by Happy in Nature
Christine Grady is the Director of Bioethics at NIH and the wife of Fauci.
Judicial Watch Files FOIA Lawsuit for NIH Emails of Dr. Fauci’s Spouse, Christine Grady
Judicial Watch announced today that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for the emails of National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) chief of the Clinical Center’s Department of Bioethics Christine Grady referencing the COVID-19 vaccine and antibody enhancement. Grady is the spouse of Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (Judicial Watch. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-02112)). The FOIA lawsuit also seeks all emails sent between Grady and Fauci.
www.judicialwatch.org/nih-emails-of-faucis-spouse/
irp.nih.gov/pi/christine-grady
Her papers include:
Phase 1 healthy volunteer willingness to participate and enrollment preferences
“Results: The majority of respondents were willing to join many kinds of studies, but fewer were willing to participate in first-in-human vaccine studies or studies of psychiatric drugs than in other study types.”
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28766409/
Reframing Consent for Clinical Research: A Function-Based Approach
Although informed consent is important in clinical research, questions persist regarding when it is necessary, what it requires, and how it should be obtained. The standard view in research ethics is that the function of informed consent is to respect individual autonomy. However, consent processes are multidimensional and serve other ethical functions as well. These functions deserve particular attention when barriers to consent exist.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29148951/
Dr. Grady and Dr. Fauci Reflect on Trust, Misinformation, and Optimism During COVID-19 at the 2021 Stubing Memorial Lecture
“There’s a classic tension between public health and individual interests and freedoms,” said Dr. Grady. “There are principles to public health ethics that help you sort out the kinds of interventions we should use…things that are effective, that are proportional, where the benefits outweigh the risks, that are necessary, [with] the least infringement possible and are transparent, that we can publicly justify.”
She added, “The challenge has been that some people view those public health requests as more than a sort of minor infringement on their rights and freedoms.”
Having navigated multiple outbreaks over the last 40 years, Dr. Fauci said the current pushback on public health measures is unlike public responses he has seen before. He remarked that resistance to masking has become about political expression more than rights infringement. He emphasized that “the enemy is the virus. The enemy is not someone who disagrees with what I want to do.”
The Christina Grady emails are part of this:
Another Fauci Cover-Up
FDA Officials: Biden Administration Vaccine Booster Timelines “Make No Sense”
We can confirm that the FDA’s decisions on Covid booster shots were not entirely about “science.”
We received 112 pages from the Food and Drug Administration that show top officials being pressured by “companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense.”
We received the records in response to a February 2022 FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Health & Human Services filed after HHS failed to respond to a September 3, 2021, FOIA request for records of communication from the former director and deputy director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause, respectively (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-00292)).
Drs. Gruber and Krause reportedly resigned during the White House’s push to approve the COVID-19 vaccine “booster shots.”
On September 13, 2021, Gruber and Krause were among a group of resigning doctors who agreed that, “Available evidence doesn’t yet indicate a need for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots among the general population …”
The records include an August 25, 2021, email by Marion Gruber to her boss, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Director Peter Marks:
Over the last couple of days, Janssen has bombarded us with emails regarding their booster dose studies.
***
I am also very concerned that companies (such as Pfizer and Janssen) are trying to put pressure on OVRR [Office of Vaccines Research and Review] by way of PR [public relations]. We need to be given time to consider their data and cannot be pushed by these companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense (e.g., Sep 20)…. It appears that at least Pfizer’s data will not be aligned with this approach and the ‘n’ [test numbers] they have is grossly insufficient. Obviously, we have to review the data but we have taken a peak and have serious concerns.
Lastly, and this is my personal opinion, data we have seen so far from various companies (Pfizer, Janssen, Moderna) appear to suggest that boosters are not needed.
In an email exchange on August 27, 2021, Gruber replies to an email from Maureen Hess, a communications specialist at the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research: “Well, the message appears to be ‘total buy-in in the need for boosters,’ this is not how I am writing the BD [likely board decision], I am trying to take a more neutral approach. This piece sounds as if we already decided to approve this supplement.”
www.judicialwatch.org/another-fauci-cover-up/