Dr. Peter Daszak's hearing in US congress exposes how another critical guardrail of US democracy is failing

Much like their unethical Republican colleages, Democratic representatives in the House discard an evidence-based worldview in favor of power and popular perception

What happened so far

Dr. Peter Daszak, the president of the pandemic-prevention non-profit organization EcoHealth Alliance, gave his public testimony to representatives of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. The Republican-led committee has previously scrutinized virologists and editors-in-chief of scientific magazines in their quest to find substantiation of a cover-up with respect to the origins of COVID-19; with the ultimate target being former public health advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci.

After a cascading release of selective information from Peter Daszak’s closed-door testimony in November last year, the Committee used most of the leading up weeks to drum up media attention for the public event.

Reinforcing popular falsehoods created by the anti-science pressure group USRTK, the subcommittee publicy accused the Dr. Daszak of lying on multiple occasions pertaining to an unfounded grant proposal that is entirely irrelevant to the origins of SARS-CoV-2 even if the work described in it had been conducted. The insinuation is that Dr. Daszak and his collaborators somehow created SARS-CoV-2, albeit no lab anywhere in the world could have created this natural virus pre-pandemic.

Two days ago, the Subcommittee would promise to hold “Dr. Daszak” accountible for facilitating dangerous gain-of-function research in China; which Republicans claim has likely created SARS-CoV-2 (absolutely contradicted by evidence).

Already before the testimony started, many client propagandists, the right-wing press and other lab leak believers (I’ll not hyperlinking to any of that garbage) had lined up their articles; hoping to use the public hearing as a springboard into virality. Some succeeded.

For all of them, EcoHealth Alliance and Peter Daszak are a soft target to further their self-serving goals. For years, conspiratorial activists, anti-science pressure groups and partisan investigations have build narratives out of decontextualized snippets of an organization that worked on emerging disease threats all around the world; and that has won a lot of grant money for its important research. Over 15 million documents have been put under the microscope to find any evidence of a cover-up or illegality. None did. An 18-months long audit by the US Department of human health and services did not find significant issues. Except for minor funding allocation errors and reporting discrepancies, no evidence of any wrongdoing has surfaced so far, and is unlikely to do so at this point. Despite this, Dr. Dasazk research collaboration with Dr. Zhengli Shi from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, his outspoken advocacy for preventing zoonotic diseases, and his public role for the WHO mission to Wuhan has tainted public perception of him; and US representatives in the House will use that to their advantage.

To call something a sham hearing is often hyperbolic, but I am not sure it is on this occasion.

Even before Dr. Daszak spoke the first words, the subcommittee announced that it will recommend EcoHealth to be stripped off their funding and that Dr. Daszak will be criminally investigated. So why hold the hearing? For the popcorn?

Dr. Daszak was allowed to read his prepared introductory statement (worth reading; where he shortly mentions how the political and media circus in the lead-up to this hearing caused a dangerous SWATing attempt at his home). After that, the hearing quickly devolved into long self-serving and self-indulgent monologues from representatives; on both sides of the aisle.

The Republicans

Republican representatives would try to find ways to insinuate and link Dr. Daszak´s work to various grand conspiracies. First and foremost of course that he facilitated gain-of-function research that caused the pandemic. But there were also quite some tangents and other dog whistles. For example;

• Rep. Comer tried to paint him as a spy or CIA asset, or at least somehow in cohoots with the intelligence agency. “Does the intelligence community know what happened in the Wuhan lab? Did the intellience community believe that China was manufacturing a bioweapon?” Dr. Daszak’s answer was that this is a question for the intelligence agency, then referenced the 2023 ODNI report (see below) where all intelligence agencies ruled out that SARS-CoV-2 was a bioweapon. (Many of the MAGA republicans believe that the “deep state”, including the intelligence community, was somehow involved in creating the pandemic).

• Rep. Cloud used his five minutes to ask whether Dr. Daszak has been engaged with social media companies and whether he agreed with their moderation policies. A dog-whistle for a different battle over mis- and disinformation research, another field of science that Republicans are attacking next to public health, medicine, climate and a general evidence-based worldview. He also questioned Dr. Daszak’s allegiance, given that he works with a country that does “unrestricted warfare against the United States”. (He replied that in order to stop pandemics, we need scientists to go to the places where they emerge, and that this is in the interest of US citizens)

• Rep. Griffith spend his five minutes in a virtual monologue, talking himself into a rage about Dr. Daszak being a supposed liar while not letting Dr. Daszak address any of his contentions. The thrust of the contention was that Dr. Daszak had previously said coronavirus spillovers are rare, but then also written that about 60.000 of those spillovers happen every year. (The discrepancy was later resolved by Dr. Daszak very simply; CoV spillovers are rare events, but they happen a lot because the human-bat interface where they can occurr is an area inhabited by 300 million people. Even very rare events are not uncommon given these baseline numbers)

Overall, a lot of grandstanding as expected from this side of the political spectrum that has long made up its mind about the myths they want to buy into. Their verdict and recommendations were entirely expected.

