This bill halts federal funding for higher education institutions and research institutes involved in dangerous gain-of-function research on certain organisms, including coronaviruses and influenza viruses.
Roger Marshall
Senator
KS
The "Dangerous Viral Gain of Function Research Moratorium Act" prohibits federal research grants to higher education institutions or research institutes that conduct gain-of-function research on certain organisms. Gain-of-function research is defined as research that genetically alters an organism to change or enhance its biological functions, potentially increasing infectivity, transmissibility, or pathogenicity. This prohibition extends to research that could pose a threat to national security, public safety, or the health of humans, animals, or livestock. The specified organisms include influenza viruses, coronaviruses, agents or toxins on the Select Agents and Toxins List, or any synthetic construct of such.
Federal Grants Banned for 'Gain-of-Function' Research Under New Proposal
The "Dangerous Viral Gain of Function Research Moratorium Act" aims to cut off federal funding for colleges and research centers that tinker with viruses and other organisms in ways that could make them more dangerous. Specifically, it targets research that genetically tweaks organisms to boost their biological functions—think increased infectivity, ability to spread, or overall threat level (SEC. 2).
Lab Coats and Red Tape
This bill is all about drawing a line in the sand when it comes to what kind of research Uncle Sam is willing to pay for. "Gain-of-function" research, in a nutshell, means altering an organism's genetic code to enhance its capabilities. This can include making viruses more infectious or transmissible. The proposed ban covers a wide range of organisms, including influenza and coronaviruses, as well as agents on the Select Agents and Toxins List. It even includes any man-made versions of these nasties (SEC. 2).
Real-World Ripple Effects
Imagine a university lab where scientists are working to understand how flu viruses mutate to become more resistant to vaccines. If their work involves enhancing the virus's ability to infect cells, even for study purposes, that lab could lose federal funding under this act. Or consider an infectious disease researcher studying how coronaviruses jump from animals to humans. If those experiments enhance transmissibility, their grants could be on the chopping block.
On one hand, cutting funds for research that could potentially create a superbug sounds like a no-brainer for public safety. No one wants an accidental lab leak to spark the next pandemic. But here's the flip side: a lot of important research that helps us understand and fight diseases could fall under this definition. Think about scientists developing new vaccines or antiviral drugs. They often need to study how viruses evolve and adapt, and some of that work might involve enhancing certain viral functions in a controlled lab setting. The bill's broad definition of "gain-of-function" could make it tough to draw the line between risky experiments and essential research.
The Bottom Line
This bill throws down a significant challenge to the scientific community. It says, "If you're playing with fire, you're doing it on your own dime." While the goal is to prevent dangerous research, there's a real risk of chilling valuable scientific progress that actually protects us. It's like saying, "We need to stop car accidents, so let's ban all engine upgrades"—you might prevent some crashes, but you'll also stall innovation that could make cars safer overall.