Posted on 07/12/2020 10:56:17 AM PDT by libh8er
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced yesterday that it would be removing a three-year funding pause on so-called "gain-of-function" research. The type of research in question involves engineering viruses to give them capabilities not found in nature in order to facilitate research. This can be as simple as producing a higher yield for a certain vaccine strain, but has also involved giving viruses potentially dangerous traits. One of the most popular examples of the potential dangers of gain-of-function research is two 2011 studies that gave a variant of avian flu in ferrets the ability to spread through the air where it previously couldn't.
Pause, Un-pause The pause was announced in 2014, and shut off funding for 21 studies involving gain-of-function research. The move came as some scientists criticized such research for being unacceptably dangerous and followed revelations of safety concerns at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) labs involving the transport of anthrax and other virulent pathogens. The pause specifically targeted research into influenza, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and severe acute respiratory syndrome viruses. Now, the NIH has reversed the decision and says it will allow such studies to go forward, after completing a new review process. Some studies into influenza and MERS are still being held up, though, Science reports, and the rest will need to resubmit their proposals. For some, the decision may come too late, as their research is outdated by now. Others will simply have to update their proposals. Gain-of-function studies have long been controversial, as they involve giving potentially dangerous viruses new capabilities. There are good reasons for doing so, in many cases, but each situation must be individually assessed to determine if the probable benefits outweigh the risks of doing the research, according to an ethical assessment commissioned by the NIH after the pause was announced. Ultimately, the assessment concludes that while some research projects may be either clearly necessary or too dangerous, most will fall in the middle, and decisions on whether to proceed will be difficult.
Risky, But Worthwhile
With today's decision, the NIH seems to side with those arguing that gain-of-function research is ultimately beneficial to society. Indeed, many such studies involve giving human diseases the ability to infect animals, or helping them to provoke an immune response, both qualities that allow researchers to better study and develop drugs to fight them. For example, there are no small animal models for studying MERS as it's found in nature, so gain-of-function techniques are necessary to adapt the virus to them. Other uses for enhanced viruses include studying how a mutated virus might attack us, testing out vaccines and formulating public health responses to outbreaks. In addition, the term gain-of-function is at risk of being applied too broadly, some researchers worry, causing even studies that pose little risk of causing harm to be vilified. At it's most basic, the term applies to any research that gives a virus or microorganism an ability that it didn't have before, regardless of whether that ability has the potential to make it more dangerous. In some cases, the function that is gained can even make a virus less of a danger to humans. It's too early to say what kinds of studies will make it through the new NIH review process at the moment. As before, there will likely be risks, but also the possibility of previously unattainable insights.
Anthony Fauci’s sponsorship of gain of function research in Wuhan China resulted in the pandemic.
Just for grins, though, what new or improved attributes would you like to see for COVID-20?
Turns host bright blue, all over, as first symptom
Lose 10 lbs. per week, guaranteed!
Permanently hairless, except on your head
Speak Mandarin like a native, without lessons
RIEVERS!
WTF??? This should be outlawed
It's possible. This was resumed under Trump. I think what likely happened is NIHers (Fauci and/or others) LIED to the Trump admin in their risk/benefit analysis, and the Trump admin being generally supportive of progress and American leadership in science/ technology/ space/ medicine etc gave the go ahead. You have to remember the NIH with all the good work they do are still a govt organization supported by the gravy train. They need money. If they have to lie for it like any other govt agency, they will. But if Trump knew of the real risk involved this would have never gone through.
One thing for sure, you will know when you are getting closer to the truth when all these ‘fact check’ organizations start popping up at you during your research. The big boys are worried about something when they do that.
The article is three years old. This is showing that it started back up.
Yeah, Mengele did ‘research too.
@$$holes
Thanks for posters. From history to current events. How did we get here?...BUMP!
100% agree. Saving this. Future history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.