Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Argumentation in Context
Vol. 12:3 (2023) ► pp.307–343

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Covid-19 and public debate over gain-of-function research on potentially pandemic pathogens

 | University of Pittsburgh
Published online: 15 December 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.00020.mit
Abstract
Controversial “gain-of-function” research (GoFR) aims to improve understanding of human health by studying behavior of genetically altered viruses in laboratory experiments. GoFR proponents tout its potential to support public health disease surveillance, drug development and vaccine innovation, while skeptics warn that unplanned laboratory release of genetically altered pathogens could harm millions in pandemics caused by science. Public interest in GoFR grew during the Covid-19 pandemic, as theories circulated that SARS-CoV-2 was the result of GoFR conducted at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology. Analysis of a 2015 public debate on GoFR research, reconstructed according to pragma-dialectical argumentation theory, sheds light on the increasingly salient scientific controversy and contributes to the growing literature on argumentation and health.
Article outline
  • Argumentative context
    • Critical approach
  • Confrontation stage
    • Opening stage
  • Argumentation stage
    • Introductory student speeches and open cross-examination
    • Introductory expert speeches and open cross-examination
    • Student prebuttals
    • Expert rebuttals
    • Concluding stage
    • Conclusion
    • Topical implications
    • Practical implications
    • Conceptual implications
  • Notes
  • Works cited
References (69)
Works cited
Aakhus, Mark, and Sally Jackson. 2005. Technology, interaction, and design. In K. L. Fitch & R. E. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of Language and Social Interaction (pp. 411–435). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Akpan, Nsikan, and Victoria Jaggard. 2020. Fauci: No scientific evidence the coronavirus was made in a Chinese lab. National Geographic, May 4, [URL]
Arjunan, Akshaya. 2015. Statement. Eighth Marcella L. Finegold Memorial Public Debate. Montefiore Hospital, University of Pittsburgh. April 27. Pittsburgh, PA, [URL]
Bigi, Sara. 2014. Evaluating argumentative moves in medical consultations. In S. Rubinelli & F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Argumentation and Health (pp. 51–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borger, Julian. 2020. Mike Pompeo: ‘enormous evidence’ coronavirus came from Chinese lab. The Guardian (London), May 3, [URL]
Burke, Kenneth. 1984. Permanence and change: An anatomy of purpose. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafets, Zev. 2006. Ministers of debate. The New York Times, March 19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Collins, Francis S. 2017. NIH lifts funding pause on gain-of-function research. Statement from the NIH director, December 17, [URL]
Duprex, W. Paul, Ron A. M. Fouchier, Michael J. Imperiale, Marc Lipsitch, & David A. Relman. 2015. Gain-of-function experiments: time for a real debate. Nature Reviews Microbiology 13(1), 58–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Argumentation studies’ five estates. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse. Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-dialectics (pp. 81–109). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst, and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, et al. 1996. Fundamentals of argumentation theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst, Scott C. Jacobs, & Sally A. Jackson. 1993. Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst. 2003. A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Pragma-dialectical analysis of argumentative discourse. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse (pp. 543–555). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
English, Eric, Stephen Llano, Gordon R. Mitchell, Catherine E. Morrison, John Rief, and Carly Woods. 2007. Debate as a weapon of mass destruction. Communication & Critical/Cultural Studies 41:222–226. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fahnestock, Jeanne and Marie Secor. 1988. The stases in scientific and literary argument. Written Communication 5(4):427–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fauci, Anthony, and Rand Paul. 2020. Statements. Hearing before U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. July 20. [URL]
Goodnight, G. Thomas. 2006. Complex cases and legitimation inference: Extending the Toulmin model to deliberative argument in controversy. In David Hitchcock and Bart Verheij (Eds.), Arguing on the Toulmin Model: New Essays in Argument Analysis and Evaluation (pp. 39–48). Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodnight, G. Thomas and Roosmaryn Pilgram. 2011. A doctor’s ethos enhancing maneuvers in medical consultation. In E. Feteris, B. Garssen, & F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Keeping in Touch with Pragma-Dialectics (pp. 135–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodrum, Felicia, et al. 2023. Virology under the microscope – a call for rational discourse. Journal of Virology 97(2):1–11. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, Genevieve, and Ben Wetherbee. 2022. Masked meanings: COVID-19 and the subversion of stasis hierarchy. Rhetoric Review 41(4):249–265. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Graham, D. W. (2021). Heraclitus. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (Ed.), [URL]
Greene, Ronald W., and Darrin Hicks. 1995. Lost convictions: Debating both sides and the ethical self-fashioning of liberal citizens. Cultural Studies 191, 100–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Conscientious objections: Debating both sides and the cultures of democracy. Paper presented at the Sixteenth NCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, Alta, UT, July 30–August 2.
