“Transgender Lab Rats and Poisoned Puppies: Oversight of Taxpayer Funded Animal Cruelty”

1[House Hearing, 119 Congress]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                          TRANSGENDER LAB RATS5                         AND POISONED PUPPIES:6                      OVERSIGHT OF TAXPAYER-FUNDED7                             ANIMAL CRUELTY8=======================================================================910                                HEARING1112                               BEFORE THE1314               SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY, INFORMATION15                 TECHNOLOGY, AND GOVERNMENT INNOVATION1617                                 OF THE1819                         COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT20                         AND GOVERNMENT REFORM2122                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES2324                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2526                             FIRST SESSION2728                               __________2930                            FEBRUARY 6, 20253132                               __________3334                            Serial No. 119-33536                               __________3738Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform3940[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]4142                       Available on: govinfo.gov43                         oversight.house.gov or44                             docs.house.gov4546                               __________4748                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4958-804 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 20255051-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------5253              COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM5455                    JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman5657Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia,58Mike Turner, Ohio                        Ranking Minority Member59Paul Gosar, Arizona                  Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of60Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Columbia61Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts62Michael Cloud, Texas                 Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois63Gary Palmer, Alabama                 Ro Khanna, California64Clay Higgins, Louisiana              Kweisi Mfume, Maryland65Pete Sessions, Texas                 Shontel Brown, Ohio66Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico67Nancy Mace, South Carolina           Robert Garcia, California68Pat Fallon, Texas                    Maxwell Frost, Florida69Byron Donalds, Florida               Summer Lee, Pennsylvania70Scott Perry, Pennsylvania            Greg Casar, Texas71William Timmons, South Carolina      Jasmine Crockett, Texas72Tim Burchett, Tennessee              Emily Randall, Washington73Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia      Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia74Lauren Boebert, Colorado             Yassamin Ansari, Arizona75Anna Paulina Luna, Florida           Wesley Bell, Missouri76Nick Langworthy, New York            Lateefah Simon, California77Eric Burlison, Missouri              Dave Min, California78Eli Crane, Arizona                   Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts79Brian Jack, Georgia                  Rashida Tlaib, Michigan80John McGuire, Virginia81Brandon Gill, Texas8283                                 ------84                       Mark Marin, Staff Director85                   James Rust, Deputy Staff Director86                     Mitch Benzine, General Counsel87                Lauren Lombardo, Deputy Policy Director88             Raj Bharwani, Senior Professional Staff Member89            Duncan Wright, Senior Professional Staff Member90      Mallory Cogar, Deputy Director of Operations and Chief Clerk9192                      Contact Number: 202-225-50749394                  Jamie Smith, Minority Staff Director9596                      Contact Number: 202-225-505197                                 ------9899 Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government100                               Innovation101102                 Nancy Mace, South Carolina, Chairwoman103Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Shontel Brown, Ohio, Ranking104Pat Fallon, Texas                        Minority Member105Eli Crane, Arizona                   Ro Khanna, California106John McGuire, Virginia               Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia107Vacancy                              Yassamin Ansari, Arizona108109                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S110111                              ----------112113                                                                   Page114115Hearing held on February 6, 2025.................................     1116117                               Witnesses118119                              ----------120121Mr. Justin Goodman, Senior Vice President, Advocacy and Public122    Policy,123    White Coat Waste Project124Oral Statement...................................................     5125126Dr. Paul A. Locke, Professor, Department of Environmental Health127    and128    Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health129Oral Statement...................................................     6130131Ms. Elizabeth Baker (Minority Witness), Director of Research132    Policy,133    Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine134Oral Statement...................................................     8135136Written opening statements for the witnesses are available on the137    U.S. House of Representatives Document Repository at:138    docs.house.gov.139140                           Index of Documents141142                              ----------143144  * No additional documents were entered into the record for this145  hearing.146147                          TRANSGENDER LAB RATS148                         AND POISONED PUPPIES:149                      OVERSIGHT OF TAXPAYER-FUNDED150                             ANIMAL CRUELTY151152                              ----------153154                       Thursday, February 6, 2025155156              U.S. House of Representatives157158              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform159160 Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government161                               Innovation162163                                           Washington, D.C.164165    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:06 p.m., in166room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nancy Mace167[Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.168    Present: Representatives Mace, Boebert, Burlison, Crane,169McGuire, Brown, Khanna, and Subramanyam.170    Ms. Mace. All right. Good afternoon, everyone. The171Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and172Government Innovation will now come to order, and welcome. Good173afternoon.174    Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any175time.176    I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening177statement.178    Good afternoon. Late last year, the White Coast Waste179Project exposed more than $10 million in taxpayer funds that180were spent creating transgender mice, rats, and monkeys. These181DEI grants funded painful and deadly transgender experiments182that forced lab animals to undergo invasive surgeries and183hormone therapies at universities across the country. For184example, the Biden-Harris Administration spent $2.5 million185taxpayer--$2.5 million taxpayer dollars--to study the fertility186of transgender mice. Let that sink in. We spent over $2 million187studying the fertility of transgender mice. One-point-one188million dollars was spent to find out if female rats receiving189testosterone therapies to mimic transgender men were more190likely to overdose on a party drug commonly used in the LGBTQ191community to induce drug-fueled, what is ``chemsex.''192    I asked my staff what was chemsex, and I guess it is193something called GHB, which is a date rape drug and also a drug194that is used recreationally. So, we spent over $1 million to195find out if female rats receiving testosterone therapy were196more likely to overdose on a date rape drug. Like, that is what197your taxpayer dollars were being spent on. Federal funds were198also used to forcibly transition male monkeys to see if hormone199therapy made them more susceptible