The Democrats

Representatives from the democratic party had very different goals and talking points prepared, potentially to the surprise of many who did not pay close attention. They overall goal was to paint Dr. Daszak as dishonest, self-serving and even fraudulent.

• Ranking member Rep. Ruiz spend considerable time painting Dr. Daszak as conflict-of-interest ridden given his involvement in the Lancet letter (to support Chinese scientists). Why did he at first not acknowledge he was working with the lab that was the focus of conspiracy theories? The intelligence communities say the question is still open, but “The statement you authored attempted to summarily close the question”, Rep. Ruiz claimed. (Peter Daszak explained that conspiracy theories at the time were about bioweapons, HIV inserts and snake DNA; all obvious conspiracy theories. He did not imagine, back in February 2020, that this statement condemning these circulating conspiracy theories would be a conflict of interest). But Rep. Ruiz was not interested; rather emphasizing the point that Peter Daszak did not explizitly state that he was working with the Wuhan institute of virology (something that was clear from a 15 year long collaboration and many co-authored paper. Nor was it relevent at all, since more than 20 other public health experts had written the same thing and still stand by the letter). Why was Rep. Ruiz so hell-bent on an conflict-of-interest statement for an opinion letter?

• Rep. Dingell was taking up a Republican talking point about the 2018 DARPA proposal (never funded). The anti-science pressure group USRTK had claimed that earlier drafts of that proposal would expose an attempt to mislead the federal agency because of a side-note stating that some assays might be performed in China. (The submitted draft to DARPA had more specifications and do not support any assertions of misleading the agency, and if the proposal had been funded, a detailed workplan with exact allocations of where and what work would be performed would have to be submitted and agreed on by the agency; so either way, there is no substance to these assertions) Rep. Dingell again was not interested in Dr. Daszak’s explanations, she just said “Well, there are appearance issues here”. “We won’t accuse you of creating COVID-19 […] but to the extend that you have considered misrepresenting facts, we consider this a very serious mistake”, she cut him off.

Let us pause for a quick second here. So Rep. Dingell knows he did not misrepresent facts to DARPA in his proposal, but she assumes that the had “considered misrepresenting facts”, and that was a serious mistake? Irrespective of whether Dr. Daszak ever thought about misrepresenting facts or not, when did Congress become the thought crime police that judges what goes on in one’s mind? Bizzare.

• Rep. Ross went all in on another, completely unrelated project that the NIH had awarded Peter Daszak and Zhengli Shi to study coronaviruses in China. That multi-year grant had yearly reporting requirements, and there was a problem with the year five reporting that Dr. Daszak had not uploaded on time in 2019. The reason was a banality; a software or related error in the NIH system prevented EcoHealth from uploading the report. “The system locked us out, we contacted NIH, we received no response”, Dr. Daszak explained. He had emailed his grants manager to upload everything; the committe had the emails, corroborating that EcoHealth had the intent of uploading the report. “The NIH has conducted a electronic forensic investigation into their report submission systems, and found no evidence of a lockout”, she claimed. Also, why where there no email records on September 29th that the submission was not working? She asked (Dr. Daszak said his admins had called). Rep. Ross went on to claim that the rules need to be followed when taxpayer money is involved, and although they had done so “examplary” for four years, that it did not happen in year five invites questioning from her colleagues. But what exactly where they questioning? Again, nothing of this has anything to do with the origins of COVID-19 or the pandemic; but about a reporting mishap (or at most violation) on an unrelated grant (The year five report was ventually re-submitted in 2021, containing nothing of relevance to the origins question, of course).

On and on the democrats would go about these banalities; as if EcoHealth Alliance was not an organization with dozens of people, multiple projects, collaborators worldwide and a million things going on that might sometimes have human mistakes in the mix. The 18 months audit of EcoHealth by DHHS has found some errors, but no significant violations, after all. So why are they hell-bent on painting Dr. Daszak in a very negative light?

