This House would ban gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens.

ethics

The COVID-19 origin debate made this question central. Defenders of GoF research argue it accelerates vaccine development; critics argue the downside scenario is civilizational.

Background

The 2014 US moratorium paused GoF research on influenza, SARS, and MERS; it lifted in 2017 under stricter review. The Wuhan Institute of Virology controversy reignited the debate after 2020 with no resolution on lab-leak likelihood. Marc Lipsitch (Harvard) has led the anti-GoF coalition, arguing a single accidental release at BSL-3 or BSL-4 could rival a natural pandemic. Defenders point to GoF's role in mapping spike-protein behavior; useful for mRNA vaccine development. A ban shifts the research to less-regulated jurisdictions; the question is whether less research-but-shifted is safer than more research-with-oversight.

Government opens with

Asymmetric risk: a single lab leak could kill millions; the marginal vaccine benefit is replaceable.

Opposition responds with

A ban shifts the research to less-regulated jurisdictions and forfeits the scientific dividend.

Take it. Against the AI.

Pick a side. Three minutes per speech. The AI takes the other side in your chosen format. Judge ballot at the end.

Open on this motion →

This week's motions

Monday, June 1, 2026

This House would require every social media platform to provide an algorithmic-feed off switch.

Sunday, May 31, 2026

This House would ban political advertising in the 60 days before an election.

Saturday, May 30, 2026

This House would ban facial recognition in public spaces.

Wednesday, June 3, 2026

This House would let people sell one of their kidneys.