greer is head of research at the Association for Decentralised Energy.

Read more: businessgreen.com


Investments in privacy and security innovation

The following is based on an excerpt from the 2020 CSR Impact Report, published on December 8, 2020.

Today’s cyber assaults are ever-evolving, so we must make investments to stay ahead. These investments include enhancements to the foundational security of our answers, computing layers of security rights that help protect against counterfeit and unauthorized versions of hardware and software. We also manage a portfolio of 400( and ripening) commodities that are equipped with trustworthy capabilities to protect against cyber strikes, attest hardware and software integrity, and pay and maintain patron rely. These technologies, such as image signing, Secure Boot, Cisco Trust Anchor module, and runtime justifications, are integrated into many of our platforms to help ensure code is authentic, unmodified, and operating as intended.

We rigorously exam and show products--over 175 product lines in all--to meet global government insurance certifications and requirements. We also invest in advanced defence study, conducted through 20 research partnerships in five countries.

Responding to world needs

At Cisco, we have always taken a world approach to privacy and security. Recognizing privacy as a basic human right, we work closely with regulators various regions of the world to drive firmnes in our approaching to protecting and respecting privacy. We have a streamlined Chief Privacy Office with regional patrolmen preceding each of the three major regions where we do business. Each regional policeman chairs a Regional Privacy Council for their respective area to ensure we are addressing local and country statutes in our world approach.

To demonstrate our conformity capabilities and adherence to world-wide privacy principles, "were having" showed our enterprisewide program to EU Binding Corporate Rules, APEC Cross-Border Privacy Rules system and Privacy Recognition for Processors, and the EU/ UK/ Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield. In the U.S ., we continue to call for federal privacy legislation that ensures a consistent baseline of protection for all users.

Beyond Cisco: Enhancing world awareness

By embedding security and privacy throughout our operations and solutions and sharing our cyberresilience approaches widely, we earn and maintain client trust and help do the world more safe and secure. When we all have better security and privacy rehearses, we’re all better off. A few routes we engage with the public and private sectors to improve our collective cyberdefenses include 😛 TAGEND

Advising governments and academia and participating in industry working groups to help develop better collective cyberresilience strategies Encouraging standards organizations to accelerate the advancement to new technologies engineered with defence, privacy, and trust by design and default Heighten concerns when authority legislation could potentially jolt its own security or privacy to new technologies Spearheading agreements to share threat intelligence with hand-picked formations, such as Interpol, to jointly combat cybercrime Investing in our first Center of Excellence and Co-Innovation concentrated on security and privacy Publishing brand-new research and extending patterns in Cisco’s Trust Center to transparently share what we have learned publicly Participating in occurrences such as National Cybersecurity Awareness Month, first in the U.S. and now in multiple countries Leading efforts to build the next generation of security talent and improve inclusion and diversification across Cisco and service industries, including:

--Working with world-wide universities on research projects and programs dedicated to the enhancement of security and privacy

-- Doctrine security courses to diverse students through the Cisco Networking Academy and are concerned with higher educational institutions to develop security and privacy curricula

Collaboration without settlement: Retaining Webex secure during COVID-1 9

The need for secure collaboration engineerings like Cisco Webex, our videoconferencing pulpit, has been especially critical during the COVID-1 9 pandemic. As the largest enterprise security company in the world, Cisco was uniquely positioned to provide unparalleled, fasten collaboration services to our clients as workforces throughout the world travelled remote.

Knowing that bad actors would manipulate individuals whose work-from-home environment was not secure, we helped clients implement secure networked arrangements for remote workforces, ensuring their businesses bided beneficial. We also published a white paper with tips-off and resources for keeping one’s family cybersafe.

Videoconferencing became a staple of numerous people’s personal and professional men, and demand for Cisco’s secure Webex abilities skyrocketed. We hosted 14 billion satisfy hours in March 2020 alone, more than doubled the list in February 2019. We sustained this grade of use throughout the year, hosting 26 billion times in October 2020 comparison with just 7 billion times in the same month in 2019. Customers took note of Webex’s distinctive features, including never compromising protection for amenity or quickened. Unlike other services, Cisco turns data sharing off by default, allowing users to choose exactly what they are willing to share. We too have maintained strong restraints to keep meeting rooms secure and to encrypt all meet chronicles and transcriptions.

