US rivalry with China expands to biotech. Lawmakers see a failure to compete and want to act

WASHINGTON — US lawmakers are raising the alarm about what they see as America’s inability to compete with China in biotechnology, warning of the risks to US national security and commercial interests. But as the rivalry between the two countries extends to the biotech industry, some say excluding Chinese companies would only hurt the US.

Biotechnology promises to revolutionize everyday life, with scientists and researchers using it to make rapid advances in medical treatments, agricultural genetic engineering and new biomaterials. Due to its potential, it has attracted the attention of both the Chinese and US governments.

Bills have been introduced in the House of Representatives and the Senate to ban “foreign biotech companies of concern” from doing business with federally funded medical providers. The bills name four Chinese-owned companies.

The Chinese embassy said those behind the bills have an “ideological bias” and are trying to suppress Chinese companies “under false pretenses.” She demanded that Chinese companies be given “open, fair and non-discriminatory treatment”.

The debate over biotechnology comes as the Biden administration seeks to stabilize the volatile US-China relationship, which has been beset by a range of issues including a trade war, the COVID-19 pandemic, cybersecurity and militarization in the South China Sea. .

Critics of the legislation warn that restrictions on Chinese companies would hinder progress that could achieve greater good.

“In biotechnology, you can’t maintain your competitiveness by shutting others down,” says Abigail Coplin, an assistant professor at Vassar College who specializes in China’s biotech industry. She said she worried that U.S. policymakers would become too obsessed with the technology’s military applications, at the cost of hampering efforts to cure diseases and feed the world’s population.

In a letter to senators sponsoring the bill, Rachel King, chief executive of the industry association Biotechnology Innovation Organization, said the legislation would cause “untold harm to the drug development supply chain, both for treatments currently approved and in the pipeline.” market, as well as for treatments currently approved and on the market. development pipelines decades in the making.â€

But supporters say the legislation is crucial to protecting American interests.

The National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology, a group created by the U.S. Senate to review the industry, said the bill would help secure the data of the federal government and U.S. citizens and would prevent unfair competition from Chinese companies discourage.

The committee warned that advances in biotechnology could result not only in economic benefits but also in rapid changes in military capabilities and tactics.

The stakes are high, said Rep. Mike Gallagher, chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. Gallagher, a Republican from Wisconsin, introduced the House version of the bill and led a congressional delegation to Boston last week to meet with biotechnology executives.

“It’s not just a supply chain battle, or a national security battle, or an economic security battle; I would say it’s a moral and ethical battle,” Gallagher said. “Just as the industry is advancing at a truly astronomical pace, the country that wins the race will set the ethical standards for how these technologies are used.”

He argues that the US must “set the rules of the road” and if it doesn’t, “we will, as a result, live in a less free, less moral world.”

Both the United States and China, the world’s two largest economies, have identified biotechnology as a crucial national interest.

The Biden administration has proposed a “whole-of-government approach” to advance biotechnology and biomanufacturing, which is important for health, climate change, energy, food security, agriculture and supply chain resilience. A stated goal is to maintain U.S. technological leadership and economic competitiveness.

The Chinese government plans to develop a “national strategic technology force” in the field of biotechnology, which would be tasked with making breakthroughs and helping China achieve “technological independence,” mainly from the US.

“Both the Chinese government and the Americans have identified biotechnology as an area of ​​interest for investment, a sector that offers an opportunity to grow their economies,” said Tom Bollyky, the Bloomberg chairman of Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations. He said any restrictive U.S. measures should be tailored to military concerns and concerns about the security of genomic data.

“Of course there will be competition, but what is challenging in biotechnology is that we are talking about human health,” Bollyky said.

Ray Yip, who founded the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention office in China, also worries that the rivalry will slow medical progress.

The benefit of coming up with better diagnostics and therapies goes beyond any individual country, Yip said, “and will not overshadow the capacity or prestige of the other country.”

What concerns Anna Puglisi, senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, is the lack of transparency and unfair market practices in Beijing. “Competition is one thing. Unfair competition is something else,” she said.

Puglisi described BGI, a major Chinese biotech company mentioned in both House and Senate bills, as “a national champion” that is subsidized by the state and given preferential treatment in a system that is “private and public, both civil and civic’ fades away. military.â€

“This system creates market distortions and undermines global standards of science by using researchers and academic and commercial entities to further the goals of the state,” Puglisi said.

BGI, which has emphasized its private ownership, offers genetic testing kits and a popular prenatal screening test to detect Down syndrome and other conditions. U.S. lawmakers say they are concerned that such data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government.

The Defense Department blacklisted BGI as a Chinese military company, and the Commerce Department blacklisted it on human rights grounds, citing the risk that BGI technology may have contributed to surveillance. BGI has denied the allegations.

In raising concerns about BGI, the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology says the company has been required to share data with the Chinese government, has collaborated with the Chinese military and has received significant Chinese state funding and support.

State grants have allowed BGI to offer genomic sequencing services at a highly competitive price that is attractive to U.S. researchers, the committee said. The genomic data, once held by the Chinese government, “represents a strategic asset that has privacy, security, economic and ethical implications,” the report said.

BGI could not immediately be reached for comment.

Also mentioned in the accounts is WuXi AppTec, a Chinese pharmaceutical and medical device company. The legislation states that the company poses a threat to national security because of its ties to the Chinese military and its involvement in a Chinese plan to develop technologies for both civilian and military use.

WuXi AppTec said in a statement that it complies with the laws in the countries where it operates and does not pose a security risk to any country. “In fact, we make a valued contribution to the global pharmaceutical and life sciences industries,” the company said in a statement.

___

Associated Press journalist Dake Kang in Beijing contributed to this report.

Related Post