June 22, 2022 - Epoch Times
14:23
| 
| Time | Text |
|---|---|
| This right here is the headquarters of the NIH, the National Institutes of Health. | |
| It's quite a sprawling futuristic complex filled with scientists, researchers, as well as bureaucrats who at least supposedly manage the country's health. | |
| However, According to this new report right here, which came from the government watchdog agency that's actually responsible for overseeing the NIH, well, it turns out that nearly three-quarters of the scientists, as well as the researchers who accept NIH grant money, meaning the actual people who receive NIH taxpayer funding to conduct their research, well, they fail to report their ties to foreign countries as well as to companies. | |
| Let me just reiterate this. | |
| This report, which came from the Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General's office, found that approximately 69% of the people who receive NIH research grants don't properly report all of their ties to foreign entities. | |
| Here's specifically what this report states on this given point. | |
| And by the way, if you appreciate content like this, I hope you take a quick moment to smash that like button as well as that subscribe button, which helps push this video out via the algorithm. | |
| Now, here's specifically what the report goes on to say. | |
| More than two-thirds of grantees fail to meet one or more requirements for investigators' disclosure of all foreign financial interests and support. | |
| These problems often involve requirements to disclose non-publicly traded equity interests from foreign entities and to disclose in-kind resources, professional affiliations, or participation in a foreign, quote-unquote, talents program. | |
| Now, just to pause here for a super quick moment, while this section very obviously does not name any specific foreign countries, the reference here to a talents program is very likely a direct reference to the Chinese Communist Party's Thousand Talents Program, otherwise known as the TTP. Now, | |
| the Thousand Talents Program, it was set up by the Chinese Communist Party's Back in 2008, so during the very tail end of the Bush administration, in order for the Chinese government to recruit leading experts in all sorts of different scientific and technological fields and to have those experts bring back to China all of their secrets. | |
| And if you've been paying attention over the last several years or so, then you likely know that they have been rather successful with this particular program. | |
| Many of the high profile cases from the last several years involving professors as well as scientists, well, they tie right back to this Chinese recruitment program. | |
| As just a few examples, in January of 2020, the FBI arrested a man named Charles Lieber, who was then the chairman of Harvard's Department of Chemistry, because he lied about his ties to the Thousand Talents program. | |
| Then, in May of 2020, the FBI arrested a former researcher at the Cleveland Clinic because he likewise failed to disclose his ties to this program as well. | |
| And then, very relevant to our discussion, back in June of 2020, it was revealed that the NIH had opened, quite literally, hundreds of investigations into scientists who were allegedly hiding their ties to China. | |
| And notice something. | |
| That article up on your screen was published in Science Magazine on June 22nd of 2020, meaning that it was published quite literally exactly two years ago today. | |
| And here's specifically what that article from two years ago, here's what it said. | |
| The NIH has sent letters to 87 institutions raising questions about the behavior of 189 scientists. | |
| Within the group of 189, 54 have subsequently lost their jobs. | |
| The man overseeing the NIH probe noted that 70 of the 189 scientists were found to have violated rules at their institution, most notably a ban on receiving outside support for their research without prior approval from their employers. | |
| In 93% of the 189 cases, the funding came from China, and the vast majority of the scientists under scrutiny are Asian men in their 50s. | |
| And so again, just to reiterate, that quote we just read was from exactly two years ago. | |
| However, it does not seem like things have gotten much better. | |
| Because as we return to this report from the government watchdog group that was just released earlier this month, well, here's what it went on to say. | |
| This is despite NIH emphasizing the importance of accurate reporting of all sources of financial interest and support. | |
| Now, just for your reference, the NIH in total has an annual budget of approximately $42 billion. | |
| And out of that, approximately $30 billion is distributed in varying amounts to different scientists who then use that money to conduct biomedical research in virtually every major field, including things like allergies, viruses, genetics, anti-aging, fighting specific diseases, and so on and so forth. | |
| However, this report, it notes that these major failures to disclose ties to foreign governments, well, it threatens the very integrity of the entire NIH-funded research ecosystem. | |
| Here's specifically what it goes on to say, quote, Now, the type of quote-unquote the type of quote-unquote support | |
