Baric Transcribed Interview (Redacted) — page 99
of 155 pages
← p.98 p.100 → · this page in the original PDF · package
DC.Scheduling@LexitasLegal.com
MS. SALAZAR: So when you have a separate technical
aim you just have two completely separate experiments that
are never going to meet, that have zero connectivity?
That, to me, I don't know, but that doesn't make logical
sense to me that you would have -- why wouldn't you have
separate --
DR. BARIC: I think you're making an incorrect
intuitive leap. I was trying to describe the two
approaches that were being used to control viruses in a
cave setting. The other approach was that having
identified strains of viruses that had spike genes that
could infect human cells and potentially cause human
disease, those spike genes would be isolated and placed in
virus vaccine vectors that would then be delivered to the
bats in the cave, is the second approach. The first
approach is immediate innate immune knockdown so that the
virus burden in the cave goes down and it's less likely
that a soldier will be infected. The second approach is to
immunize the bats in that cave so that a virus burden would
be very, very low, and it would be long-term protection so
the cave could be used for a much longer period of time.
So they are linked but they're different approaches to
abrogate virus replication.
MS. SALAZAR: Okay. Would this have been subject to
the gain-of-function pause in 2017?
This is our OCR of the page, with running headers and footers removed. The
Committee's PDF
is authoritative; quote from it. Machine-readable, including the uncleaned
text: /api/page/baric_ti/99
Records on this page
| Record | Date | Type | Pages |
|---|---|---|---|
| baric_ti:utt:00861 | 2026-04-10 | transcript segment | 98–99 |
| baric_ti:utt:00862 | 2026-04-10 | transcript segment | 99 |
| baric_ti:utt:00863 | 2026-04-10 | transcript segment | 99 |
| baric_ti:utt:00864 | 2026-04-10 | transcript segment | 99–100 |