to HIV. Now, I did not know200this until recently, but monkeys cannot be infected with HIV,201yet this federally funded experiment forced them to take202hormone-altering drugs to study a virus they cannot have.203    The Biden-Harris Administration was so eager to propagate204their radical gender ideology across all facets of American205society that they were surgically mutating animal genitals.206Like, taxpayer money went to that. So, my question is, were207they castrating mice, castrating monkeys? Were they getting208double mastectomies? The language that they used in many of209these experiments were ``gender-affirming care,'' which I210learned about 3 years ago what that meant. I thought that was211maybe just some hormones or something like that, but212apparently, gender-affirming care is actually surgical213mutilation of genitals, and apparently, it is not just humans214they were doing it to. We were doing it with taxpayer dollars215to animals.216    It is well known that, because of the differences between217animal and human biology, animal testing frequently does not218produce results relevant for humans. In fact, 90 percent of219novel drugs that are successful in animal tests fail in human220clinical trials. Today's scientific questions are so complex221that we have well surpassed the time where it is useful or222appropriate to rely on inhumane animal experiments to answer223them. Recently developed technological tools can more224accurately model human biology and identify solutions that are225more useful for human patients, but it is often the Federal226bureaucracy that prevents these new technologies from being227used. Instead of adequately investing in these innovative228alternatives, the Federal Government has continued to funnel229taxpayer dollars toward cruel animal experiments. Today, most230of the 27 NIH institutes and centers conduct or support animal231testing, as does the Food and Drug Administration, the U.S.232Department of Agriculture, the Department of Veterans Affairs,233the Department of Defense, and countless other agencies.234    We have some Beagle puppies here with us today. Beagle235puppies have gone through some of the worst medical236experiments, I mean, drugging them with cocaine, having insects237eat at them and their bodies so much until they die, drugging238them until they die. These are God's creatures, and they are239beautiful. And you can see them sitting in the front row today,240so we thank the folks who are here and brought these beautiful241Beagle puppies here today.242    In fact, the U.S. Government spends in excess of $20243billion a year conducting experiments on animals. The White244Coat Waste Project found in 2021 that the NIH--the National245Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a component of246NIH, at the time ran by Dr. Fauci--spent $1.68 million force247feeding toxic drugs to Beagle puppies between 6 and 8 months248old before dissecting and killing them. The conversation we are249having today is important.250    In 2022, due to public criticism lobbied about Fauci's251NAIAD by me and other Members of Congress, another $1.8 million252experiment to abuse Beagle puppies in various drug tests was253canceled. So, I want to thank the work of White Coat Waste and254everyone in the room today, others who have been on the255forefront of this fight to end this sick and cruel and barbaric256testing of animals today. Thanks to one of our witnesses,257Justin Goodman of White Coat Waste, the Beagles are here. The258Beagles are a reminder of the real costs of animal259experimentation. So, I am looking forward to this conversation260this afternoon regarding wasteful government spending on animal261cruelty.262    And I also want to say before I yield to the Ranking Member263for her opening statement, that this is a nonpartisan issue.264Ironically, in Oversight, while we might fight a lot in public,265we are actually very nonpartisan here. And some of the most266nonpartisan work in Congress comes right through this267Committee. So, I want to thank the Ranking Member. I look268forward to working with you, and I yield to you for 5 minutes269for your opening statement.270    Ms. Brown. Thank you, and good afternoon to our three271witnesses. Thanks for being here.272    Chairwoman Mace, I appreciated working with you last week273to introduce a bipartisan bill to strengthen Federal contractor274cybersecurity. I was glad our teams were able to connect early275into this new Congress, and on a personal note, my team found276your staff to be very responsive and helpful.277    Ms. Mace. Likewise.278    Ms. Brown. As the Ranking Member of this Subcommittee, I279look forward to continuing to work with you to modernize and280secure Federal IT systems from potential cyberattacks.281Bipartisan solutions like this are critical to protecting our282Federal system from cyberthreats. I look forward to finding283more common ground and delivering results for the American284people.285    I am looking forward to having a productive discussion286today about the scientific innovations and the need for287additional oversight over alternatives to animal testing. Each288year, millions of animals, including dogs, cats, and monkeys,289are used worldwide for research, and I think it is safe to290assume that everyone here in this room would like to see that291number reduced. We are living in a moment where there have been292extraordinary advancements in medical research, utilizing293groundbreaking technology like artificial intelligence, 3D294bioprinting, and robotics that allows us to reduce our reliance295on animal testing. I am especially proud that much of this296innovation is happening in my district, Ohio's 11th, home to297world-class research universities and medical institutions. Not298only does this offer the chance to save animals from suffering,299these methods can actually lead to better and more accurate300results.301    From a scientific perspective, one of the main issues with302animal testing is that these trials often fail to produce303results relevant to humans. In fact, 90 percent of new drugs304that are shown to work in animal models fail in human trials.305Dr. Locke, one of the witnesses here today, is going to explain306this phenomenon, and he said that ``Animal biology is just too307different from human biology. Because of this, a great deal of308funding and time is wasted on experiments that, ultimately, do309not translate to human trials. By modernizing our research310methods to avoid the use of animal subjects, we can also save311precious taxpayer dollars.''312    Thankfully, there are viable alternatives that are more313ethical, accurate, and efficient ways to study human biology314and disease. We now have the technology to effectively315replicate organs in labs, allowing us to better see how the316human body will respond to drugs and treatments. We have317machine learning systems that can analyze large sets of health318data to develop predictable models of patient response. We have319the capabilities of 3D printing tissue and muscle to test320cosmetics, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals in a highly realistic321way. Just these few examples highlight the amazing work that322has already been done and the important need for continued323investment in the medical field.324    At the time, we must institute strong oversight of the325animal testing that is still occurring to ensure that our326Federal dollars are being used ethically and transparently and327that harm to animals is minimized. I believe it is our moral328responsibility to advocate for animals who cannot speak for329themselves. Last Congress, I was proud to cosponsor the Humane330Cosmetics Act, which addresses the use of animal testing in the331cosmetic industry. This bill had massive bipartisan support,332demonstrating the progress we can make in this area.333    I look forward to hearing more from our witnesses on these334important issues, and I look forward to future hearings in the335months to come on important topics of cybersecurity, artificial336intelligence, and government innovation. Thank you.337    Ms. Mace. Great job. I am pleased to introduce our338witnesses for today's hearing. Our first witness is Mr. Justin339Goodman, Senior Vice President, Advocacy and Public Policy, at340the White Coat Waste Project. It is also Mr. Goodman's birthday341today, and so I would like to wish you a happy birthday and342thank you for being here today. Our second witness is Dr. Paul343Locke, Professor of the Department of Environmental Health and344Engineering at