In a surprisingly substantive hearing today, members of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee seemed to signal an emerging consensus that gain-of-function research that some believe is a likely cause of the COVID-19 pandemic requires significant additional government oversight, or even a complete halt.
The hearing, chaired by Democratic Senator Gary Peters (Mich.), was held to continue the Senate’s ongoing investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. While some senators focused to some extent on the familiar debate over natural origins versus a lab leak, the bulk of the discussion centered on the need for reform and additional oversight of gain-of-function research by the U.S. government.
The hearing featured four witnesses who have been involved to varying degrees in the debate over the most likely origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Gregory Koblentz George Mason University, Former Professor at Stanford University Stephen C. QuayProfessor at Rutgers University Dr. Richard EbrightProfessor at Tulane University Dr. Robert Garrythe highly controversial “Proximal origin of SARS-Cov-2“This paper was widely used to discredit proponents of the lab leak theory.”
“The fact that this hearing was held is a stark contrast to Democrats’ consistent denial of the government’s responsibility for the outbreak of the pandemic.”
Several sparks broke out during the hearing, especially during questioning of Dr. Ghaly, who was accused of scientific fraud by co-panelist Dr. Richard Ebright. Dr. Ghaly continued to position himself as one of a noticeably shrinking number of scientists who believe that the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan is the most likely source of the pandemic. He defended his work on the “Proximal Origins” paper, claiming, “It’s one of the most scrutinized papers in history. It’s been very well-preserved.”
Although emails exchanged between himself and his co-authors on the paper suggested that they all believed the leak from the laboratory to some extent at one time, Gary maintained that the change in his and co-author Christian G. Andersen’s attitudes was the result of adhering to the “scientific method” and not the result of a pressure campaign orchestrated by Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Francis Collins, and Jeremy Farrar, as many have argued. Several Republican members of the committee asked angry questions about the government’s censorship efforts in response to the paper, to which Gary defended himself by saying, “All we did was write the paper,” and insisted, “We didn’t put anything in the paper that we didn’t believe.”
But most senators seemed united in an emerging bipartisan consensus that gain-of-function research needs more government oversight. Even Democrats on the committee, led by Peters and New Hampshire Senator Maggie Hassan, asked Ghaly and Koblentz a series of pointed questions that suggested their belief that not only should government funding be curbed, but that private research should also be subject to government regulation.
For example, at one point Hassan confronted Koblenz about the current lack of oversight of labs conducting potentially risky research: “Private companies, universities, and research institutes are also conducting cutting-edge research that has the potential to cure diseases and boost the economy, but unless they receive federal funding, there is little federal oversight to ensure that private labs are conducting safe and ethical research.” Hassan also expressed concern that “researchers are conducting informal experiments that may be risky or unethical…are U.S. and international institutions adequately equipped to mitigate these risks?”
In his closing remarks, Peters went out of his way to praise committee member Rand Paul and declare that he agrees with Paul that Congress should do more to prevent future pandemics, then asked the panelists for recommendations on what the government should do about this dangerous research.
The Senate hearing stood in stark contrast to a recent House hearing on the same subject, perhaps due to the absence of controversial Dr. Anthony Fauci. Without Dr. Fauci sucking the air out of the room, senators from both parties seemed more willing to thoughtfully address the issue of dangerous research that, as Dr. Ebright put it, literally threatens the future of humanity.
Their work is especially timely: As nearly everyone at this hearing acknowledged, the current federal oversight system is a spectacular failure. Several recent high-profile cases attest to this..
Matt Kibbe, President Free the people He is also the producer of the new investigative series.Cover-up“teeth, Blaze TV“The fact that this hearing is happening at all marks a major step forward from the typical Democratic stance of completely denying the government’s responsibility for creating the pandemic. I am hopeful that Rand Paul’s work will lead to truth and full accountability,” he said at the hearing.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get stories like this directly to your inbox. Register here!
