approval from—the NIH’s IBC when they wanted to begin inserting clade I genes into clade II virus.
Figure 2: Overview of Proposed and Approved Experiment
The Committee only learned about the full extent of the proposed experiment and its approval after subpoena threats forced HHS and the NIH to make documents related to the risky experiment available in camera. In a March 19, 2024, letter to the Committee agreeing to the in camera review, HHS Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs Melanie Egorin admitted that “research involving bidirectional transfer of genes between clades I and II of the MPXV was considered and approved.”[1]
This deliberate, prolonged effort to deceive the Committee is unacceptable and potentially criminal.[2] HHS, the NIH, and NIAID continue to insist the GOFROC experiment transferring material from clade I into clade II was never conducted, despite being approved for a period of over eight years. However, HHS has repeatedly refused to produce any documents that corroborate this claim.
In civil law, when one party refuses to produce evidence in its possession, a jury is permitted to draw an adverse inference that the information not produced was unfavorable.[3] Absent production of sufficient corroborating documentation, it is
- ↑ Letter from The Honorable Melanie Egorin, HHS ASL, to The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Chair of the H. Comm. on Energy & Commerce, et al., (March 19, 2024) (included in Appendix I).
- ↑ See 18 U.S.C § 1505 and 18 U.S.C § 1001.
- ↑ International Union (UAW) v. NLRB, 459 F.2d 1329 (D.C. Cir. 1972) (“When a party has relevant evidence within his control which he fails to produce, that failure gives rise to an inference that the evidence is unfavorable to him.”)
6