the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public345Health. Our third witness is Ms. Elizabeth Baker, Director of346Research Policy at the Physicians Committee for Responsible347Medicine. Welcome, everyone. We are pleased to have you this348afternoon.349    Pursuant to Committee Rule 9(g), the witnesses, if you will350please stand and raise your right hand.351    Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are352about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but353the truth, so help you God?354    [A chorus of ayes.]355    Ms. Mace. Let the record show that the witnesses all356answered in the affirmative. We appreciate you for being here357today and look forward to your testimony. You may be seated.358    Let me remind the witnesses that we have read your written359statements, and they will appear in full in the hearing record.360Please limit your oral statements to 5 minutes. As a reminder,361please press the button on the microphone in front of you so362that it is on when you speak and the members can hear you. When363you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green.364After 4 our minutes, the light will turn yellow, and when the365red light comes on, your 5 minutes is up, and we would ask that366you please wrap it up.367    I would like to recognize Mr. Goodman to please begin your368opening statement.369370                      STATEMENT OF JUSTIN GOODMAN371372                         SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT373374                        WHITE COAT WASTE PROJECT375376    Mr. Goodman. Thank you. Chairwoman Mace, Ranking Member377Brown, and distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you378for the opportunity to testify today. As the Chairwoman379mentioned, it is my birthday, and this is the greatest gift I380could possibly ask for. My name is Justin Goodman, and I am the381Senior Vice President of Advocacy and Public Policy at the382nonprofit, nonpartisan government watchdog White Coat Waste383Project. White Coat Waste has one mission: to stop taxpayers384from being forced to pay for cruel, wasteful, inefficient, and385dangerous animal experiments in labs around the world. Lab386survivors Nellie, Beasley, and Oliver, sitting behind me, are387three of the many reasons why.388    Many people do not realize that the U.S. Government is not389only the single largest funder of animal testing in the390country, but in the world. Uncle Sam outspends the private391sector on animal testing 2 to 1. This is not something to be392proud of. Over 20 years ago, the NIH budget doubled and animal393testing skyrocketed, but, overall, people are not healthier or394living longer. It is estimated that over $20 million a year of395taxpayers' money is still wasted annually on ineffective and396inhumane tests on tens of millions of puppies, kittens, and397other animals.398    Am I being flippant when I use the word ``waste?''399Absolutely not. The NIH itself has said, ``Animal models fail400to mimic disease or predict how drugs will work in humans,401resulting in much wasted time and money,'' yet agencies402continue to dump billions of tax dollars into animal tests,403despite the horrible return on investment.404    Experiments we have uncovered range from the savage to the405stupid: injecting puppies with cocaine, staging hamster fight406clubs, putting dead turtles on treadmills. One of the reasons407this problem has gotten so out of control is the stunning lack408of innovation, transparency, and accountability. Agencies do409not report, or even track, in some cases, how much money is410being spent, how many animals are used, what is being done to411them, where, and what taxpayers are getting out of it. We file412hundreds of FOIA requests every year to glean just basic413information. When we can find out how tax dollars are being414spent, it becomes apparent why Federal agencies fight against415disclosing details.416    For example, Senator Rand Paul's December 2024 Festivus417Report highlighted cruel taxpayer-funded cat experiments418exposed by my organization. In one $10 million DARPA grant,419cats have marbles shoved up their rectums and are420electroshocked to make them defecate in constipation421experiments. We have also recently identified over $240 million422in NIH grants for transgender animal experiments, including $26423million in active funding. Some of these tests, as the424Chairwoman mentioned, examine the effects of party drugs on425animals injected with testosterone and how hormones used for426human gender transitions impact the size and shape of animals'427genitals. How does this translate to helping the average428American?429    Shockingly, 95 percent of this funding came from Dr.430Fauci's NIAID. Speaking of Dr. Fauci, our group is perhaps best431known for exposing his and USAID's funding for dangerous gain-432of-function animal experiments at the Wuhan lab. We also433uncovered his support for cruel Beagle tests around the world.434Taxpayer-funded animal tests may have caused COVID.435    Unfortunately, the government has not learned its lesson436from what happened in Wuhan. Today, there are still 26 animal437labs in China, including labs controlled by the Chinese438Communist Party and tied to the military, approved to receive439NIH funding. This is not just a misuse of taxpayer dollars but440presents a national security threat.441    White Coat Waste recently obtained a contract funded by the442NIH and DOD that is paying for 300 Beagles a week to be443restrained and injected with or force-fed experimental drugs in444a Chinese lab. The reason they chose Beagles like Nellie,445Oliver, and Beasley, the contract states, ``Beagle dogs are446docile, cute, and easy to domesticate, so it has been the best447choice,'' not because it is effective, but because it is easy.448    This issue extends beyond China. Three hundred and forty-449four animal labs in 52 foreign countries are approved currently450to receive NIH funding. GAO audits prompted by White Coat Waste451have found that NIH shipped billions to foreign animal labs452with essentially no oversight, that the NIH has never visited a453foreign animal lab in over 40 years of overseeing research, and454that some foreign spending is not even tracked. This is how455some spending in Wuhan went undisclosed, and no surprise, Dr.456Fauci's division of NIH is responsible for 95 percent of the457foreign aid. Continuing to send tax dollars to an authoritarian458adversary's animal labs is a recipe for disaster.459    With Chairwoman Mace's leadership, we have been able to460halt plans for wasteful and cruel testing on dogs and cats in461other Fauci-funded labs. These tests never should have been462approved in the first place and were only deemed unnecessary463after we exposed them. Our campaigns and legislative work with464the Chairwoman, Reps Boebert, Khanna, Luna, and many others465exposed and shuttered waste, like the government's largest cat466lab that was feeding kittens kitten meat from Chinese wet467markets--yes, that is true; that was a cannibalism experiment--468eliminating VA testing on dogs and cats, and ending nicotine469tests on monkeys at FDA, but there is much more work to be470done. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay billions of dollars471every year for outdated, cruel, and potentially dangerous472animal experiments, especially when most people oppose them.473    We are excited to work with you, DOGE, the Administration,474and others to continue cutting wasteful spending on animal475experiments. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, on476my birthday. I look forward to your questions.477    Ms. Mace. Thank you. I recognize Dr. Locke to please begin478your opening statement.479480                     STATEMENT OF DR. PAUL A. LOCKE481482                               PROFESSOR483484            JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH485486    Mr. Locke. Chairwoman Mace, Ranking Member Brown, and487members of the Committee and Subcommittee, thank you for488inviting me to offer comments at today's hearing. My name is489Paul Locke. I am a professor in the Department of Environmental490Health and Engineering at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of491Public Health. I am an attorney and an environmental health492scientist, and a substantial portion of my work has493concentrated on the uses of nonanimal methodologies in research494and regulatory decision-making, with an emphasis on the promise495that these methods have for both reducing animal use and496improving evidence-based decision-making.497    I want to state for the record that the opinions here that498I offer are my own, and they do not necessarily reflect the499views or positions of the Johns Hopkins University or the Johns500Hopkins Health System.501    Today, I want to cover three major points. First, the502scientific questions facing us increasingly call into question503our reliance on animal models and demand that we move forward504with more human-centric science. Second, Federal agencies must505play a leadership role in this transition to these new human-506centric models. And third, the development and deployment of507these models represent innovation in places where U.S.508businesses and scientists are and must continue to be at the509cutting edge. Let us start with a discussion about scientific510methods and needs.511    The complex scientific challenges that we now face require512that we move away from traditional animal models and embrace513new technologies that do not involve animals but instead514incorporate human biology. These technologies include small,515engineered systems, such as organs on a chip and516microphysiological systems, or three-dimensional groups of517cells, such as organoids, that mimic many of the important518functions of human organs. I would also include AI in this519group. Now, while there is considerable enthusiasm around the520promise of these new methodologies, unless Federal agencies and521departments support their development and recognize their522promise, they will never be able to reach their full potential.523We are not going to be able to replace animals in biomedical524research with the meagre investments that Federal agencies are525now making.526    EPA, FDA, and NIH all have important roles to play in527unlocking the potential that these technologies have for528designing better drugs, protecting the environment, and529improving health. Based on our research, there are currently530major gaps in the frameworks needed to support new531methodologies, and it is imperative that the Federal Government532step forward. The Federal approach has been passive and533reactive. What we need is for Federal agencies and departments534to lead efforts to development, implement, and use these535methods, and my written testimony goes into greater information536about what Federal agencies can be doing, and I hope we will537have some questions on that, as well.538    Finally, the U.S. must continue to lead the way in these539technologies so that we are setting the global standards in540these fields rather than following other nations. Regulatory541agencies worldwide look to us for leadership, and if the U.S.542leads in alternatives, methods, development, and validation,543our standards will shape international regulations, assist in544the creation of U.S. high-tech jobs, and strengthen our545national economic growth.546    So, to summarize, scientific advancements have created547multiple opportunities for us to develop and deploy more human-548centric techniques in toxicology and biomedical research and549transition away from animals in biomedical research.550Championing these nonanimal models is a win-win situation551because we can reduce the number of animals used, as well as552produce data that is more relevant to human health. Federal553agencies and departments must play a central role, and they554have already begun to do so. However, to realize the full555potential that this transition holds, our agencies and556departments must do more, including dedicating additional557resources and leading in efforts to validate these innovative558new technologies. We cannot be world leaders given the meagre559resources that are now available. These markets are expanding560rapidly, and several American companies are well positioned for561success in this market space once the regulatory environment562and framework is open for them.563    In closing, I urge the Subcommittee to work with Federal564agencies to further develop the criteria for validation and565acceptance of these new technologies within each department and566in a coordinated way across multiple agencies, as well as567dedicate additional resources to them. Doing so will allow us568to reduce the number of animals in research, better inform569decision-making, and advance American entrepreneurial science.570Thank you very much.571    Ms. Mace. Thank you, Dr. Locke. I now recognize Ms. Baker572to please begin your opening statement.573574                      STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH BAKER575576                      DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH POLICY577578             PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE579580    Ms. Baker. Chair Mace and Ranking Member Brown and Members581of the Subcommittee, thank you so much for the opportunity to582testify today. My name is Elizabeth Baker at the Physicians583Committee for Responsible Medicine. I work with a team of584scientists, physicians, lawyers, and other professionals to585move medical research, product testing, and advanced medical586training away from using animals. I appreciate the587Subcommittee's attention to this critical subject.588    Ending federally funded animal experiments is long overdue.589For generations, tax dollars have paid scientists to conduct590acts that would shock the conscience of most Americans. Dogs,591cats, monkeys, rabbits, pigs, and other animals are used in592experiments that are painful, stressful, and often lethal for593the animals that are subjected to them. Increasingly, it is594recognized across research and testing sectors that animals are595not good surrogates for humans. Over 85 percent of Americans596that were recently polled agreed that animal-based research597should be phased out. Both Congress and the Administration must598take action to ensure that government funding and requests for599animal experiments are stopped, and that instead, a portion of600that funding is reinvested into more effective human-based601approaches.602    Our first recommendation is to end Federal support for603wasteful and ineffective animal research. Animal research does604not translate to humans because there are insurmountable605species differences in our anatomy, physiology, lifespan,606disease characteristics, and more. It is known that, for new607drugs, 9 out of 10 are going to fail in humans after they608appeared successful in animals, and paying for those failures609is partially why drugs can take so long, over a decade, to610develop and cost so much to develop, over $1 billion. Worse,611relying on animal data is partially why many human diseases612have no treatments and even fewer have cures. Despite this613knowledge, the Federal Government continues to promote animal614research. The National Institutes of Health fund seven National615Primate Research Centers that house, breed, and experiment on616nonhuman primates with little regard to actual human617translation.618    While there are countless examples of cruel research,619consider this. Since 1991, the NIH has given $15 million to a620single heart failure project where dogs are subjected to621multiple major surgeries, they have devices that are stabbed622into their hearts, and then they are forced to run on623treadmills until they die or that device malfunctions. Despite62434 years of this work and hundreds of dead dogs, there has been625no benefit to patients.626    Agencies across the Federal Government continue to fund627animal experiments, even when the objectives of the research628have already been shown in humans or could be studied using629human-based approaches, like animal experiments for human630nutrition. Regulatory agencies continue to require animal631testing. Congress and the administration can end these wasteful632experiments by cutting egregious research, ensuring that633research is not funded if these objectives can be studied634without using animals, and ending the Federal animal testing635requirements in regulation and policy.636    Our second recommendation is to reinvest some of these637savings from animal research and testing toward evaluation,638acceptance, and use of innovative and more effective human-639based approaches. Methods like organs on chips, reconstructed640human tissues, sophisticated computer models have existed for641some time, but they are only supported at a fraction of the642funding that goes to the animal experiments.643    Some Federal efforts have already begun accelerating644innovative human-based methods. The NIH has a national center,645NICEATM, that works to evaluate and advance nonanimal646approaches across Federal agencies through a congressionally647mandated