Because of Cisco’s approach to security and privacy by design, we were ready to meet critical expect during these fantastic ages. As almost every business learned to navigate a brand-new actuality, the end-to-end security of mixtures like Webex passed our patrons one less thing to worry about--so they could focus on staying connected and productive.

Trip our Cisco ESG Reporting Hub to read the full CSR Impact Report and learn more about the progress we’re constructing to power a more all-inclusive future through CSR.

Cisco Corporate Responsibility

Read more: blogs.cisco.com


2012 Video of Fauci Promoting Gain-of-Function Bioweapons

Dr. Anthony Fauci, conductor of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases( NIAID) -- an arm of the National Institutes of Health( NIH) that in recent years has money gain-of-function research on at-bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology( WIV) -- has denied that such funding occurred.

Fauci told a House Appropriations subcommittee that $600,000 was given to the nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance, which funneled the money to WIV, over a five-year period for the purpose of studying at-bat coronaviruses and whether they could be transmitted to humans. 1

However, involving gain-of-function( GOF) experiment, which refers to studies that have the potential to enhance the ability of pathogens to compel canker, including heighten either their pathogenicity or transmissibility, 2 Fauci said, “That categorically was not done.”3

However, Fauci has long patronage controversial GOF research, which you can hear him speak about in the video above, which boasts a hearing before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs at the U.S. Senate, viewed April 26, 2012.4

Dual Use Research Is Inherently Risky

Dual use research is so reputation because it involves study on select agents and poisons that could either interest culture or destroy it, depending on whether or not it falls into the wrong pass. Fauci specifically speaks about dual help study of concern, or DURC, which involves 15 potentially deadly pathogens, including: 5

Highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses

Anthrax( Bacillus anthracis)

Botulinum neurotoxin

Burkholderia mallei

Burkholderia pseudomallei

Ebola virus

Foot-and-mouth disease virus

Francisella tularensis

Marburg virus

Reconstructed 1918 influenza virus

Rinderpest virus

Toxin-producing tightens of clostridium botulinum

Smallpox( Variola major)

Smallpox( Variola minor viruses)

Yersinia pestis

DURC involves seven categories of research experiments, according to the U.S. Middle for Disease Control and Prevention, which includes GOF and may: 6

Enhance the harmful consequences of the negotiator or toxin

Disrupt immunity or the efficacy of an immunization against the operator or toxin without clinical and/ or agricultural justification

Confer to the agent or toxin resist to clinically and/ or agricultural useful preventative or care interventions against that negotiator or poison or promotes their capacity to sidestep the methods used in detection

Increase the stability, transmissibility or the ability to disseminate the negotiator or toxin

Alter the emcee array or tropism of the agent or toxin

Enhance the susceptibility of a emcee population to the agent or toxin

Generate or reconstitute an eradicated or extinct negotiator or one of the 15 DURC toxins or agents

Controversy Over H5N 1 GOF Research Began in 2012

Because GOF, or DURC, allows us to start pathogens more easily be allowed to infect humen, it constitutes major biosecurity threats, which obliges publishing of such data almost as contentious as studies and research itself.

Two studies on highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza erupted the discussion in 2012. One, led by Yoshihiro Kawaoka at the University of Madison-Wisconsin, recognized molecular changes in H5N 1 that would allow it to transmit among mammals. 7

The other, led by Ron Fouchier at Rotterdam University in The Netherlands, genetically modified H5N 1 virus, realizing it airborne transmissible in ferrets. 8 As written in EMBO Reports in 2015:9

“Both groups introduced mutants into highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza( HPAI) that could potentially increase human-to-human transfer of the virus. These mutants are classified as GOF because they increase airborne transmissibility in ferrets -- a good pose for human transmission.

Some in the research and biosecurity societies was worried that these experiments could result in accidental or intentional secretes of the mutated pathogen, or that the now publicly available information about how to increase the human-to-human transmissibility of H5N1 influenza could be abused for developing biological weapons.”

