https://oversight.house.gov/release/final-report-covid-selec...
> OPERATION WARP SPEED: President-elect Trump’s Operation Warp Speed — which
> encouraged the rapid development and authorization of the COVID-19 vaccine
> — was highly successful and helped save millions of lives.
>
> RUSHED COVID-19 VACCINE APPROVAL: The FDA rushed approval of the COVID-19
> vaccine in order to meet the Biden Administration’s arbitrary mandate
> timeline. Two leading FDA scientists warned their colleagues about the
> dangers of rushing the vaccine approval process and the likelihood of
> adverse events. They were ignored, and days later, the Biden
> Administration mandated the vaccine.
Trump started it, Biden finished it. The only negative is “Biden didn’t listen to two people” which I think we all agree is a good thing.
Not all of us agree and I say that with 3 covid vaccine shots coursing through my body.
I believe the two FDA scientists were concerned about the Biden admin demanding vaccine mandates around the vaccine booster where the FDA would normally have consultative influence and was intentionally excluded. By the time of the booster, there was active reports of adverse cardiac side effects in younger men. Exactly the demographic (military aged men) most affected by the mandate. Also, the original effectiveness of the vaccines were decreased due to the COVID mutations.
So the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive but certainly politics will spin the language in the report. The vaccines can and did help save lives and were rapidly created by Operation Warp Speed. Mandating the boosters for the military also put some lives at risk as well.
>>> They were ignored, and days later, the Biden Administration mandated the vaccine.
It's one thing to ignore the issues and allow people to choose to take the vaccine. It's entirely different to force people to take it.
One administration was harshly criticized for reducing the amount of time and resources spent evaluating the possible negative outcomes of the vaccine.
I found the first 10 mins quite interesting. No real mention of politics, quite a lot on gain of function and bioweapons.
> 4) Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) researchers were sick with a COVID-like virus in the fall of 2019, months before COVID-19 was discovered at the wet market.
> 5) By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced.
For #4, how do you tell that from an ordinary flu? Virus researchers get the flu about as much as everyone else does and WIV employed several hundred people. Having a few of them sick at any given time is not unusual.
For #5, they are overestimating how easy it is to find origins of viruses. SARS took 5 years. The 2013 Ebola outbreak origin still hasn't been found. It took until 2016 to track down the origins of the 2009 swine flu pandemic. For novel viruses the norm to finding where they came from is between "years" and "never".
SARS-1 took about a year to find a proximal zoonotic host. The reservoir host took much longer, but the proximal host is the important part (and still hasn't been found for SARS-CoV-2).
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5241a2.htm
You're right about Ebola and the 2009 flu. I think it's likely that SARS-CoV-2 arose from a research accident, but I don't think the COVID Select Subcommittee's arguments are very good.