committee, ICCVAM. With more investment and an648expanded purview, NICEATM can accelerate this work and even649address the reproducibility crisis in research. A center at the650NIH, NCATS, is already working to bridge the gap between651medical research and product development by prioritizing652innovative human-based approaches. Recently, the NIH adopted653important recommendations on nonanimal approaches and launched654the complementary program to speed development and use of these655methods.656    Each of these are great examples of steps in the right657direction, but the current resource investments just pale in658comparison to the stronghold that animal experiments have held659for decades. Greater support for these efforts will more660quickly advance better science that leads to improved outcomes661for people, while avoiding animal use. There has been so much662recent attention on getting Americans healthier. If we truly663want to make America healthy again, we have to make science664human again.665    Thank you so much for this opportunity to testify, and I666look forward to answering your questions.667    Ms. Mace. Thank you all for being here today. I will now668recognize myself for 5 minutes of questioning.669    Mr. Goodman, in your written, you state the White Coat670Waste Project identified at least $10 million in NIH grants for671transgender animal experiments. You state that 95 percent of672the funding came from Dr. Fauci's NIAID. Why is the Federal673Government spending taxpayer dollars to create transgender674animals?675    Mr. Goodman. It is a great question. I----676    Ms. Mace. Your microphone.677    Mr. Goodman. Thank you. It is a great question. I mean, I678wonder why they are making cats constipated also. It is a679question that rings around in my head at night when I am going680to bed, why we are funding these things. A lot of the programs681that are funded do latch on to some type of social trend, and682then animal experimenters use it as a money grab, as an excuse683to get NIH tax funds. In this case, DEI grants were used to684fund a lot of this stuff.685    Ms. Mace. Uh-huh.686    Mr. Goodman. So, people who abuse animals find some kind of687excuse to bring in new money, and They will switch their688research program over to something that is trendy to bring tax689dollars into a university. I mean, that is part of the big690problem here is that colleges and universities are taking 25 to69140 percent off the top of every single one of these grants for692indirect costs that go into a slush fund that has nothing to do693with the research, so they are willing to let experimenters do694whatever they want to animals to keep the money flowing in.695    Ms. Mace. Some people might describe that as money696laundering. All right. Are sex change experiments that forcibly697transition mice, rats, and monkeys necessary for science?698    Mr. Goodman. Absolutely not.699    Ms. Mace. Why do these experiments at all--if they are not700producing useful human-relevant research, again, do you think701it is a money issue, follow the money?702    Mr. Goodman. Animal testing is big business.703    Ms. Mace. As you know, I have been long vocal about animal704experiments and Federal-funded animal testing and worked with705you to prevent Fauci's plan to waste almost $2 million in706taxpayer dollars to maim and murder Beagle puppies, for707example. Why was Dr. Fauci so insistent on poisoning these708puppies, even though, as you state in your written statement,709the FDA does not mandate that human drugs be studied on dogs?710    Mr. Goodman. So much of the problem with all of this is711institutional inertia. It is that people just continue doing712the same thing because that is what They have done before.713There was a report the National Academy of Sciences put out a714few years ago about the VA's testing on dogs that Congressman715Khanna actually helped us----716    Ms. Mace. Uh-huh.717    Mr. Goodman [continuing]. Get the NAS to conduct. And they718found that most of the VA's testing on dogs was unnecessary,719and not only that it was unnecessary, but one of the reasons720why is that there is just circular reasoning that they use to721defend it when they propose a new project. They say, well, we722used dogs previously, so we are just going to use dogs again,723and there is no one to break that cycle. There is not enough724oversight to say, hey, maybe we do not need to do this anymore,725maybe there is a better way to do it. It is like, if you only726have a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and that is kind727of the problem.728    Ms. Mace. Right, and what would have happened to these729Beagle puppies if your organization had not rescued them?730    Mr. Goodman. In the case of those experiments?731    Ms. Mace. Uh-huh.732    Mr. Goodman. Those dogs were going to be force-fed and733injected with massive doses of experimental drugs to poison734them to see at what point they got sick or died, and those735tests will have no relevance for the safety and efficacy of736that drug in human beings.737    Ms. Mace. Thank you. Dr. Locke, I had a few questions for738you. Can the scientific challenges we face today be saved by739relying on animal testing?740    Dr. Locke. No, not all of them.741    Ms. Mace. Can you briefly describe how new technologies can742allow us to transition away from animal testing without743hindering scientific research?744    Dr. Locke. Certainly. I also want to point out that in my745written testimony, I do try to lay out a roadmap for how that746could happen. But basically, what we need to do is we need to747spend a lot more resources supporting these nonanimal748technologies, such as organs on a chip and organoids, so we can749use those to study many of the phenomena that we are now750studying in animals.751    Ms. Mace. OK. Thank you, and, Ms. Baker, what are your752thoughts today--reading your testimony ``for the opportunity to753testify, that it is long overdue''--where do we go from here?754How do we fix the problem?755    Ms. Baker. I think we fix the problem by investing in what756is going right. First, we have got to cut a lot of this757terrible animal research. We need to cut the National Primate758Research Centers.759    Ms. Mace. Uh-huh.760    Ms. Baker. We are funding these centers to the tune of761hundreds of millions of dollars every year. We have got to762stop. We have got to stop funding animal experiments outside763the United States, as Mr. Goodman said, that have no oversight.764If you can meet your objectives without using animals, there is765absolutely no reason that you should, and so----766    Ms. Mace. Thank you for bringing that up, the amount of767money, the hundreds of millions. I recently found out in the768state of South Carolina, in my district, there is a primate769breeding center and testing site, Alpha Genesis. They have770made, to my understanding, over $100 million from NIH over the771last 20 or so years. This is a boondoggle. It is a racket, and772hundreds of millions of dollars--billions of dollars, in fact--773have been wasted on it. So, I want to thank you all for your774testimony today. Thank you for being here. I would now like to775recognize my colleague, Ms. Brown, for 5 minutes.776    Ms. Brown. Again, thank you to our witnesses for being777here. I think it is clear that we all agree that we do not want778to see animals harmed and that there is work to be done to779reduce our reliance on animals for medical and scientific780research. So, I would like to start with you, Ms. Baker. Can781you talk about where you think some of the current gaps, the782oversight, are in the animal experimentation?783    Ms. Baker. Yes. I think we have some major issues with784oversight. We do not know, really, how much spending is going785to animal experiments. The public is largely in the dark. We786try so hard to understand this information, and we have to come787up with some of it on our own. It would be great if the Federal788Government would be more transparent in this way. We do know789that, in 2016, the NIH said that for Fiscal Year 2015, 47790percent of extramural grants used mice. Seven-point-four791billion dollars is what that would be in 2024. In 2021, NIH792issued a figure that said about 8 percent of grants go to non-793clinical, nonanimal approaches. Well, non-clinical approaches794really mean the animal tests or the alternatives, and so a ton795of money is going into this.796    We wanted to understand for cancer; cancer is one disease797area where it is well known that animals are just really poor798predictors of human