Interestingly, the EMBO report actually was written to protest classifying Fouchier’s work as gain-of-function. However, in January 2012, six months before Fouchier’s article was published, 39 international flu researchers announced a voluntary standstill on study related to H5N 1, who ought to last-place 60 eras but continued until January 23, 2013, due to the highly controversial nature of the studies.

This prompted the U.S. to develop a DURC policy, which was released in March 2012; Fauci references it in the video above. 10

Dual Use Research' Clearly Tips Towards Benefiting Society’

Fauci speaks favorably of DURC, despite an opportunity for grave danger. First, he instills fear in the naturally mutating viruses found in nature , observe, “Indeed, nature itself is the most dangerous bioterrorist, and even as we meet today, H5N1 and other influenza viruses are naturally mutating and changing with the potential of a fatal pandemic. This is not a theoretical threat. It is a real danger.”1 1

He last-minute makes it clear that dual implementation research, including that which explicitly falls under the DURC label, should be allowed to continue: 12

“If a particular research experiment is identified as DURC, that designation is not inevitably means that such research should not been issued , nor that it should even be prohibited in the first place.

However, it does call for us, as you spoke about, to balance carefully the potential benefits of the research to public health, the biosafety and biosecurity conditions under which the research is conducted and the potential risk that the lore gained from such research might fall into the pass of those with misfortune intent.”

Even in the interests of the conflict, Fauci is steadfast in his support of DURC and GOF research, quoting its “clear” benefit to society: 13

“Importantly, the public attention and concern generated by this issue has triggered a voluntary postponement or delay on this type of research on the part of the influenza research community as well as a fresh look at how the U.S. authority administers DURC as manifested by a formalization of both governments wide policy to address the issue.

This policy, which was secreted on March 29, strengthens and formalizes ongoing efforts in DURC oversight and provides a description of my written testimony.

The ultimate goal of the NIH in its embrace of this new policy is to ensure that the conduct and communication of research in this area will remain transparent and open at the same time as the risk-benefit ratio of this research clearly tips towards benefiting society.”

Controversy Due to' Public Misunderstanding’

During the hearing, Fauci downplayed the public controversy over the two H5N 1 DURC studies, calling it a public breach 😛 TAGEND

“I might point out that one of the causes of the public misunderstanding was the widespread impression that the virus that was transmitted by aerosol from one ferret to another actually killed the ferrets when, in fact, that was not the case.”1 4

So, by Fauci’s logic, the fact that the virus was genetically modified into a model that represented it capable of being transmitted via the aura to mammals is inconsequential because it didn’t kill the ferrets during the experiment, and the public uproar that followed was all a misunderstanding. In lending his further supporting, he territory: 15

“We feel that these studies require critical information and it was important to determine if H5N 1 virus that has this enhanced transmissibility would remain sensitive to existing anti-influenza drugs and vaccines. In addition, and importantly, knowledge of the genetic mutations that promote transmitting may be critical for global surveillance of emerging influenza viruses.”

Another moratorium was placed on U.S.-funded GOF research in October 2014, after a cord of concerning contests, including brochure of contentious GOF studies and high-profile “incidents” at U.S. biocontainment laboratories, led to more than 300 scientists propelling a petition calling for an end to gain-of-function research. 16 That postponement was filched in December 2017.17

However, according to Ronnie Cummins, co-founder of the Organic Consumers Association( OCA) and Alexis Baden-Mayer, OCA’s political head( as mentioned earlier in the Mercola link on GOF ventures ):

“Exemptions to this' delay, ’ eventually reviewed by a secret government panel, were nonetheless allowed to go forward. The outlaw was promoted in 2017. Yet between 2014 and 2016, the NIH and Fauci-led NIAID continued money gain-of-function research overseas at the Wuhan lab, via[ Peter] Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance.

Not astonishingly both Fauci and Daszak have been staunch champions of the official Chinese government story that the virus that effects COVID-1 9( SARS-CoV-2)' naturally’ derived from at-bats and/ or other multitude categories to foul humans.”

