Tuesday, June 4, 2024

The End of Public Purpose and the Collapse of Public Trust: The Sheep Cannot Safely Graze

 

I've been following the appalling revelations of misconduct spilling forth from the House’s Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

Among the most grievous findings was evidence that Fauci's close associate at NIAID, Morens, sought to evade public transparency requirements of the Freedom of Information Act by communicating on private emails and by misspelling words to avoid search inquiries.

See McKay, B. (2024, June 3). Anthony Fauci Defends Federal Covid Response. The Wall Street Journal https://www.wsj.com/politics/anthony-fauci-to-appear-before-house-committee-on-covid-06142639?st=jdsgppunjcpdd8y&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

What were they seeking to hide?

It has become clear that one bit of information that was selectively hidden concerned the royalty payments made by Pfizer and Moderna directly to NIH and NIAID, which personally enriched scientists affiliated with those agencies. 

That revenue stream reported to be $710 million to the NIH and $690 to NIAID between 2021 and 2023 is a DIRECT CONFLICT OF INTEREST where personal gain ensures regulatory capture and undermines public purpose.

While being personally enriched by royalty payments, Fauci and his "cronies" (this is the only apt term) deliberately suppressed information about pandemic origins and the efficacy of vaccines and other treatments.

Why was the "lab leak" hypothesis systematically denied and symbolically rendered radioactive by labeling it "racist"?

Why was the mRNA vaccine platform elevated and all information regarding its failures and hazards suppressed or labeled "misinformation" and marginalized?

Why were all critics de-platformed?

What was the intent that drove this unprecedented totalitarianism?

Today I was reading a seminal piece on risk by Brian Wynne titled, "May the Sheep Safely Graze? A Reflexive View of the Expert-Knowledge Divide" and pondering the scale of debasement of expert, institutional knowledge in pandemic governance.

Wynne observed that "Institutions which can be seen to be reconstructing history so as to confirm their own blamelessness whilst attempting to manufacture public trust and legitimation are prima facie likely to be undermining public trust rather than enhancing it" (p. 51)   

This passage struck me as I observed Fauci and other bureaucrats decry the decline in public trust in so-called democratic institutions such as NIH, NIAID, and the WHO.

These institutions have sought to centralize power over people's bodies and communications at an unprecedented level. 

These institutions have deceived publics by withholding vital information that undermined their draconian directives and mandates.

These institutions have deleted and otherwise hidden information that is legally required to be recorded and made available to public queries.

For example, as Shellenberg reports:

there was never definitive evidence that the vaccines would prevent transmission. In December 2020, the FDA determined that “data are not available to make a determination about how long the vaccine will provide protection, nor is there evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from person to person.”

The mRNA failures were documented before the OSHA mandate.

I was carefully following news reports of "breakthrough" infections and have documentation from early in 2021 that the vaccines were not effective in preventing contagion and transmission. Nonetheless, mandates were rolled out and adverse reactions censored and denied, erased from social media by being categorized as "mal-information" ("true" information regarded as politically non-expedient) by the new self-appointed guardians of truth (many of which, I'm sorry to write, were academics).

The medical establishment proved its cowardice in failing to recognize and report adverse events, as I have documented many times on this blog. For instance, my health insurance company directed me NOT to go to the hospital despite severe chest pressure and heart pain that lasted 5 days after my first moderna vaccine.

The decline in public trust in public institutions is a direct result of the dispensation of public purpose by those institutions.

Authoritarianism, censorship, and the de-platforming of opposition and criticism are the ailments that are delivering skepticism and resistance.

Truth and reconciliation are the only way forward but sadly and perhaps not accidentally, these issues of institutional corruption have been politicized and coded "red" so that a factionalized public is unable to launch a concerted campaign demanding truth and reform.

Technocracy wins. Public trust disappears. Democracy fades. The sheep cannot safely graze.