outcomes. We get cancer differently. It799behaves differently in our bodies. The failure rate for cancer800drugs is 94 percent. We have cures for cancer in mice. We do801not in humans. And so, we wanted to look at what is the802National Cancer Institute doing. How are they funding? What803does their funding look like? And so, our analysis is not804perfect because it is based on, unfortunately, just the805publicly available information, which is not totally806transparent, but we found that 45 percent of their grants seem807to be animal related. And so, the NIH can really, I think, help808by ensuring that there is transparency around this.809    Ms. Brown. I am just going to reclaim----810    Ms. Baker. There is also an oversight issue when----811    Ms. Brown [continuing]. Because I would like to get to Dr.812Locke, too, but thank you. Dr. Locke, you talked in your813testimony about several different technologies that you have814worked with that are direct alternatives to animal testing. Can815you speak to the success of these technologies and what816Congress can do to be more supportive of the efforts to expand817other innovative technologies in this space?818    Dr. Locke. Yes. Thank you for your question. I think there819are at least two things that Congress can do. The first thing820Congress can do is to really get a handle, as my colleagues821have said, on how much money we are spending on these822technologies. The transparency issue is severe. So, since this823is a committee on accountability, I would say the first thing824we need to do is we need to count. We do not have that825information. You do not have that information.826    The second thing that needs to be done is that these827technologies need to be what I would call validated, and by828that, I mean they need to be shown that they are relevant and829reliable for a particular purpose. One of my frustrations now830is that the Federal agencies are not doing that. They seem to831be very reactive, and they seem to want folks who are in the832field to bring the data to them. And then they are going to833make the decision, well, we accept this data or do not accept834this data, and that is a really bad situation to be in. These835folks who are developing the methods are entrepreneurs. They836are innovators. They have to know what kind of target they are837shooting at.838    The third thing I would say is that we really do need to839get a handle on the animal research we are doing. Again, that840is an area of transparency, and we need to develop metrics so841we can figure out what part of that research is actually842working and what part is not working. And then, as my843colleagues have suggested, I think we should be sunsetting the844stuff that is not working and reinvesting that in these new845methodologies.846    Ms. Brown. Thank you very much, Dr. Locke. And as we move847to decrease our reliance on animal experimentation, it is848important to acknowledge that, unfortunately, there are still849companies and organizations that still utilize animal testing.850So, what can be done to move these places toward alternative851models like the ones you have mentioned?852    Dr. Locke. Thank you for that question. I think there are853several things that can be done. The first thing that we can854do--and I have some bias here as an academic--is we can train855our students in these new methods. We have to move away from856animal tests and animal research as always the gold standard.857The second thing we can do is we can energize the whole Federal858grant system to make it much more friendly so that folks who859want to use these alternatives can actually go out and get860research money to study them.861    Ms. Brown. All right. Thank you, and with that, Madam862Chair, I yield back.863    Ms. Mace. Thank you. I will now yield to Ms. Boebert.864    Ms. Boebert. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate your865advocacy on this and protecting so many animals against this,866as we have heard, savage research that has been taking place,867not only in the United States, but all throughout the world.868And I want to thank our witnesses today for your boldness to869come out because it seems like any time we expose millions and870billions, even, of dollars that are spent toward ridiculous871research programs or just organizations themselves, we are872lashed out at. We are called crazy and conspiracist, and I want873to thank you so much for taking a bold step.874    I want to thank you for the White Coat Waste Project875because this is not only saving precious Beagles' lives but876really exposing to the American taxpayer where their money is877going, and I think we all want to be good stewards of our tax878money. We are responsible for those tax dollars here in879Congress, and it is our responsibility to be stewards and880overseers of that. So, I am grateful for DOGE to come in881alongside of us to help expose some of this and kind of get882those wheels turning.883    But just for the folks back home real quick, before I get884into my questions, I want to just highlight, a million seconds885is 11-and-a-half days. A billion seconds is 31 years and 7886months. It is, like, this is a huge difference. When we are887talking about billions of dollars going toward the cruelty of888animals, it is much larger than what it sounds because it has889been so watered down to hear that Congress is spending millions890or billions or even trillions of dollars. God forbid if we find891out what comes after a trillion. We will start spending that,892too. But Mr. Goodman, since 1998, how much do you believe that893the Federal Government has spent on animal cruelty testing?894    Mr. Goodman. Thank you for the question. As we have been895discussing, it is tough because there is not a lot of896transparency behind actually how much tax dollars are being897spent. I would say we are probably looking at a trillion in898spending by NIH since 1998, and about 47 percent of that is899used for experiments on animals. Half a trillion dollars----900    Ms. Boebert. Wow.901    Mr. Goodman [continuing]. Could have potentially been spent902on animal testing since 1998.903    Ms. Boebert. That is an extreme number. Thank you for that,904and, Mr. Goodman, how much money do you think that NIAID wasted905on unethical and useless and abusive testing? I would imagine906it is about the same because none of this has been very useful907or effective.908    Mr. Goodman. Yes. So, Dr. Fauci ran NIAID from 1984 to9092022, and when he left at the end of 2022, it had a $6.5910billion budget. Again, we do not know what percentage that was911for animal testing but probably higher than the average across912NIH. And I just want to make a note here that Dr. Fauci--and I913do not have any issue with him outside of his abuse of914animals--he was not just a paper pusher. He was personally915involved in animal experimentation, experimenting on monkeys,916giving them HIV-like viruses, until the day he left NIH. He was917a lead investigator on grants that were funded by taxpayers to918do that. And he started his career by infecting chimpanzees919with HIV and promising we were going to have an AIDS vaccine920back in the 1980's, which we never got because, as you921mentioned, they do not get HIV. They do not get AIDS. They do922not get sick. So, there has been an enormous amount of waste923and abuse, and, unfortunately, he is gone from government, but924his legacy at NIAID lives on.925    Ms. Boebert. Yes. Fortunately, he is gone from government,926but that does not prevent us from holding him accountable for927not only the wasteful spending, but the cruel tests that have928taken place over the years, so maybe you answered my next929question. How many of these treatments have found cures in930humans that come from this cruel kind of testing?931    Mr. Goodman. Virtually none. We have heard the statistics932today, and any that have come, it is out of pure dumb luck, and933they are the exception, not the rule because animal experiments934are a dead end. It is pure chance if something good comes out935of it.936    Ms. Boebert. And so, I am seeing here, with NIAID, the937budget of spending $6.5 billion in taxpayer money, it has been938used to pay EcoHealth Alliance to import hundreds of Asian bats939into the U.S. for new viruses in labs in Colorado run by the940Wuhan-linked researchers. That is $6.7 for the Colorado State941University in Fort Collins to research bats here in America.942And we have also sent billions of taxpayer dollars to943unaccountable labs in China and other foreign countries.944Implanted aborted baby parts