Clear Links Show NIAID Funded GOF Research

In a May 11, 2021, Senate hearing, Sen. Rand Paul questioned Fauci on the NIAID’s funding of GOF research on bat coronaviruses, some of which was conducted at the WIV. Fauci denied service charges, saying, “The NIH has not ever, and is not now, money gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute.”1 8 However, NIH’s funding of this research can be easily double-checked.

In a Truth in Media report, 19 investigative reporter Ben Swann discusses substantiates proving Fauci lied to Congress, including a article entitled “SARS-Like WIV1-CoV Poised for Human Emergence, ”2 0 submitted to PNAS in 2015 and subsequently published in 2016. In the present working paper, the authors state 😛 TAGEND

“Overall, the results from these studies foreground the practicality of a scaffold that leverages metagenomics findings and reverse genetics to identify prepandemic menaces. For SARS-like WIV1-CoV, the data can inform surveillance planneds, improve diagnostic reagents, and facilitate effective medicines to mitigate future emergence events.

However, building new and chimeric reagents must be carefully weighing up potential gain-of-function( GoF) concerns.”

At the end of the working paper, the authors thank “Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology for access to bat CoV sequences and plasmid of WIV1-CoV spike protein.” They too specify that the research was supported by the NIAID under the grant awards U19AI109761 and U19AI107810, which together total $41.7 million.

As noted by Swann, this paper clearly spells out that the NIAID spent $41.7 million on GOF research, with the aim of determining how bat coronaviruses can be made more pathogenic to humans, and that this research continued after the 2014 moratorium on such funding was implemented.

Shortly after the March 2021 Senate hearing, WIV removed mentions of cooperation and collaboration with Fauci’s NIAID, NIH and other U.S. research partners from its website. 21 It too removed descriptions of GOF research on the SARS virus. This appears to be an struggled cover-up , is not simply of their own involvement but likewise American government involvement.

Several members of the U.S. Congress, however, have recently been vowed to propel their own investigation to explore the lab accident theory. The Energy and Commerce Committee has also requested extended records from both the NIH and EcoHealth Alliance detailing research and collaborations with WIV. 22 As George Washington famously said, “Truth will ultimately prevail where there are plans taken to fetch it to light.”2 3

Read more: articles.mercola.com


Avoiding a climate culture war: How can the UK maintain broad support for net zero action?

Avoiding a climate culture war: How can the UK maintain broad support for net zero action?

Difficult policy questions lie ahead that could sow grains of partition- but could a 'patriotic sense of national mission' help smooth the path to net zero releases?

Just as the UK perceives itself extending the world's efforts to set out on an epoch-defining economic transition to a net zero economy, the country - from both a political and cultural standpoint - has rarely felt more divided.

The UK is already five years in to a period of significant constitutional agitation, political indecision, and economic headwinds, first from Brexit and then from the coronavirus crisis. These historic challenges, coupled with the sluggish productivity and glaring inequalities that have come to define the 13 times since the global financial crisis, have reshaped age-old political devotions and supported the foundations for the purposes of an escalating culture combat that identifies political and media rivals scrap topics such as statutes, mask-wearing, political correctness, and flag-waving.

Against this volatile backdrop, the political consensus on the need for climate action has, perhaps suprisingly, been generally maintained. Extinction Rebellion's approach to protest and Greta Thunberg's interventions may not have secured universal approval, but political parties across the spectrum still concur with their central meaning - that climate change is an emergency that requires urgent and sustained action. Prime Minister Boris Johnson may have been willing to stoke the culture war on multiple breasts, but when it comes to climate change he has attacked the consensus and sought to position climate action as a central board of his agenda. Meanwhile, the private sector organizations remains more committed than ever to accelerating the net zero transition.

However, one only has to look across The Pond to America to see the constant hazard of climate change and the net zero agenda slipping into the racial war countenance quarry, where striking divisions between the Republican and Democratic gatherings have long held back policy progress. Is there a danger of the same happening here in the UK - of net zero becoming a brand-new territory in increasingly fraught culture combat? For Tim Lord, senior companion at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, if political leaders prove self-complacent - if they think it could never happen here - the health risks is a very real one.

