Transcript segment

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
   Yes, that's correct.
2. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
   Why was that statement included? Was it because there was a concern that it could be perceived that there was gain-of-function work occurring after the pause?
3. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric open
   I don't recall the exact reason why we put that statement in. It may have been because the journal wanted it written in that it was started prior to the pause. It's technically accurate and honest, and I think that's the most important thing for the reason why the DC.Scheduling@LexitasLegal.com statement is in the paper.
4. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
   Was all the work done before the pause, or was it that it was --
5. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric
   It was 90 percent done before the pause. We had resurrected the virus, I think, in, I don't know, February, March, April of 2014, and had done a lot of work on them.
6. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
   And so was it NIH's position that anything that was created prior to the pause, you could do any type of work after the pause and it wouldn't be considered gain-of-function?
7. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric open
   No. That's not correct at all. They reviewed it. Again, you're asking me to describe NIH policy that occurred behind a closed door. So the details of the discussion about what's gain-of-function or what's not is dependent on NIH. My role is to provide them with the information of what I think. They don't have to accept that at all.
8. 2026-04-10 09:00 Christina Salazar open
   Have they ever not?
9. 2026-04-10 09:00 Ralph S. Baric open
   Yes.

Full conversation →