into lab animals, have you heard945of that sort of research?946    Mr. Goodman. Yes. We did an analysis a few years ago947showing that over 90 percent of experiments using human fetal948tissue and involving animals were funded by Fauci's NIAID.949    Ms. Boebert. Do you know where they are getting the aborted950human fetal tissue?951    Mr. Goodman. A lot of it is happening at colleges and952universities that have affiliated hospitals that perform that953procedure.954    Ms. Boebert. Madam Chair, I think we need to look into that955as well. My time has expired. I apologize to our other956witnesses. I did have questions for you, but I will submit957those in writing. Thank you.958    Ms. Mace. That is wild. I would now like to recognize Mr.959Subramanyam for 5 minutes of questioning.960    Mr. Subramanyam. Thank you. I am glad we are having this961hearing today. I actually had the chance to talk to an animal962care program manager at a research facility, and he said963something really interesting. He said, the day we no longer964need animals for research is the day we have succeeded as an965industry. So, I think what you are finding is that even the966people who are employed to run these programs are starting to967realize that we would like to see a path to where we no longer968need animals, and so I think that is really interesting.969    One of the things I would like to know, though, is how far970away are we until the technologies can completely replace971animals and we can still be on the cutting edge of science. I972am an animal lover. I am a vegan, even. I very much support973getting rid of animals in all testing, but I want to make sure974that we also do the cutting-edge research that we need to do. I975would ask all three, really--Ms. Baker, Dr. Locke, Mr.976Goodman--if you could address how far away are we, and I also977would love to know what kind of investment do we need. Does it978have to be from the public sector? Is there private-sector979companies going after this, getting venture funding for it, for980instance? I would love to know what we can do and what the path981looks like.982    Ms. Baker. Thank you for the question. There are so many983incredible technologies that we have today that we should be984using to be on the cutting edge. So, using animals is not985cutting edge. Using animals is something that has been done for986so long. The innovative approaches, they do not use animals.987They are human-biology-based because we need to understand988human outcomes. If we want to talk about innovation, just take989a look at any other industry. Look at the phone industry. What990was a phone in the 1950's versus what it is today? What was a991car back then versus what it is today? What was science doing992back then versus what is happening today? A lot of the993regulatory tests that are done are the same exact tests that994have been done since the 1950's, so if we are talking about995really being on the cutting edge, we absolutely have to be996embracing and supporting and investing in these approaches.997    It is not just our Federal Government. There are many998companies that exist today that have already developed these999approaches. I think they will do much better once we do things1000like remove requirements for testing products on animals.1001Because there still is so much favoritism in science for using1002the animal-based approaches, because people think that you have1003to do it if you want to get an NIH grant, you have to do it if1004you want to get through the FDA. And so, once those things1005really start to change, I think we will see a lot more1006investment in the government and outside.1007    Mr. Subramanyam. And, Dr. Locke, the same question.1008    Dr. Locke. Yes, thank you for the question. The good news1009is that, at least in one area, cosmetics testing, we are pretty1010much out of the animal testing business. If you look at other1011areas--for example, testing of environmental chemicals, drugs,1012and discovery--we are not there yet. How long is it going to1013take? I always like to say it is not a matter of if, but it is1014a matter of when, but no one has ever asked me to put a time on1015that, and I am afraid I cannot do that.1016    I know what steps we need to take to get there, which are1017to really start to fund these technologies, to make sure that1018these technologies are valid, to get the Federal Government to1019really be very, very much of a leader in these. I do believe1020that we have an incredibly entrepreneurial private sector that1021is well positioned to be leaders in these in the world market.1022You are seeing all sorts of continuous funding of these from1023venture capitalists. You are seeing all sorts of use of these1024technologies in medical settings. There is a lot of1025personalized medicine that is being used, so the future is very1026bright. I think it is just really a matter of getting us on the1027right pathway to do that.1028    It is not going to be something, unfortunately, I think it1029is going to happen in 5 years or 10 years, but it could happen1030in 20, 30, 40, maybe not even within my lifetime, but to be1031honest with you, I do not really care as long as we get on that1032pathway.1033    Mr. Subramanyam. Mr. Goodman?1034    Mr. Goodman. I think I am a little more optimistic. I mean,1035we could stop animal testing today. It is useless. It is1036misleading us. It is causing us to waste billions of dollars1037every year, decades of time and energy and very smart people.1038These are some of the smartest people in the world. You cutoff1039their funding for animal testing, they are going to figure out1040something else to do. The private sector is going to innovate.1041Stop forcing companies to test on animals. Stop doling out1042billions of dollars to animal experimenters who have no1043incentive to innovate and actually solve problems because that1044is what keeps the grants coming. They will figure out another1045way to do it, and we are going to get solutions that way.1046    The EPA is a great example. I know my time is up, but the1047EPA set a timeline in 2019. The Trump Administration said, by10482035, we are going to phaseout all animal testing, which was1049great. It was lauded by Republicans, Democrats. Everyone across1050the spectrum thought it was a great idea. Within months of1051that, within months of the Biden Administration taking over,1052they killed that timeline to phaseout animal testing at the EPA1053because environmental groups pushed them to do it, saying that1054it was an environmental justice issue, that we needed to do1055more animal testing, not less, which is ridiculous. So, I think1056that if you take the politics out, and if we are concerned with1057science and we are concerned about being good stewards of1058taxpayer dollars and the public's interest, we can end animal1059testing tomorrow. We are going to be fine, and we are actually1060going to be better off. Thank you.1061    Ms. Mace. Thank you. I would now like to recognize Mr.1062Crane for 5 minutes.1063    Mr. Crane. Thank you, Ms. Chairwoman, for holding this1064hearing today. Thank you guys for showing up. It was just1065yesterday in an Oversight hearing that I asked Chairman Comer1066if we could get some therapy dogs up here because of some of1067the meltdowns that were going on. I had no idea I would walk1068into this hearing today and see three beautiful Beagle puppies.1069And I have noticed that my mood has already improved, so thank1070you guys for bringing them there. I think we should make it1071mandatory.1072    We also talked about, in the Oversight Committee hearing1073yesterday, some of the ridiculous initiatives and programs that1074need to be cut from our bloated government. And it seems like a1075lot of these studies are just another example of our senseless,1076out-of-control spending by bureaucrats who never really get1077held accountable. I want to start with you, Mr. Goodman. You1078said you have estimated over $20 billion in taxpayer money1079wasted on ineffective animal research. Is that correct, sir?1080    Mr. Goodman. Yes.1081    Mr. Crane. Wow. Mr. Goodman, did you also say that it was1082your estimation that $241 million was spent for transgender1083animal testing?1084    Mr. Goodman. Yes, and that, I would say, is the floor, not1085the ceiling, because the information on Federal data bases is1086pretty incomplete.1087    Mr. Crane. So, you think we are going to find out that it1088was much more money than that for----1089    Mr. Goodman. Yes.1090    Mr. Crane [continuing]. Transgender animal testing?1091    