COVID-19 Records

Transcript segment

Baric Transcribed Interview (Redacted), pp.28-29 · baric_ti:utt:00162

Page text: p.28, p.29 · original PDF

Date
2026-04-10 09:00 (day precision)
Type
transcript segment · interview
recipient
Christina Salazar, Harry Kazenoff, David T. Lambeth III, William Henderson, Clark Ervin, Jake Greenberg
speaker
Ralph S. Baric
Topics
Gain-of-function researchIntelligence community assessments
Well, Fauci was present for about 5 to 10 minutes max. He got called away for a phone call in a SCIF, and so he left pretty early in the meeting. There was some basic discussion about the new virus. Ultimately, they got to, I think, what they really wanted to talk about was gain-of-function related experiments, or I think it should be potential gain-of-function related experiments, that were associated with this 2015 and 2016 paper. I was a little surprised that they didn't seem to have the paperwork that was involved in my presentation on why I thought this might be more of a loss-of-function than a gain-of-function phenotype. And so then I think a day or so later I sent them all those documents. DC.Scheduling@LexitasLegal.com

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

StatementGradeAttributionStance
Ultimately, they got to, I think, what they really wanted to talk about was gain-of-function related experiments, or I think it should be potential gain-of-function related experiments, that were associated with this 2015 and 2016 paper. needs context uncertain explicit hedge asserts
I was a little surprised that they didn't seem to have the paperwork that was involved in my presentation on why I thought this might be more of a loss-of-function than a gain-of-function phenotype. needs context uncertain explicit hedge asserts

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

  1. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric open
    The first part, absolutely. I don't DC.Scheduling@LexitasLegal.com recall much in the discussion of the slowness of the P3CO process. But if it says it in the email then at some point they may have wanted to discuss that. I don't know. Was that something that I said?
  2. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
    No, it wasn't. But in the agenda items that we've seen from other officials, that's the agenda that was on there. But from your House testimony it sounded like that wasn't necessarily what was discussed.
  3. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric open
    I don't recall that part being in the House, so I think the House testimony is actually accurate.
  4. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
    So can you let us know what you all talked about and who was present?
  5. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric
    Well, Fauci was present for about 5 to 10 minutes max. He got called away for a phone call in a SCIF, and so he left pretty early in the meeting. There was some basic discussion about the new virus. Ultimately, they got to, I think, what they really wanted to talk about was gain-of-function related experiments, or I think it should be potential gain-of-function related experiments, that were associated with this 2015 and 2016 paper. I was a little surprised that they didn't seem to have the paperwork that was involved in my presentation on why I thought this might be more of a loss-of-function than a gain-of-function phenotype. And so then I think a day or so later I sent them all those documents. DC.Scheduling@LexitasLegal.com
  6. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
    So they just didn't have them?
  7. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric open
    I don't know. They seemed surprised to me.
  8. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
    Surprised about --
  9. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric open
    They seemed uncertain, not surprised. "Uncertain" would be the better word, about the status of these documents, which surprised me.

Full conversation →