this fall through distance learning. now we have a tendency as humans and as americans to live such fast pacedast lives to want to move on too fast from crisis. pp what doro i mean by that? isn t the resilient approach of carrying on a good thing, laura a trait to be encouraged rather than crying over spilled milk? when we re talking thoughh a abt something as profoundly damaging as the government s pandemic lock down mandates, the answer is yes and no.n no, we shouldn t wallow all the lingering miseries that we can t change. but yes, we need n accountabiliy to ensure that this never, everh happens againap and that means holding accountable anyone in any organizationer that recklessly pushed policies that were never grounded in sciencee and certainly not permissible under our constitutionno. now almost immediately when the lockdown s began on a federal level and then trickling to the states, the angle was a relentless force for protectingvu the vulnerable and also for reopeni
groups believe the payments should be fully disclosed. instead, the nih appears to be withholding the information . in fact, the groupup open the books says nih defines a freedom of information request to give up the data so the group s and one. but even then they say the nihg is slow o walking the information, releasing only partial data and the data that is being released is heavily redacted, making it impossible to know exactly how much each scientist e is getting. so the documents only provide the total number of payments and the totalal dollar amount. for example, between 2009 and 2014 there were twenty two thousand one hundred royalty payments too 17 hundred nih scientists totaling one hundred thirty four million dollars. open the books estimates by twenty twenty the total payments exceeded three hundred fifty million dollars and for the record from 2009 to 2014.he dr. fauci who makes four