Three key House committee leaders want the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to sort out the multiple definitions of “gain-of-function” biomedical research used by federal agencies that fund such activities to determine if any real-world benefits have been achieved by them.
“As ‘gain-of-function’ research could entail biosafety, biosecurity, and public health risks, the risks and benefits of this research must be evaluated to determine which types of studies should go forward and under what conditions,” House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) said in an Aug. 1 letter to Comptroller General Gene Dodaro, who manages the GAO. “Further, until we know the tangible outcomes of ‘gain-of-function’ research, we cannot know if the benefits outweigh the risks.”
Joining Ms. McMorris Rodgers in seeking the GAO analysis are Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), chairman of the energy and commerce subcommittee on health, and Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), the investigations subcommittee chairman.
The term “‘gain-of-function’ is not well understood and is often misused. ‘Gain-of-function’ is a broad term that covers research that, among other things, involves genetically altering an organism, which may include increasing a pathogen’s ability to cause a pandemic,” the signers told Mr. Dodaro.
“The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) has recommended that federal agencies adopt an appropriate review process if they conduct or fund ‘gain-of-function’ research that could increase a potential pandemic pathogen’s ability to cause a pandemic. SARSCoV-2, which causes COVID-19 disease, is an example of a pandemic pathogen.”
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Defense (DOD), and other federal departments fund and/or oversee some high-risk research, which may include ‘gain-of-function’ research. Some in the scientific community argue that the riskier types of ‘gain-of-function’ research are needed to better understand how viruses evolve in order to develop medical countermeasures for emerging pathogens. Others argue that the risks outweigh any potential benefits,” the letter said.
The coronavirus pandemic that many U.S. experts contend originated in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology has killed more than 1 million Americans since January 2020 and prompted a multitude of damaging economic and social restrictions on Americans that continue to linger.
Specifically, Ms. McMorris Rodgers, Mr. Guthrie, and Mr. Griffith want to know “what tangible outcomes, such as the development of medical countermeasures, have resulted from the different types of federally funded ‘gain-of-function’ research, including the enhancement of potential pandemic pathogens?”
In addition, the GOP leaders want to know “what terms and definitions do federal agencies use to refer to ‘gain-of-function’ research, what gaps, if any, exist among the different definitions, and what potential changes are under consideration for those definitions?”
They also want GAO to determine the “risks and benefits of gain-of-function research.” Also, “what are the risks associated with ‘gain-of-function’ research, and to what extent can lab safety protocols mitigate these risks? Are there particular challenges with overseeing the mitigation of such risks for ‘gain-of-function’ research conducted abroad?”
Mr. Paul based his criminal referral of Dr. Fauci on multiple emails going back to 2020 in which the former NIAID chief referenced gain-of-function research at the Wuhan facility, much of which was, in fact, funded indirectly by the federal government through the EcoHealth Alliance.