"Difficult policy decisions lie ahead which will directly affect the way people live and work, and if they aren't designed and communicated in the right way then politicians gamble leaving the field open for climate change to become a divisive party-political issue, and even weaponised as the next culture fighting, " he alerts. "Support for net zero can be maintained - but action is needed to build and communicate a positive lawsuit for act which reverberates across the political spectrum."

Lord, who has almost 20 years' suffer working on environment, vigor, and industrial program - most recently as superintendent of the UK government's decarbonisation strategy - has co-authored new research for the Institute which today seeks to address some of the crucial political questions circumventing the next stage of the UK's net zero modulation, which will increasingly necessary the direct participation and subsidize of the British public.

Fortunately, the research begins by arguing the present situation is a good one as far as public and political expressed support for net zero is concerned. Assessing various sources of public polling on atmosphere topics in the last decades, including regular study by the Pew Research Centre and the UK government's own Public Attitudes Tracker examinations, it concludes expressed concerns about climate change is at record levels. Not simply that, but unlike after the global financial crisis in 2007 -0 8, that concern has been sustained despite the chao of Covid-1 9. Climate change is now a major issue at the ballot box and, contrary to some media preconceptions, it is not just an issue for certain subsets of voters either, but is of growing concern across all age groups, income levels, and urban and rural areas of the country, according to the report.

In short-lived, politicians can be confident there currently exists strong and sustained desire for climate act right across the board. "Climate change is here to stay as a political issue, " the report states.

Yet that is far from the whole picture. To date, life-styles have been broadly unaffected by decarbonisation that has witnessed the UK cut its emissions in half since 1990. But as anyone in the green economy knows, the second half of that jaunt promises to be much harder, involving tough political choices that instantly alter the public through changes to their transport, nutritions, and home heating. Meanwhile, there are fractures beginning to show in the broad coalition in support of the net zero mission, which in many ways follow the same dividing lines as those between 'Leave' and 'Remain' supporters that has defined British politics since the EU referendum in 2016. Polling indicates socially conservative voters tend to be much less supportive of climate action than more socially liberal voters, and that divide increasingly manifests the bases of the two main political parties in the UK.

Recent debates bordering plans to build the UK's firstly coal pit in 30 years require a case in point. While environmental campaigners and the Labour Party have argued the project will add to greenhouse gas emissions and undermine the UK's climate leadership credentials in the run up to COP2 6, some Conservative MPs have vocally argued that the pit is crucial for jobs and growth in the area. Against this backdrop, the government has flip-flopped on the issue, first tacitly supporting the project, and now launching its examination of the controversial plans.

As such, today's report argues that in order to ensure a long-term political alignment of support for the net zero transition commanders across the political range will need to work hard to maintain it. "Getting this right - developing a unifying politics of the environmental issues that speaks to the concerns of the large bulk of the electorate - is perhaps the most important long-term political challenge of our time, " it states.

For its part, the authorities concerned appears to be considering these risks. Earlier this month two cases of handiwork commissioned by government departments for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy( BEIS) be issued, one report on net zero public action and participation by Cardiff University's Dr Christina Demski and another which solicited public beliefs on net zero that was carried out by Newgate Research and the University of Cambridge. Both universally support the view that, over the coming decade and beyond, the public may be required to far more directly involved in the net zero modulation than they have been so far, which will in turn necessitate brand-new date approaches from politicians and businesses to avoid pushback and division.

Demski's report warns of a lack of public awareness about many of the challenges required to meet net zero, and warns that high levels of concern about climate change do not undoubtedly translate into committed support for the types of changes that may be required. As a outcome her analysis warns that "overall public date and participation may have the potential to impact the tempo of transmission, cost and success of net zero delivery".

The Newgate and University of Cambridge work, meanwhile, involved a total of 93 participants from across the UK in online research, which sought to identify the easiest and toughest challenges for delivering decarbonisation, as well as how best to engage people with net zero programs. The two most contentious policy areas, it knew, were around vehicle possession and nutritions, with a clear desire among some groups to maintain freedom over choice over how and when they buy a private automobile or feed meat and dairy. Yet such research also emphasized "very limited awareness" among the public of possibilities policies that could be looked at in the course of the year in a bid to reduce carbon emissions.

