Attachment

Chairman Rand Paul, M.D. COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY & GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS NIH HID PUBLIC COMMENTS ABOUT WUHAN AND IVERMECTIN Internal records reveal how the agency curated public discussion of controversial COVID-19 issues The documents expose a broader federal effort to control the public conversation surrounding COVID-19. Although these records were created during litigation concerning the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) treatment of animal-rights comments, the internal communications show that NIH's suppression practices extended to other contested subjects. NIH officials acknowledged hiding comments concerning the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and ivermectin, collected examples involving Dr. Anthony Fauci and alleged vaccine misinformation, and discussed preserving the agency's ability to filter or manually hide public comments in the future. WHAT THE DOC ENTS SHOW = NIH hid comments about the WIV and ivermectin. An NIH official expressly acknowledged that comments referencing the WIV and ivermectin had been hidden as "off topic" beneath an NIH post concerning its initiative to end structural racism. The agency's moderation reached the central COVID debates. NIH identified and collected comments about Dr. Fauci and alleged vaccine misinformation, including comments reading "ARREST ANTHONY FAUCI!!!!" and "#firefauci," as part of the example set it assembled of "inappropriate" and "off topic" content on its pages. NiIHused both automated filters and human judgment to restrict public comments. The records describe NIH's reliance on keyword filters and confirm that agency personnel also manually hid comments before the litigation began. NIH paused that manual process after the lawsuit was filed but drafted language stating that it intended to resume manual moderation after the summary-judgment ruling, if permitted by the court. Officials discussed expanding future suppression tools. NIH and Justice Department attorneys considered the agency's ability to add new and supposedly "neutral" keyword filters. Their communications expressly recognized that such filters could prevent discussion of entire subjects, including COVID vaccinations. NiHunderstood the First Amendment implications. Government attorneys warned that a court could determine NIH's Facebook and Instagram pages were public forums and prohibit content-based restrictions. Even with that risk, the internal discussions focused on preserving NIH's discretion to remove speech it considered unrelated to its chosen message.