Dr. Siegel Advocates for Halt on High-Risk Gain-of-Function Research

Dr. Siegel Advocates for Halt on High-Risk Gain-of-Function Research

PROGRAMMING ALERT: Tune in to Dr. Siegel as he discusses this significant issue on “Fox & Friends” and “America’s Newsroom” on Tuesday, May 6.

Gain-of-function research serves various purposes, including exploring treatment options and vaccine effectiveness against specific pathogens. However, this type of research also involves manipulating viruses or pathogens to assess their potential for human transmission or lethality. This duality raises significant concerns within the scientific community.

For decades, scientists have grappled with the implications of this research. In 2012, Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier, Ph.D., conducted a controversial study to determine the mutations required for the H5N1 bird flu virus to adapt to human transmission. This research prompted prominent figures like Dr. Anthony Fauci to call for a moratorium on similar studies.

Following this incident, Fauci and other scientists continued to support specific kinds of gain-of-function research, categorized under Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens. These pathogens are defined as organisms likely to have high transmissibility and virulence, posing substantial risks to human health.

Nevertheless, the approach of conducting gain-of-function research has drawn criticism from figures like Dr. Robert Redfield and myself, who advocated for a complete moratorium on such studies as early as 2021. The risks involved remain too high.

Trump’s Executive Action Against Risky Research

In a decisive move, President Trump announced an executive order prohibiting federal funding for what he termed “dangerous” gain-of-function research. This order applies not only to programs within the United States but also extends to foreign entities, including research capabilities in China and Iran.

Whereas some scientists depend on collaborative international oversight, we believe that ensuring safety and containment beyond U.S. borders is inherently problematic. Moreover, the potential for bioterrorists to exploit such research poses a grim reality that cannot be ignored.

Recent advancements in artificial intelligence and computational analysis further highlight the diminishing need for direct gain-of-function experiments involving real viruses. Researchers can simulate viral behavior and transmission patterns, reducing the necessity of risky live studies.

The majority of Americans have come to believe that COVID-19 originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China. This belief has gained traction, supported by findings from intelligence agencies, including the FBI, and guidance from national public health organizations like the CDC. Therefore, one pressing question remains: should a lab origin of COVID-19 prompt a reevaluation of gain-of-function research protocols worldwide?

The answer is undoubtedly affirmative. The onset of the pandemic should serve as a clarion call for global leaders to impose a moratorium on this high-risk research to prevent future crises.

The obfuscation regarding the origins of COVID-19 during the initial outbreak was detrimental, underscoring the necessity of transparency and oversight in research practices. Trump’s executive order represents a much-needed intervention in a landscape marked by uncertainty and potential peril.

The White House fact sheet accompanying the executive order revealed significant deficiencies in the existing policies governing gain-of-function research. Many years of inadequate enforcement left gaps in regulatory measures that must now be addressed.

This executive measure entrusts the National Institutes of Health and other agencies with the task of assessing the threat levels associated with biological research. It specifically emphasizes the risk tied to accidental releases, particularly in light of laboratory incidents at locations such as the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

While funding pauses on gain-of-function research have occurred in the past, they have often failed due to lapses in compliance or policy reversals. An example can be traced back to 2017, when initial pauses did not yield the anticipated outcomes.

Despite these prior challenges, Trump’s executive order constitutes a vital preliminary step to mitigate the risks posed by such research. Comprehensive oversight and proactive measures are crucial in today’s rapidly evolving scientific landscape.

There is much work ahead to safeguard public health and prevent future pandemics. Nevertheless, this executive order lays the foundation for a more cautious approach to gain-of-function research.

Rethinking Safety in Research

Ultimately, establishing a robust framework for the oversight of gain-of-function research globally is imperative. If the COVID-19 pandemic has taught the world anything, it is that the balance between scientific inquiry and public safety must be reevaluated.

Moving forward, enhanced transparency, greater accountability, and stricter regulations surrounding high-risk research must become priorities for governments and scientific organizations across the globe. Only by undertaking these necessary steps can we hope to avert future public health disasters.