 

 


 

Sunday, May 19, 2024

Normalizing Deviance: The Thanatopolitics of Bio-Security and Biocapitalism



About 10 days ago, I described the symbolic ruptures and catastrophic networks of the the bio-capital-security complex, which includes corporations, government agencies, scientists/academics, and "civil society" organizations that symbiotically amplify institutional and/or elite agendas:An Essay on the Failing Bio-Capital-Security Complex

The formula for failing is simple: risk seeking behavior leads to crises that are ignored or exploited by well positioned networks and organizations

I study and teach risk & crisis communications. Risks are pursued and hazards ignored when profits or power are at play, as my case studies of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, the BP oil spill, the Fukushima crisis, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear crisis, and now the pandemic (2020-2022) demonstrate.

To use the language of  Diane Vaughan in her study of the Challenger disaster, "deviance" is normalized when observations of harm and warnings are censored or otherwise repressed, as discussed in this review by WSJ reporter JB Meigs:

Meigs, J. B. (2024, May 1 0). "Challenger" review: How the space shuttle disaster happened. The Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/arts-culture/books/challenger-review-how-disasters-happen-2e3f41a2?st=c77eqc3ii5g7fou&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Quote: "It’s tempting to assume that if we were in a risky enterprise we would spot the danger and raise the alarm. But the study of disasters shows that such assumptions are too easy. In any organization, the pressure to normalize deviance is strong; even the best-intentioned managers succumb to groupthink; and rules too rigidly followed can make it hard to cope with contingencies"KEY IDEA: pressure to normalize deviance leads to disasters!


Deviance is normalized when hazards - especially those offloaded to less-powerful "others" - are ignored because of "perverse incentives."

We see it now coming out in the pandemic. Gain-of-function research is being done haphazardly and is funded by governments and elite networks without transparency and accountability. Everyone should read the Congressional testimony about NIH funding of GoF: https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-nih-repeatedly-refutes-ecohealth-alliance-president-dr-peter-daszaks-testimony-tabak-testimony-reveals-federal-grant-procedures-in-need-of-serious-reform/

Meanwhile, a historic lapse in medical ethics drives efforts to genetically engineer the synthesis of human proteins through mandated injectables, with no product liabilities.

Gene transfection experiments are being conducted on people with adverse outcomes denied.

But the externalities are getting difficult to ignore. The public health is plummeting in highly-vaccinated nations:

Jon Ungoed-Thomas (2024, May 19). Heart patients forced to wait over a year for treatment in England. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/may/19/heart-patients-wait-year-treatment-england-disease-waiting-lists

The British Heart Foundation (BHF) warns that heart care waiting lists are now at a record high, reaching 414,596 at the end of March 2024 in England, almost double what it was in 2020. The number of people waiting longer than a year for heart tests and treatments has risen to 10,893. Four years ago, the figure was just 53. ….
An analysis by the BHF published in January found the number of people dying in England before age 75 from heart and circulatory ­diseases had risen to its highest level in a decade. In 2022 more than 39,000 died in England prematurely of cardiovascular conditions, including heart attacks, coronary heart disease and stroke – an average of 750 people a week. It reported the annual total of deaths as the highest since 2008.


COVID-19, genetic susceptibilities, and lifestyle will take the blame but don't under-estimate the impact of the vaccines. The virus contains the optimized ACE-2 receptors and furin cleavage to enable virus to hijack cells. But the vaccine causes your body to produce almost identical spike proteins for a protracted duration, throughout your body, with the added hazard of the delivery mechanism - the so-called lipid nanopoarticles that are prone to cause clotting and auto-immune problems.

In a recent interview, Former CDC Director Robert Redfield (see here) lamented the loss of public confidence in public health agencies because of a lack of transparency around the vaccines, which he reportedly stated “saved a lot of lives” but also made some people “quite ill.”

“Those of us that tried to suggest there may be significant side effects from vaccines ... we kind of got canceled because no one wanted to talk about the potential that there was a problem from the vaccines because they were afraid that that would cause people not to want to get vaccinated,” Dr. Redfield said.

“I have a number of people that are quite ill and they never had COVID, but they are ill from the vaccine,” he continued. “And we just have to acknowledge that.”


CANCELED

Redfield is among a group of former vaccine advocates who are now "acknowledging" vaccine injuries, although all mentions of adverse effects were systematically ignored, censored and erased in 2021 and 2022.