“I wanna be clear, nothing produced for the select Subcommittee over the last 14 months, 425.000 documents, over 100 hours of close-door testimony substantiates claims that federal funding to EcoHealth alliance and the Institute in Wuhan caused the pandemic”, Rep. Ruiz stated. But that would not excuse Dr. Daszak’s alleged lack of transparency.

“I do think, at the end of the day, Dr.Daszak, your responses here are unsatisfactory”, Rep. Ruiz would finish up. “You claim you submitted, and yet it was not submitted”, “Your administrative responsibilities and lack of reporting in a timely manner is concering”, “You are explaining things to your convenience to avoid consequences, and that is concerning” (Reminder; the Subcommittes report was released an hour before the public hearing; no matter what Dr. Daszak explained, their verdict was already in). The report recommends barring EcoHealth from receiving any federal funding, and that the justice department investigates him for lying to federal agencies. “It is important that you and your actions as grantees are held accountible”.

The Republican counterparts fully agreed, congratulating each other for their bipartisan agreement. Rep. Wenstrup closed the hearing with scepticism towards scientists. “We cannot just blindly trust the scientists, because they are scientists.” “There are scientists in China. A country that is an adversary to the United States of America”

“Especially when they”, pointing at Dr. Daszak, “are not forthcoming and honest.” “Getting money for a federal grant? That is a problem” “Hiding behind different definitions of gain-of-function research”, “This is a troubing pattern behavior that we are seeing. And conduct as well” “Misleading grant application to DARPA, downplaying the Chinese part” “You did not disclose your collaboration with the WIV in the Lancet” “Here we are, and we will continue to conduct oversight and evaluate the evidence surrounding EcoHealth Alliance”.

Why did the Democrats attack Dr. Daszak?

I watched the hearing with increasing discomfort, and I was not the only one. Scientists from three continents were chatting with me about their unease. “Shitshow”, “The whole thing makes me sick. Political theatre at scientists expense” would be some of the sentiments expressed.

But I think something a bit more concerning was going on.

The Democrats came out attacking Dr. Daszak because he is a weak point for the coming Republican assault on the NIH, NIAID and Anthony Fauci. That these are the main targets is unquestionable, with Dr. Fauci`s public grilling already sheduled for June; and the Subcommittee report already proposing the remodeling of NIH to bring it under political control of the national security and intelligence apparatus.

Facing this threat, the Democrats decided to try to direct heat away from the NIH and other federal agencies - who awarded EcoHealth alliance with grant funding for research and was responsible for oversight - by throwing the non-profit organization and Dr. Daszak under the bus. By painting Dr. Daszak as an dishonest, conflict-of-interest hiding, deceitful actor, they will attempt to claim that even if these agencies financed risky research; or even gain-of-function research, it was without their knowledge. It was not a failure of oversight. They could not know because they were mislead by the dishonest Chinese and their conduit, the “shady” Dr. Daszak (they just smeared).

A small sacrifice to make to protect the institutions and Fauci from false allegations of willingly financing gain-of-function research.

A dangerous trend

I believe the actions of House Democrats signal a dangerous shift in US politics. 66% of Americans believe the virus came from a lab, many of them feverishly. In a general election year, the Democrats do not want to open avenues of attack against them, for example by having to educate citizens about something they do not want to believe. It is just too risky to be perceived as covering anything up; especially with China involved. The Biden administration has always signaled a hard stance on China; that was a good topic to show it.

Yet by making that political calculus - that it is better to play to popular sentiment, rather than risk exposure by sticking up for facts - Democrats in the House have taken up same pugilistic worldview of their opponents.

A worldview where power and public perception, not evidence, gets to shape politics and reality. If people want accountability for the pandemic and somebody to blame, politicians today have shown that they will deliver, not stick their neck out for science or scientists.

“The customer is never wrong” is however a motto for salespeople, not leaders. Scientists heard the shifting winds today louder and clearer than ever. As the journal nature just quoted from Dr. Angela Rasmussen:

Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, Canada, says she was disappointed that the Democrats joined the Republicans in what she says was “essentially an attack on science”. “It’s a very dangerous situation because most scientists who are approaching any problem — whether it’s the origins of the pandemic, whether it’s anything else — are going to think twice: should I actually get involved in research that is high impact but potentially politically controversial?”

Science fulfills an important role in society; it creates shared reality through shared facts. By undermining this today, Democratic politicians, like their Republican counterparts, are hastening our descend into a new dark age of myth, manipulation and magical thinking.

Consequences be damned.

Update 2nd May: The LA Times’s Michael Hiltzig managed to point out these issues, and Democratic complicity, probably much better than I could. Give it a read too.