Hvistendahl: NIH-funded coronavirus research ‘highly concerning’

Intercept reporter Mara Hvistendahl said coronavirus research funded by the National Institute of Health was “highly concerning,” but based on available evidence “could not have led to the pandemic,” in an interview on HillTV’s Rising.

Hvistendahl and Intercept reporter Sharon Lerner reported that Peter Daszak, who works for EcoHealth Alliance, which aims to understand and prevent infectious diseases, worked closely with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a partner on a 2014 NIH grant to research bat coronaviruses in China. 

Daszak has also been tied to debates about the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic because of a research proposal that reportedly risked creating a more dangerous pathogen. 

Hvistendahl said Daszak maintained that research that could make coronavirus more transmissible was not funded or carried out.

“He maintains that this research was not done even in any kind of preliminary way to see, kind of explore, it for the purpose of this proposal,” she said. 

However, another proposal from Daszak’s group involving the Wuhan Institute was funded by NIH, Hvistendahl said. 

“And that contained experiments that were highly concerning. But are you know, according to the documents in terms of the experiments that have actually been described so far — because we’re still waiting for some documents — could not have led to the pandemic,” she said.

The more concerning unfunded proposal, she said, involved inserting furin cleavage cells into coronaviruses to increase infectivity.

“Many people are concerned about that particular proposal and we are in an unusual situation where you have a group of internet sleuths who release a document that initially was not verified by other people apart from Project Veritas,” she added. 

Project Veritas, a far right media company, has been criticized for its reporting that the NIH funded a grant into research into bat related coronavirus may have led to the pandemic, with Dr. Anthony Fauci calling the reporting, “distorted.” 

Hvistendahl also said she considered that link to be unsupported at this point. 

“There is absolutely no evidence to support that so I consider that a conspiracy theory,” she said. 

Editor’s note: this article was revised on June 30 to clarify Hvistendahl’s comments on HillTV’s Rising.