Roger Marshall: “certainly I understand the Senator from Massachusetts' comments and his concerns. I would still continue to argue that…”

“certainly I understand the Senator from Massachusetts' comments and his concerns. I would still continue to argue that the benefits have not outweighed the risk. We have not seen any benefits from this type of research. The whole concept, just going back to what the definition of ``viral gain-of-function research'' is--we wouldn't do it if it is causing potential for harm, but we can still continue to research flu vaccines. We can continue to research avian influenza. There are all sorts of things we could do. But let's not make avian influenza worse. Let's not put a protein spike on it that is going to make it stick to human lung cells like they did with SARS-CoV-1. The justification of gain-of-function research hinges on its purported benefits, as you described, such as improved preparedness for pandemics; however, it is important to scrutinize whether these benefits are indeed reliable and they outweigh the risks. Critics argue that the knowledge gained from such research can often be obtained through safer means, such as computational models or studying natural outbreaks. Moreover, these resources invested in high- risk research can be redirected toward strengthening public health infrastructure, improving our surveillance system, and developing broad-spectrum antivirals and vaccines. Let's quit throwing good money after bad money.…”