| from these foreign entities that is potentially being obfuscated, there are things like intellectual property rights, royalties that they're getting from patents and copyrights, speaking fees, publishing fees, consulting fees, free trips, or trips that are rather reimbursed, and so on and so forth. | |
| Meaning, many of these scientists are failing to disclose any possible money that is flowing to them from foreign governments, such as the Communist government of China. | |
| Furthermore, it's worth noting that this problem extends to domestic payments as well. | |
| Because while this report, it actually focuses on exposing the potential conflicts of interest in regards to undisclosed payments from foreign entities, well, it seems like the NIH is also not forthcoming in regards to royalty payments that their scientists are receiving from American companies either. | |
| In fact, just a few days ago, I spoke with the president of Open the Books, which is a government transparency watchdog group, and he explained to me how his organization successfully obtained many documents from the NIH showing that in a 10-year span of time, government scientists like Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins, and so on, received somewhere between government scientists like Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins, and so on, received somewhere between $350 all the way up to $400 million | |
| But the kicker is that the documents that he received were so redacted that we don't know which company is paying how much money to which scientist and for which patent. | |
| Take a listen. | |
| At the NIH, here's what the record shows. | |
| Nine months ago, we filed a Freedom of Information Act request for their third-party paid royalties. | |
| Think pharmaceutical companies cutting checks to the agency and up to 1,800 of its scientists. | |
| NIH ignored our open records request, so we sued them in federal court with judicial watches our lawyers. | |
| Now on judicially mandated production, after You know, heavy taxpayer financing of this lawsuit. | |
| NIH is slow walking and heavily redacting the production. | |
| So although we can see the top line numbers over the course of the last decade, about $350 million to $400 million worth of these third party royalties were paid. | |
| We don't know who paid them. | |
| They redacted, they blanked out the company paying the royalty. | |
| They also redacted the payment amount to the individual scientist and they redacted the invention. | |
| The number of the patent or the license number. | |
| So we're calling on NIH to open the books on these payments. | |
| Every single one of these payments could be a potential conflict of interest. | |
| And the documents that you received, how up to date were they? | |
| What was the cutoff year? | |
| So we're going to get a decade's worth of these royalties. | |
| Right now we've gotten half of them. | |
| We've gotten 1,500 pages spanning the years 2010 through 2016. | |
| The total universe of pages for the decade is 3,000. | |
| So we're right at half of the production. | |
| And so we're forecasting approximately $400 million worth of these third-party payments. | |
| And this is important because we know every single year, NIH doles out $32 billion in grants. | |
| So think about this. | |
| You've got tens of billions of dollars in grants going out the door. | |
| And then every 10 years, you've got hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Yeah, that sounds like a conflict of interest waiting to happen. | |
| And there was actually a fascinating exchange. | |
| I wanted to get your take on it. | |
| It was between Congressman Molinar and the current acting director of the NIH. They were referencing your work at a congressional hearing, and he was specifically asked about these payments. | |
| And Dr. | |
| Tabak, he said that... | |
| None of the leadership of the NIH is receiving these payments. | |
| However, according to the documents that you released, that I read at least, Dr. | |
| Fauci and Dr. | |
| Collins were receiving these payments. | |
| So what do you think that was? | |
| Was that an oversight? | |
| Was that a lie? | |
| What's your opinion? | |
| So I think the acting director, Lawrence Tabak, must be misinformed. | |
| Either that or he misled Congress in that appropriations hearing. | |
| Here's what the record shows. | |
| The acting director of the National Cancer Institute is actually ranked number 20th out of 1,800 scientists on the direct receipt of these third-party royalties. | |
| So not only do you have leadership at the top, like Francis Collins, the former director of NIH itself receiving royalties, and Dr. | |
| Fauci receiving royalties, you also have one of the top recipients is now the acting director of the National Cancer Institute. | |
| So, you know, Tabak said, trust us, we have firewalls. | |
| You know, look, NIH is acting like they have a lot to hide. | |
| These royalty payments are legal, so why are they redacting information? | |
| So surprising. | |
| So can you just break it down to our viewers just one more time? | |
| So what you know, what you were able to find out is that over a 10-year span of time, well at least in a six-year span of time, but then you can extrapolate to 10, there's $400 million that were doled out in royalty payments to scientists at the NIH. You know that it's roughly 1,800 scientists, but you don't know which specific scientists are receiving what money for what patent and from which company. | |
