CONGRESSIONAL GOOFING AROUND WITH GOF PART 1

THERE’S A POLITICIZING OF SCIENCE THESE DAYS. Lamentable but not surprising, given the current dysfunction of our national legislative body. 

As a case in point, Republicans are keen on convincing themselves (in many cases, in retrospect) that activities of January 6, 2021, were merely touristic, not the out-and-out mob that we all verified on national TV that day.

Another example of this dysfunction is the recent grilling of Dr. Anthony Fauci on matters of his handling of the Covid pandemic. Forgetting for the moment Trump’s abysmal lack of leadership during the pandemic (his “Hoax” comments, his denials, his downplaying of its seriousness, his asinine remedies, and the rest), Republicans are now scraping the edges of science to support absurd conspiracies. 

Let’s see the hands of those who believe Marjorie Taylor Greene has a whit of anything resembling scientific thought. (“Jewish space lasers,” anyone?) And to observe MTG’s congressional arrogance in saying “You belong in prison,” all the while refusing to give Dr. Fauci his correct title.

At the heart of this is crass ignorance of science and the scientific method of thought. As an example today, let’s examine one of the current buzz phrases: Gain of Function, “GOF,” for short. As a source, I turn to the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the lively discussions taking place on its Member Community Forum. 

Here are GOF facts as opposed to Congressional GOOFING around. Tidbits here in Parts 1 and 2 today and tomorrow are gleaned from comments of scientists Robert Dodge and Ronnie Hawkings, the latter having already appeared here at SimanaitisSays “On Environmental Philosophy.”

Robert Dodge, Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin, Primary Scientific Discipline: Biotechnology.

GOF, Gain of Function. Dr. Dodge writes, “ ‘Gain of function’ is a general term implying giving an organism some new function, whether or not the organism is a pathogen, or that the new function is dangerous to humans.” Virologists might employ this technique to investigate a pathogen’s susceptibility to humans or development of a vaccine combating it.

Under discussion at the Fauci hearings was U.S. funding committed to research at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), of which more anon.  

“As the term is applied to PPP [Potential Pandemic Pathogens],” Dodge continues, “there are specific guidelines for approval, since the risk level is higher. In the specific case of the Wuhan research referenced by the subcommittee, the virus to be modified was WIV1-COV, which was not known to be a human pathogen, and therefore not a PPP. In the hearing Dr. Fauci pointed out that WIV1-COV was so genetically different from SARS-COV2 that it couldn’t be the source of the pandemic.”

WIV and the Chinese Government. “As Dr. Fauci noted in his testimony,” Dodge notes, “the US grant under discussion was for $125,000; the budget of the Wuhan Institute is $5 billion, so research outside of US surveillance goes on all the time.”

Science, after all, is an international endeavor. Another example, by the way, is auto production: Chinese production of GM Buicks continues to dwarf GM’s U.S. operation).

Tomorrow in Part 2, Drs. Dodge and Hawkins discuss lab/wild Covid origins and whether definitive answers will ever result (with Congressional wisdom or otherwise). ds 

© Dennis Simanaitis, SimanaitisSays.com, 2024