I witnessed, in the flesh, medical professionals refusing to acknowledge vaccine injuries. In my personal case, the nurse line of my insurance company directed me not to go to the hospital, despite tremendous and unremitting chest pressure and breathing difficulties after the vaccine for days. I believe this study explains my experience, which is only "rare" because it was not adequately reported:

Bakos, Tamás, et al. ( 2024). "mRNA-LNP COVID-19 Vaccine Lipids Induce Complement Activation and Production of Proinflammatory Cytokines: Mechanisms, Effects of Complement Inhibitors, and Relevance to Adverse Reactions" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 25, no. 7: 3595. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25073595

Many people had adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines, and some people died. People in our network died and had life-threatening reactions, almost all of which medical professionals neglected to report or even acknowledge. Many of those injured were under 40 years old.

Many people refused to acknowledge or discuss vaccine injuries. Some of those people villified any form of resistance to mandates and cancelled friends and family who disagreed with the grand experimentation upon the population.

Propaganda was used as never before to promote a single fabricated narrative of virus origins and to stigmatize and de-platform all dissent. Documentation of the mis-use of pandemic risk communication is well established. The country was deliberately divided into the "vaccinated" and the "unvaccinated" by health authorities, as I document here.

Forgiveness is going to take a long time. People lost lives and health. Those who refused were villified and censored. Many people lost jobs for resisting. Those who had adverse events and those who resisted were ignored or cancelled by the petty tyrants.

It will take a long time for forgiveness but before that can be achieved there must be truth and reconciliation and I don't see that happening.

Instead, it appears that Gain-of-function research on viruses continues and includes bird flu and other nasties as bio-security is cast as both defensive and offensive and as bio-capital cannabilizes the human body.

Meanwhile the material and symbolic failures of the bio-security are becoming increasingly apparent.


Thursday, May 9, 2024

An Essay on the Failing Bio-Capital-Security Complex

 An essay on the failing bio-security complex, with implications drawn for liberal-democratic biopolitics.


As I discuss and document in this recent post, Bio-economy and thanatopolitics, the 21st century was supposed to be the century of the life sciences, especially bio-engineering.

Biden endorsed the 21st century bio-economy in the "Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy." September 9, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/09/12/executive-order-on-advancing-biotechnology-and-biomanufacturing-innovation-for-a-sustainable-safe-and-secure-american-bioeconomy/ 

But the promise of bio-capital foundered on the practical realities of engineering life (e.g., see Kaushik Sunder Rajan Biocapital: The constitution of postgenomic life and Erica Borg & Amedeo Policante's Mutuant Ecologies: Manufacturing life in the age of genomic capital).

Bio-engineering faces challenges of delivery (i.e., vector) and deliverable (including synthetic mRNA, DNA(fragments), contaminants.

Vectors for delivering DNA and mRNA are especially hazardous, whether viral or lipid nano-particle (e.g., PEG). 

Vectors and/or deliverables cause inflammation and clotting problems, which have been documented in scientific and medical publications (see my summary here), as well as in media coverage prior to 2020. Newly documented problems are especially alarming, such as DNA fragments in the Pfizer vaccine and frameshifting problems with protein synthesis caused by mRNA vaccines.

Yet, scientific and medical research and critics were ignored or de-platformed. Anecdotal (but authentic) subjective accounts of  vaccine adverse events were labeled "mal-information" by the newly appointed truth brokers, leading to alleged "mal-informants" being discredited, de-platformed and stigmatized. 

What were elevated institutionally were the promise and enforced delivery of experimental "vaccines," which tested the bio-tech-biosecurity phantasy of remotely engineering in situ cellular synthesis by delivering a "vaccine."

The bio-tech century would be delivered regardless of its readiness or its ethics. 

The acceptable discourse about the origins, hazards and governance of the SARS-CoV2 virus was highly filtered and constrained. Dissenters of many origins were de-platformed, ousted and symbolically annihilated.

The mediated campaign of "safe and effective" was highly profitable for those bio-economy "stakeholders" whose time had arrived for demonstrating the full potential of their tech, with the threat of the virus used to rationalize all manner of ethical violations of medical and democratic principles.

Increasing documentation of the hazards of the mandated experimental transfection-based vaccines pulls back the curtain on the mantra of" safe and effective" that was delivered through a media/social-media campaign whose engineering exceeded the propaganda campaigns of the 20th century world wars.