| Is that correct? | |
| That's correct, yes. | |
| And furthermore, NIH has also redacted the invention So the patent and license numbers are also redacted. | |
| So we don't know, like for instance, Dr. | |
| Fauci is receiving royalties. | |
| We don't know how much money he's receiving. | |
| We don't know who's paying those royalties. | |
| And we don't know the invention, the license or patent number that he's receiving royalties under. | |
| All of that needs to be opened. | |
| People need to be able to follow the money. | |
| Now it's worth noting that we actually went a lot deeper into the subject during the full interview. | |
| However, for various reasons, I actually cannot show the full interview here on YouTube. | |
| And also, I want to note that besides discussing this topic of the NIH, in that interview, he also revealed how his team uncovered details surrounding how you and me, meaning the American taxpayers, are actually helping to fund the World Economic Forum. | |
| And so if you'd like to watch that interview in its glorious entirety, you can do so over on Epic TV, which is our awesome no-censorship video platform. | |
| I'll throw the link. | |
| It'll be down there in the description box below. | |
| And then also, if you'd like to read this transparency report from the Office of the Inspector General in full, well, I'll throw the link to the PDF version of it. | |
| It'll be down there in the description box as well. | |
| That way you can grab a cup of coffee and read through it for yourself. | |
| And now, sir, what's this? | |
| Hello? | |
| We use the Secure app, which is the sponsor of today's episode, as well as an awesome email and message service provider that actually cares about your privacy. | |
| Now listen, it's no big secret that our data is being mined and remined all the time. | |
| In fact, there was a recent study that was published in the year 2020, which found that 155 million Americans, likely including you and me, have suffered some form of data breach. | |
| And frankly, that's only what's publicly known. | |
| However, all those past problems with privacy issues and data mining, well, that can be an issue of the past because moving forward, You can use the Secure app, which both your messages, your emails, and your phone calls can remain private. | |
| That's because they have their servers and their data centers located in Switzerland instead of in the US or China or Russia. | |
| And why does that matter? | |
| Because Switzerland has the strictest data privacy laws in the entire world and they are not subject to the intrusive Cloud app. | |
| Now, what I love the most about the secure app is that they don't collect my data. | |
| They don't mine my data. | |
| They don't mine the data and phone numbers of my friends and family. | |
| Everything is private. | |
| And best of all, at least in my opinion, this does not work with your big tech email provider just because it is not secure. | |
| And so check it out. | |
| You can head on over to secure.com. | |
| And if you use promo code Roland, you can get 25% off. | |
| And frankly, their rates are not even that expensive. | |
| It only starts with $5 for the messenger and $10 for the email and messenger combo. | |
| And best of all, they offer a seven-day free trial. | |
| I mentioned it before, but I think it's worth mentioning again. | |
| Over on Epic TV, we recently published a great interview between myself and Dr. | |
| Michael Yeadon, who is a former vice president over at Pfizer, as well as Pfizer's former chief scientific officer for their Allergy and Respiratory Research Department. | |
| And we discussed a broad range of topics, including how, in his professional opinion at least, there is no safe way to combat an ongoing pandemic with a vaccine, Now again, | |
| even though that interview was fantastic, at least in my opinion, due to the censorship regime here on YouTube, I cannot even show you the trailer for that episode. | |
| In fact, you might not know this, but the censorship here on YouTube is so extreme, it's so strict, that the J6 committee, meaning the Democrat-led January 6th committee that's currently holding hearings over in Congress, even they were censored a few days ago. | |
| Because they showed a video of President Trump disputing the election results. | |
| And even though they were very obviously critical of that viewpoint, and they were only showing that video as evidence, YouTube still decided to censor it. | |
| Because just showing that footage is too much. | |
| That is just the reality of the world that we live in. | |
| And so, if you'd like to check out the awesome interview between myself and Dr. | |
| Michael Yeadon, I'll throw that link. | |
| It'll be down there, right there, at the very top of the description box. | |
| I hope you click on it, and I hope you check it out, because, frankly, Dr. | |
| Yeadon has quite an interesting insider's view into what's been happening over the past two and a half years across the entire world. | |
| Again, that link will be right there at the very top of the description box. | |
| And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epoch Times. |
Export Selection