Page:Interim Staff Report on Investigation into Risky MPXV Experiment at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.pdf/43



The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers Chair Committee on Energy and Commerce U.S. House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chair Rodgers:

We are in receipt of your July 21, 2023, letter to the Department of Health and Human Services (Department) regarding research on mpox, formerly known as monkeypox, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

In response to your March 30 letter regarding a Science magazine article on mpox virus research, the Department informed the committee on April 26 that the experiment on which your letter was premised had not been conducted. We also clearly stated that NIAID does not presently have any plans to move forward with such an experiment. Despite this clear representation, on May 30 the committee sent another letter to the Department claiming it was “still unclear whether this research may have been conducted, or even how NIAID knows that this research was not conducted.” In a June 30 letter that was drafted and personally signed by Dr. Bernard Moss, an NIH Distinguished Investigator with whom you requested a videotaped transcribed interview regarding the experiment that has not happened, Dr. Moss himself reiterated that the experiment at issue had not been conducted and there were currently no plans to do so.

The Department believed—and continues to believe—these April 26 and June 30 letters reflect appropriate accommodations that addressed the committee’s questions regarding this matter. Moreover, the insinuation in the committee’s July 21 letter that the June 30 letter signed by Dr. Moss was not from Dr. Moss is entirely baseless. This unfounded questioning of the authenticity of Dr. Moss’s letter is inappropriate and appears to be part of this committee’s persistent refusal to accept the information provided in a good-faith effort to satisfy the committee’s inquiry. This type of accusation is detrimental to the continuing relationship between co-equal branches of government and serves as another example of the committee engaging in groundless attacks that amount to intimidation simply because it is dissatisfied with the Department’s response to its inquiries.