That propaganda campaign used fear, de-humanization, scapegoating and gas-lighting to enforce its agandas. Just as elements of the legacy media and their publics demanded the unvaccinated be dragged away into concentration camps, the propaganda campaign tempered in 2012, but did not fully withdraw and continued to push endless boosters, despite evidence that risks for adverse events accumulates across exposures.  

Today, the public has become restless as their biovitalities are failing due to the hazards of the spike protein (both viral and vaccine-induced) and the dangerous delivery vectors, as well as the psychological trauma of four years of propaganda designed to incite fear of biological and social contagion. 

Adverse events have escaped engineered containment. Biological, psychological and social adverse events from the great experiment are cascading, with unknown, but surely adverse, events before us.

The bio-capital-security complex is on the defensive. Beware because it seeks to administer all life, including genetic and molecular "building" blocks at the micro scale and  psycho-social fields at the macro scale.

 

RELEVANT RESEARCH

Porter, H. (2016). Ferreting things out: Biosecurity, pandemic flu and the transformation of experimental systems. BioSocieties (2016) 11, 22–45. doi:10.1057/biosoc.2015.4; published online 30 March 2015

Abstract: At the end of 2011, microbiologists created a scientific and media frenzy by
genetically engineering mutant avian flu viruses that transmitted through the air between ferrets,
the animal most widely used to model human flu. Though the studies offered new evidence of
avian flu’s pandemic potential, they were nevertheless restricted from publication because of
concerns about their possible threat to human health and security. 

In this article, I examine the mutant flu controversy to show how nascent biosecurity regulations engender transformations in experimental systems; namely, in the use and interpretation of experimental organisms, and in the establishment of a culture of security among a globalizing community of scientists. 

Drawing on analyses of academic publications, interviews with microbiologists and biosecurity regulators, and ethnographic observations at a biosecure laboratory, I show how these experimental transformations
are structured by the local demands of scientific production as well as by broader concerns
about biosecurity made visible in formal and informal regulations on scientific conduct. I further
argue that while the controversy signals unprecedented controls over publication in the biological
sciences, such controls build upon and extend on-going shifts in scientific thought and practice in
the wake of pandemic threats.

MY RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS

Nadesan, M. (2022). Crises Narratives Defining the Covid-19 Pandemic: Expert Uncertainties and Conspiratorial Sensemaking. American Behavioral Scientist. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642221085893

Nadesan, M. (2021). Technological Utopia, End Times and the SARS-CoV-2 Crisis: A Genealogy of Crisis Ideoscapes and Mediascapes. Communication +1, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.7275/x6qx-0r31. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cpo/vol8/iss1/8/

Nadesan, M. (2011, 2008). Governmentality, Biopower, and Everyday Life. New York: Routledge. First published 2008. Reprinted in paperback and electronic forms with a 2011 Reprint edition publication date.

Nadesan, M. (2013) The demise of liberal biopolitics: Wealth accumulation and disposable populations. In Claudio Colaguori (ed.) Security, Life and Death: Governmentality and Biopower in the Post-9/11 Era. De Sitter Publications.

 


Wednesday, April 17, 2024

Bio-Economy Thanatopolitics: Gene-Therapy Risks - Past, Present, and Future


In 2007, Rick Weiss reported for the Washington Post potential hazards of genetic medicine and the failed regulatory apparatuses designed to protect patient safety and public health.

You will find below a short excerpt from the article, which is indexed online by Georgetown, but no longer seems to be available. Here is the link to the Georgetown index: https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/511426

The content of the original article appears to have been taken down by Google in response to a recent (2024) DMCA (Copyright) Complaint: https://lumendatabase.org/notices/40332238#

I will not be posting the entire article and the purpose of the excerpted materials is educational:

Weiss, R. (2007, August 6). Death points to risks in research. The Washington Post, A1.

Robb Mohr sat by his wife's hospital bed two weeks ago, trying to take it all in. His wife, Jolee Mohr, was breathing with the help of a ventilator in a Chicago intensive care unit -- her body bloated from internal bleeding, her liver failing -- and no one could figure out what was wrong with her.