Herfst, Sander, et al. 2012. Airborne transmission of influenza A/H5N1 virus between ferrets. Science 3361, 1534–1541. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hite, Adele H., and Andrew Carter. 2019. Examining assumptions in science-based policy: Critical health communication, stasis theory, and public health nutrition guidance. Rhetoric of Health and Medicine 2(2):147–175. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoppmann, Michael J. 2014. A modern theory of stasis. Philosophy & Rhetoric 47(3):273–296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Imperiale, Michael. 2015. Statement. Eighth Marcella L. Finegold Memorial Public Debate. Montefiore Hospital, University of Pittsburgh. April 27. Pittsburgh, PA, [URL]
Isenstadt, Alex. 2020. GOP memo urges anti-China assault over coronavirus. Politico, April 24, [URL]
Jackson, Sally. 2015. Design thinking in argumentation theory and practice. Argumentation 291:243–263. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kock, Christian. 2009. Choice is not true or false: The domain of rhetorical argumentation. Argumentation 231, 61–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Deliberative rhetoric: Arguing about doing. Windsor, ON: Windsor Studies in Argumentation. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labrie, Nanon H. M. 2015. The promise and prospects of argumentation for public health communication. Journal of Public Health Research 4(1), 47–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labrie, Nanon and Peter J. Schulz. 2014. Does argumentation matter? A systematic literature review on the role of argumentation in doctor-patient communication. Health Communication 29(10), 996–1008. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levine, Arthur. 2015. Statement. Eighth Marcella L. Finegold Memorial Public Debate. Montefiore Hospital, University of Pittsburgh. April 27. Pittsburgh, PA, [URL]
Lipsitch, Marc. 2015. Statement. Eighth Marcella L. Finegold Memorial Public Debate. Montefiore Hospital, University of Pittsburgh. April 27. Pittsburgh, PA, [URL]
Matheson, Calum. 2019. Stasis in the net of affect. Philosophy and Rhetoric 52(1): 71–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mendelson, Michael. 2002. Many sides: A Protagorean approach to the theory, practice and pedagogy of argument. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mitchell, Gordon R. 2010. Switch-side debating meets demand-driven rhetoric of science. Rhetoric and Public Affairs 13(1): 95–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nadeau, Ray. 1958. Hermogenes on “stock issues” in deliberative speaking. Speech Monographs 25(1):59–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Donnell and Associates. 2020. Corona big book. Alexandria, VA: O’Donnell and Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Owens, Brian. 2014. Anthrax and smallpox errors highlight gaps in US biosafety. The Lancet 3841, 294. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pilgram, Roosmaryn. 2014. Reasonableness of a doctor’s argument by authority: A pragma-dialectical analysis of the specific soundness conditions. In S. Rubinelli & F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Argumentation and Health (pp. 33–50). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Putnam, Linda L., Steve R. Wilson, and Dudley B. Turner. 1990. The evolution of policy arguments in teachers’ negotiations. Argumentation 41, 129–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rajprohat, Swati. 2015. Statement. Eighth Marcella L. Finegold Memorial Public Debate. Montefiore Hospital, University of Pittsburgh. April 27. Pittsburgh, PA, [URL]
Ratcliffe, John L. 2023. Prepared testimony. Hearing. US House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. US House Oversight Committee. April 18, [URL]
Rubinelli, Sara and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.). 2014. Argumentation and health. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidt, Charles. 2021. Gain-of-function research: all in the eye of the beholder. Undark, September 27, [URL]
Schulz, Peter J., and Sara Rubinelli. 2008. Arguing “for” the patient: Informed consent and strategic maneuvering in doctor-patient interaction. Argumentation 22(3), 423–432. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shackley, Simon. 2000. Commentary on the debate between James Hansen and Patrick Michaels, November 1998. Social Epistemology 14(2/3), 181–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sloane, Thomas, et al., ed. 2001. Encyclopedia of rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Snoeck Henkemans, Francisca A., and Dima Mohammed. 2014. Institutional constraints on strategic maneuvering in shared medical decision-making. In S. Rubinelli & F. A. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Argumentation and Health (pp. 19–32). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sun, Lena H. 2014. CDC chief admits pattern of safety lapses after mishandling anthrax, other pathogens. Washington Post, July 16.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thielmann, A. Gregory. 2007. Intelligence in preventive military strategy. In W. W. Keller & G. R. Mitchell (Eds.), Hitting First: Preventive Force in US Security Strategy (pp. 153–174). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
United States. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. 2015. Potential risks and benefits of gain-of-function research: Summary of a workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
United States. National Science Advisory Board on Biosecurity. 2016. Recommendations for the evaluation and oversight of proposed gain of function research, May, [URL]
United States. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. 2020. Intelligence community statement on origins of COVID-19. ODNI News Release No. 11–20. April 30, [URL]
. 2021. Declassified assessment on Covid-19 origins. Intelligence Community assessment, October 29, [URL]
United States. Office of Science and Technology Policy and Department of Health and Human Services. 2014. Doing diligence to assess the risks and benefits of life sciences gain-of-function research. October 17, [URL]
University of Pittsburgh. Department of Medicine. Office of the Chair. 2022. Medicine grand rounds, [URL]
Walden, R., Fritze, K., Hayashi, H., Miklashevichs, E., Harling, H., & Schell, J. 1994. Activation tagging: a means of isolating genes implicated as playing a role in plant growth and development. Plant molecular biology, 261, 1521–1528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wallace-Wells, David. 2023a. This debate hasn’t made us safer. The New York Times, March 5.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023b. We could easily make risky virological research safer. The New York Times, May 10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walsh, Lynda. 2010. Before climategate: Visual strategies to integrate ethos across the “is/ought” divide in the IPCC’s Climate Change 2007: Summary for Policy Makers. Poroi 6(2), [URL].
Wierda, Renske, and Jacky Visser. 2014. Direct-to-consumer advertisements for prescription drugs as an argumentative activity type. In S. Rubinelli & F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Argumentation and Health (pp. 81–96). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Woodward, Aylin. 2020. Both the new coronavirus and SARS outbreaks likely started in Chinese “wet markets.” Business Insider, February 26, [URL]
Zimmer, Carl, and James Gorman. 2021. Fight over Covid’s origins renews debate on risks of lab work. New York Times, June 20, [URL]
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue