House Republicans Look to Revamp NIH

Congressional Republicans are unveiling a plan to revamp the National Institutes of Health (NIH) by stripping its authority to commission risky gain of function research and pausing such experiments until new reforms are put in place, as reported by Axios on Monday.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee has crafted a proposal that would introduce additional oversight measures for high-risk pathogen research proposals. These measures would transfer the NIH’s authority in conducting research to a “public, independent oversight entity” that would review, approve, reject, and supervise experiments.

The plan includes a temporary halt on gain of function research until proper safety protocols are established. It also suggests prohibiting the NIH from engaging in or supporting such research in countries categorized as foreign adversaries. National security assessments would be integrated into the NIH’s grant approval process, and there would be enhanced reporting and conflict-of-interest guidelines.

Moreover, the plan imposes five-year term limits for NIH institute directors, a move perceived as targeting former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci.

“Let us be clear,” stated Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., and senior House appropriator Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., in a joint statement. “We support the NIH and the crucial role it plays in serving Americans, advancing scientific discovery, and ensuring the U.S. remains a leader in basic science and biomedical research innovation. However, our allegiance to what an agency has been in the past should not prevent us from building on previous lessons or addressing areas of deficiency.”

“Our message to scientists, researchers, patient advocates, colleagues, and the American people is simple: Our doors are open. Collaborate with us. Be a partner. A thoughtful, participatory process will lead to better outcomes for all. The framework being unveiled on Friday marks the beginning of a robust dialogue, not a final product.”