Robb Mohr had his suspicions. Jolee, 36, had been feeling fine just a few weeks earlier, save for occasional stiffness from her arthritis. Her decline had begun the day after her right knee was injected with an experimental drug made of genetically engineered viruses. Doctors at the hospital shared his concern.

Jolee Mohr died from massive bleeding and organ failure July 24, leaving behind a 5-year-old daughter and a host of questions about why she was recruited into a gene therapy experiment whose chief goal was to test the safety of a novel arthritis treatment that had virtually no chance of helping her.

No one knows yet whether the treatment was to blame. Of the dozens of other volunteers who got the injections, only Mohr suffered anything more than short-lived side effects, said officials at Targeted Genetics Corp., the Seattle company that makes the product. The Food and Drug Administration and the company are investigating.

But a close look at the events leading to Mohr's death reveals failures in the safety net that is supposed to protect people from the risks of medical experimentation -- and in particular, the risks of gene therapy, which for 17 years has struggled in vain to live up to its optimistic name.

Breaches of clinical research standards and a federal oversight system that allowed key decisions to be made behind closed doors may have helped draw Mohr into an experiment that was not, her husband says, what she thought it was....

... Suspecting a possible link to the experimental drug, the doctors in Chicago contacted the FDA.

Federal regulations require a company to report any serious complications that are even "possibly" related to an experimental treatment "as soon as possible" and no later than seven days after learning of it. But Targeted Genetics and Trapp had at first classified the problems as not serious, and later classified them as serious but unrelated to the treatment. So no FDA report was made, and the study went on, with other volunteers unaware of the problems.

That reflects a widespread problem in clinical trials, said Adil Shamoo, a professor at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and editor in chief of the journal Accountability in Research.

"There are no uniform standards for 'adverse events' reporting," Shamoo said. "And there is no motivation to report them. . . . No one wants to show their dirty linen." Dirty linen can drag down a company's bottom line, and Targeted Genetics, like all companies, puts a lot of work into keeping that line afloat.

One reassuring aspect of tgAAC94's engineering is that genes required for replication have been removed, so the viruses cannot make more of themselves. But animal studies conducted by the company have shown that the product can escape from the joint space and travel about the body, perhaps catching the attention of the immune system. In general, the immune system mounts much more robust -- sometimes dangerously robust -- responses after a second exposure. In fact, both shots Mohr got were the real thing, the company said.

In order to learn more about Targeted Genetics, I tracked the company over time. The company assumed the name of AmpliPhi Biosciences Corporation in March 2011. The chain of acquisitions after then has been non-stop. 

The life-sciences and bio-engineering were supposed to fuel the 21st century's economic engine, as optimistically reported in 2011:

“...the entire complex of the life sciences and the biopharmaceutical industry has been portrayed as the industry that will dominate the economic regime of accumulation in the new century” p. 43

Styhre, A., & Sundgren, M. (2011). The Bioeconomy, Biocapital and the New Regime of Science-based Innovation. In Venturing into the Bioeconomy: Professions, Innovation, Identity (pp. 42-99). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. P. 43

In 2012, the Biden administration issued an executive order on this "bio-economy," pushing to make it a reality despite years of failed projects and lack of successes due to the complexities of biological systems and the challenges of delivering genetic changes using (primarily adeno) viruses. 

The lipid nanonparticles that encase the experimental mRNA vaccines were supposed to be less risky than the viral vectors but have turned out to be highly inflammatory, persistent and disease-producing. The lipid nanoparticles may also produce clots.

Robert Malone was involved in early testing of these lipid nanoparticles and his explanations for their failures are highly instructive. You can read his work here:

Review and Commentary: "Strategies to reduce the risks of mRNA drug and vaccine toxicity" https://open.substack.com/pub/rwmalonemd/p/review-and-commentary-strategies?r=q89bo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Malone, R.W. (2023, Nov 16). Statement and Testimony, COVID-19 Vax Injuries. A statement prepared for the November 13 House of Representatives Hearing. https://open.substack.com/pub/rwmalonemd/p/statement-and-testimony-covid-19?r=q89bo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Documentation of the risks of lipid nanoparticles can be found elsewhere, as well:

Lipid nanoparticle structural components, production methods, route of administration and proteins produced from complexed mRNAs all present toxicity concerns.”

