They cut much more than DEI programs. They aggressively and ignorantly cut jobs and grants which could have benefited the planet and saved lives.
https://airtable.com/appjhyo9NTvJLocRy/shrNto1NNp9eJlgpA?Ffj...
https://airtable.com/appjhyo9NTvJLocRy/shrNto1NNp9eJlgpA?Ffj...
They just slap DEI on any policy they disagree with.
So, at best, they're funding illegal research. At worst, their research inadvertently led to millions of deaths and trillions in economic damage.
Exactly how many grants are necessary to make up for that, and why would you trust the agency issuing grants for illegal research to manage such a program?
Even this assertion is heavily, heavily disputed:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210706065130/https://www.washi...
>Richard Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and a critic of gain-of-function research, told the Washington Post that the EcoHealth/Wuhan lab research “was — unequivocally — gain-of-function research.” He said it “met the definition for gain-of-function research of concern under the 2014 Pause.”.
"the EcoHealth funding was not related to the experiments, but the collection of samples."
Pretty cut and dry?