AcidicBasicGlitch

Hi, I am trying to access an NYT article from 2013 but for some reason it's unavailable on archive snapshot pages.

Are there any reliable alternatives I can check out or if anyone knows a different way to access this article could you please let me know: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/02/health/experts-scramble-to-trace-the-emergence-of-mers.html

Thanks!

Normally I use archive.is but oddly this NYT article I'm looking for isn't even available even though it's from 2013. It seems ridiculous to keep an article that's over a decade old behind a paywall.

Are there communities that help access paywalled information?

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/02/health/experts-scramble-to-trace-the-emergence-of-mers.html

Thanks!

Of fucking course. Fuck Bill Gates

I've been trying to call attention to his stupid fucking data centers for months. Musk built a constantly expanding data center in Memphis last summer, and then quietly built another in Atlanta back in February. He's got another in the works in the UK.

He's hoarding our data and hiring thousands of data annotators to create a giant database that he can charge access to for training AI or any number of evil things.

Like I’m sure we all know profits are usually the true motivation behind this stuff but this lays it out step by step with news headlines explaining the how for each step. Just trying to make this publicly available knowledge. Even if we can’t stop them we should at least try to stay a few steps ahead

Also didn't include this one in the skeets but it's included in my blog post write up: RFK and Pfizer CEO had dinner just prior to his nomination https://fortune.com/well/2025/02/04/pfizer-ceo-had-dinner-with-rfk-jr-cautiously-optimistic-despite-vaccine-controversy/

Even though RFK allegedly despises big pharma corruption so much right 🙄 https://cepr.net/publications/big-pharma-is-corrupt/

Does a community exist to help people learn to spot more sophisticated bot activity and algorithm control on social media platforms. I was thinking of something where people could share screen shots of weird activity to warn others, similar to teaching people how to spot disinformation propaganda? Or a place where information is available focused on discussing bot activity.

I feel like that will be a useful skill to have in the coming years.

The NIH has been accused of funding dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Legislation is being proposed to ban federal funding for this research, which many powerful individuals have alleged is what led to the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, many scientists have pointed out that the vague language of the legislation would result in a blanket ban of federal funding for any virology or vaccine research in the U.S. This would mean that vaccine production and roll out would become completely privatized, even in the event of a pandemic.

This post examines the current policy behind federal funding for GOF research, which is based on framework created nearly a year into Donald Trump's first term.

The framework was created in response to policy recommendations provided by the Obama administration for oversight and care of pathogens with pandemic potential (P3CO). However, while P3CO provided recommendations for oversight and public transparency, these recommendations seem to have been omitted from the Trump framework for federal funding.

Justification for the removal of federal funding frequently sites a lack of oversight and transparency by the NIH. However, there is never any explanation given for why the Trump framework failed to include the recommendations to enable oversight and transparency for funding decisions.

Two days after taking office for his second term, Trump proposed an executive order banning GOF research, and received public praise from the Heritage Foundation.

This post which is focused on the policy background, will be followed by additional posts examining the proposed legislation and vaccine privatization.

Hello,

I am a researcher in the U.S. who began writing about the NIH federal funding issues just to keep people informed about things that weren't reaching most major news outlets.

I began this piece several weeks ago, and finally finished it this past week. The focus is on the attacks against the NIH for their gain-of-function research funding policy. I ended up doing a deep dive into the history of the policy which began in 2014, and trying to condense everything into an article for a broad audience.

You may have seen all of the proposed legislation about gain-of-function (GOF) research, and more recently increasing attacks on mRNA vaccines. It is being presented by legislative members as a concern over safety issues, however, it turns out there are many reasons to question if that is the legitimate reason these bills are being introduced. It's important to note that the GOF legislation is not aimed at improving any safety requirements for the research. It is only aimed at funding policy.

The language of the bills is very vague, and many researchers worry that the legislation would make it illegal to federally fund any vaccine research in the U.S. This would mean a complete privatization of vaccine research. Pharmaceutical companies would still be free to carry out the allegedly dangerous research because it is (typically) privately funded.

Interestingly, if you do a deep dive into the policy history, and everything that has led to this moment, you will find that an updated set of policy guidelines has been in the works since last summer. The updated policy may even be extend to the creation of mandatory oversight laws for private research. Meaning that the updated policy guidelines which are due to be released by May of 2025, would not only address the safety concerns which are being used to justify the GOF legislation for federal funding, they may even result in safety improvements and oversight across the private sector.

So, why do so many law makers seem to be in such a rush to pass these bills that will only privatize the allegedly dangerous research?

The article is broken up into 5 sections including the introduction. The main focus of this article is GOF funding policy history, which is covered in sections 1-3. The last two sections briefly focus on the legislation attacking the research, and some potential motivations for vaccine research privatization.

I am planning two individual follow up articles that will cover these last two sections in greater depth. My goal is to spread public awareness of this information, to defend science and improve public health. Please help me do that by either sharing the article or just by spreading this information by word of mouth.

Thank you!

Ok, so I am a U.S. researcher who has ended up here bc of censorship issues on other platforms.

I understand why rules for no self promotion exist in general, but typically I would consider that to be things like promoting a business or anything with a paywall or with the goal to get more attention for self vs the goal to spread information that is being suppressed.

I started writing a blog on ghost and putting some information together to raise awareness about science and other policy disinformation. Would sharing the information or graphics from the blog still be self promotion since it's my own blog

If it is self promotion, are there any good communities where this kind of things is ok to share?