Bitounis, D. et al. Strategies to reduce the risks of mRNA drug and vaccine toxicity. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 23 January 2024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41573-023-00859-3; PMID: 38263456


Biden's bio-economy is challenged by the complexity of human biology and by the challenges associated with creating safe delivery mechanisms for genetic engineering.

Even CRISPR, that much heralded tool of genetic engineering, has been flawed with unexpected downstream mutation effects from gene editing:

Schaofer, K.A., Wu, W-H., Colgan, D.F., Tsang, S.H., Bassuk, A.G., & Mahajan, V. B. (2017) Unexpected mutations after CRISPR-Cas9 editing in vivo. Nature Methods, 14(6), 547.

To the Editor: CRISPR–Cas9 editing shows promise for correcting disease-causing mutations. For example, in a recent study we used CRISPR-Cas9 for sight restoration in blind rd1 mice by correcting a mutation in the Pde6b gene1. 

However, concerns persist regarding secondary mutations in regions not targeted by the single guide RNA (sgRNA)2. Algorithms generate likely off-target sites for a given gRNA, but these algorithms may miss mutations.

Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) has been used to assess the presence of small insertions and deletions (indels)3 but not to probe for single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) in a whole organism. We performed WGS on a CRISPR–Cas9-edited mouse to identify all off-target mutations and found an unexpectedly high number of SNVs compared with the widely accepted assumption that CRISPR causes mostly indels at regions homologous to the sgRNA.

Downstream mutations! Yikes. Turns out that the mRNA vaccines produced mutation errors as well!

Joe Pinkstone, Science Correspondent 6 December 2023 One in four who had Pfizer Covid jabs experienced unintended immune response https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/06/mrna-jabs-modena-pfizer-quarter-unintended-response/

The upshot of all this is that our institutional authorities and decision-makers are going to move ahead with the bioeconomy whether it is ready or not for the safety engineering the "meat" that is our bodies and minds:

Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy. September 9, 2022.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/09/12/executive-order-on-advancing-biotechnology-and-biomanufacturing-innovation-for-a-sustainable-safe-and-secure-american-bioeconomy/

Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of my Administration to coordinate a whole-of-government approach to advance biotechnology and biomanufacturing towards innovative solutions in health, climate change, energy, food security, agriculture, supply chain resilience, and national and economic security. Central to this policy and its outcomes are principles of equity, ethics, safety, and security that enable access to technologies, processes, and products in a manner that benefits all Americans and the global community and that maintains United States technological leadership and economic competitiveness.

Biotechnology harnesses the power of biology to create new services and products, which provide opportunities to grow the United States economy and workforce and improve the quality of our lives and the environment. The economic activity derived from biotechnology and biomanufacturing is referred to as “the bioeconomy.” 

The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the vital role of biotechnology and biomanufacturing in developing and producing life-saving diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines that protect Americans and the world. Although the power of these technologies is most vivid at the moment in the context of human health, biotechnology and biomanufacturing can also be used to achieve our climate and energy goals, improve food security and sustainability, secure our supply chains, and grow the economy across all of America.

For biotechnology and biomanufacturing to help us achieve our societal goals, the United States needs to invest in foundational scientific capabilities. 

We need to develop genetic engineering technologies and techniques to be able to write circuitry for cells and predictably program biology in the same way in which we write software and program computers; unlock the power of biological data, including through computing tools and artificial intelligence; and advance the science of scale‑up production while reducing the obstacles for commercialization so that innovative technologies and products can reach markets faster.

Simultaneously, we must take concrete steps to reduce biological risks associated with advances in biotechnology. We need to invest in and promote biosafety and biosecurity to ensure that biotechnology is developed and deployed in ways that align with United States principles and values and international best practices, and not in ways that lead to accidental or deliberate harm to people, animals, or the environment. 

In addition, we must safeguard the United States bioeconomy, as foreign adversaries and strategic competitors alike use legal and illegal means to acquire United States technologies and data, including biological data, and proprietary or precompetitive information, which threatens United States economic competitiveness and national security.

cont. at link above