"Ultimately people wanted net zero to be achieved in ways which respected individual choice and promoted wellbeing, which were seen to be fair in their distributional significance, and which did not limit interpersonal relationships or result in the widening of social prejudices, " it concluded.

Clearly, participation with the public that openly addresses the new challenges, payments, and modifies ahead in the drive to net zero must be at the top of the agenda for the UK government's environment policy, taking the baton from where exercises such as the recent citizens' Climate Assembly UK began.

To do that, Lord today says lessons must be learned from the fallout of the Brexit referendum so as to avoid further polarisation and department on climate act. In particular, he points to the Remain campaign's focus on the economic assertions for EU membership, while the Leave campaign opted for a more values-driven campaigning approach that was arguably more effective. "Similarly now[ with net zero ], you have to think about how are we frisking to a really wide prepare of values, so we're not just talking about the 'just transition' and economic right, we're not just talking about the moral disagreement for atmosphere activity, " he tells BusinessGreen. "I wouldn't dismiss either of those arguments, as they're both important, but they're not going to resonate with a wide enough group of voters for the kind of action that is needed for net zero to be politically sustainable."

Consequently, his report indicates political leaders need to not only strengthen voters' understanding of what net zero actually means for them, but pattern and communicate public policies that appeal to voters with different quality across the growing divide. It also sets out how fears that the transition could adversely affect jobs and communities must also be addressed head on, with clear assurances from political leaders that the mistakes of the past have been learned after the shuttering of industry in the 1980 s without the financing and transitional strategy that could have alleviated much of the resulting economic agony and social dislocation. And it points to the fact that moral and economic controversies for environment action are not enough on their own - instead a "patriotic sense of national mission" should be provoked which places emphasis on regional ownership of climate solutions and ensures that green growth and jobs are delivered "in a way that is meaningful and visible".

Yet bringing patriotism into the realm of climate act also arguably views its own jeopardies. As antagonisms between the UK and EU over AstraZeneca's Covid-1 9 inoculation roll out reveals, national grandstanding can serve to undermine much-needed international cooperation on crisis of world-wide proportions.

Lord, nonetheless, contends a constructive patriotism has a role to play. "Firstly I think what that's really about is climate change being a polity rather than a politics of separation, because patriotism can be about requiring better communities, healthier life-styles and better places, etc, " he says. "And furthermore, a hasten to the top on decarbonisation is undoubtedly a good thing. Some countries have different challenges and strongs in terms of getting to net zero. A patriotic framing of this that introduces a sense of national duty and shared endeavour can be really positive for the orders of the day. The other thing I'd say is that if parties was concerned at excessive patriotism, then a much bigger concern for me would be a world where we haven't dealt with climate change, and what that will do in terms of world-wide geopolitics. Because the disruption to supply chains and some of the unmanaged affects, I see, will be very risky from a political perspective."

As an example for businesses, he foreground General Motors' recent electric vehicle push, which included a major advertising campaign pioneered by Hollywood comedian Will Ferrell that was screened to big audiences during the US Super Bowl. The advert light-heartedly calls for Americans to build driving EVs part of a patriotic mission to catch up with Norway, one of the world leaders on artillery vehicle approval. Interestingly, the ad does not once mention the words 'climate change'.

"I assume that's because GM thinks that is the most effective message for purchasers, and it's an assertion around patriotism, and around the fact that these products are better than the high-pitched carbon or unsustainable alternative, " Lord memoranda. "I think there's a really interesting lesson, or at least a extent of reflection, in there for businesses thinking about how to sell themselves to consumers."

Whether carefully-framed patriotism and national contender is the answer to avoiding a climate culture war and still further political fraction remains to be determined, but it is a compelling argument that - certainly in the case of Boris Johnson's 'world leading' claims and GM's TV adverts - is clearly already being tested out by both politicians and top businesses.

Whatever the answer, with tougher decarbonisation challenges onward, the wider public cannot be excluded from the net zero conversation for long, and ensuring unity of support for climate action is almost certain to become one of the most important missions for policymakers over the next decade. Indeed, the success of the entire net zero project relies upon it.

Read more: businessgreen.com