Mr. Goodman. Yes.1092    Mr. Crane. Can you describe what exactly the American1093people's taxpayer dollars were spent on regarding transgender1094animal testing?1095    Mr. Goodman. Yes. In a lot of these cases, they involve1096mice, rats, monkeys who are being surgically mutilated and1097subjected to hormone therapies to mimic female-to-male or male-1098to-female gender transitions, gender-affirming hormone1099therapies, and then looking at the biological, psychological,1100and physiological effects of the gender transitions, looking at1101the effects of taking vaccines after you have transitioned1102these animals from male to female or female to male, looking at1103the size of their genitals changing after you have put them on1104estrogen or testosterone therapies to transition them. In the1105example the Chairwoman gave, there was a $1.1 million grant to1106give female lab rats testosterone to mimic transgender male1107humans and then overdose them with this party drug to see if1108female animals taking testosterone were more likely to overdose1109on this sex-party drug than animals who were not taking1110testosterone.1111    Mr. Crane. Mr. Goodman, are many of these taxpayer-funded1112animal studies shared with the public, or is there a1113significant oversight of this research?1114    Mr. Goodman. You essentially needed a degree in information1115technology to navigate the Federal spending data bases to find1116any of this stuff.1117    Mr. Crane. So, what you have found is we are not being very1118transparent with what we are spending these funds on?1119    Mr. Goodman. Not at all, and it is by design.1120    Mr. Crane. Did you say that Dr. Fauci, in your estimation,1121had funded close to 95 percent of these animal research1122projects?1123    Mr. Goodman. Yes. In our analysis, Dr. Fauci funded about112495 percent of the transgender animal experiments.1125    Mr. Crane. OK. I found in some research that the EPA, under1126President Trump, is planning to reduce the Agency's animal1127testing by 30 percent by 2025 and completely by 2035. Mr.1128Goodman, can you explain why that is a win for the American1129taxpayer?1130    Mr. Goodman. Absolutely. Animal testing is incredibly time-1131intensive, inaccurate, and expensive, and it is not very good1132at predicting the human health effects or environmental effects1133of chemicals and pesticides. And right now, what we are doing1134to test human effects is poisoning the lab animals, forcing1135them to breathe wildfire smoke simulated in a laboratory by1136burning different types of foliage and pumping it into animals'1137cages, making them obese to simulate what it would be like for1138obese people to be exposed to wildfire smoke, shooting off1139handguns and rifles and forcing animals to breathe the1140emissions in gun control experiments, and the list goes on and1141on. And that is what is happening currently at the EPA after1142the Biden Administration overturned the Trump plan to phaseout1143animal testing.1144    Mr. Crane. Mr. Goodman, one more question. You have also1145been outspoken about the COVID-19 outbreak stemming from Dr.1146Fauci's U.S.-funded research at China's Wuhan lab. What are the1147public health risks if we continue some of these outrageous1148animal studies?1149    Mr. Goodman. We are flirting with disaster if we continue1150to fund dangerous virus research, both abroad, like in1151Colorado, where Fauci greenlit this bat lab. They are trying to1152import hundreds of bats from Asia to build a new lab in1153Colorado to do virus experiments with Ebola, Nipah, Lassa,1154deadly viruses for which there is no cure. It is just a matter1155of time before we have another pandemic on our hands if we let1156mad scientists run amok with our money.1157    Mr. Crane. Thank you. I yield back.1158    Ms. Mace. All right. I will now yield 5 minutes to Mr.1159Burlison.1160    Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for this1161hearing. I have to admit, whenever I saw the subject line of1162this, I was surprised that this was a thing. I am shocked. I1163think the American people should be even more shocked and1164disgusted to find out what is happening with their dollars. I1165think it is actually embarrassing. People from other countries1166look at this country as a beacon and as an example, and here we1167are spending money, taxpayer dollars, to try to study1168transgender animals, like transing animals and testing them on1169party drugs? I mean, it is insane.1170    My question to you, Mr. Goodman, is, I understand that your1171organization, White Coat Waste, helped expose the taxpayer-1172funded experiments on bats that led to the COVID pandemic. How1173did you come about that? What was your investigation? How did1174you get the information?1175    Mr. Goodman. Yes. Thanks for the question. Again, it is an1176honor to be here. In 2018, we uncovered a lab at the USDA here,1177right outside of the Beltway, where they were breeding hundreds1178of kittens every year and then flying to China and other1179foreign countries to these disgusting wet markets, and buying1180dog and cat meat--Federal employees. They were then putting it1181in their carry-on luggage, flying it back to the United States,1182and then force-feeding dog and cat meat to kittens in this1183government laboratory in Maryland. They had spent $22 million1184on this project.1185    Mr. Burlison. For what purpose?1186    Mr. Goodman. They wanted to know if people eating dog and1187cat meat in China might be exposed to a particular parasite1188that could be carried in dog and cat meat.1189    Mr. Burlison. Wow. That was your first----1190    Mr. Goodman. So, that was when we first got a sense that1191taxpayer dollars----1192    Mr. Burlison. That was the first clue----1193    Mr. Goodman. Yes. So----1194    Mr. Burlison [continuing]. And then you continued to follow1195that.1196    Mr. Goodman. And fortunately, the Trump Administration shut1197that project down. They adopted out the cats who were left in1198the lab. Two of them went to live with my boss, the president1199and founder of White Coat Waste Project. Delilah and Petite1200lived happily ever after with him, but that set us on the scent1201of foreign aid for animal research. In late 2019, we discovered1202a list on the NIH website of all the labs in China receiving1203taxpayer dollars, and in January 2020, we went----1204    Mr. Burlison. There are, like, still 26?1205    Mr. Goodman. Yes.1206    Mr. Burlison. Or how many were there at that time?1207    Mr. Goodman. There were more than 30 at the time, and there1208were actually labs in Russia receiving taxpayer money at the1209time. In January 2020, we met with the White House to flag for1210them that these labs in China, including the Wuhan lab, were1211receiving taxpayer funding, and then in April 2020, we finally1212went public. Working with Congressman Matt Gaetz and Joni1213Ernst, we went public, exposing the grant that Fauci sent to1214the Wuhan lab through EcoHealth Alliance to fund the gain-of-1215function experiments. And then since then, we have been working1216to defund EcoHealth, defund the Wuhan lab, and cut funding for1217all animal laboratories in adversarial nations as a matter of1218animal welfare, government waste, and national security.1219    Mr. Burlison. What kind of sick and twisted individual1220comes up with a plan to have an experiment where you are going1221to turn these animals into cannibals and see what the outcome1222is? Where does that come from? Like, what was the thought1223process? How did the Ph.D. student who was doing the research1224or whatever, how did they make that pitch to get that grant?1225    Mr. Goodman. If it tells you anything about the1226government's thinking, the person responsible for this1227experiment is in the USDA's Hall of Fame.1228    Mr. Burlison. Do you have the name?1229    Mr. Goodman. Dr. Dubey.1230    Mr. Burlison. Dr. Dubey. Wow. Let me ask this question, I1231just have a little bit more time left. Given the fact that we1232have got quantum computing, we now have AI, if they truly are1233trying to do research and determine something, could they not1234run a lot of this research through advanced technology using1235quantum computers, data centers?1236    Mr. Goodman. Absolutely, and there are studies that have1237come out of Johns Hopkins and elsewhere showing that things1238like screening drugs and chemicals for human safety are1239actually much more accurate and efficient using computer1240modeling and AI than testing on lab animals.1241    Mr. Burlison. On a completely different species, right?1242    Mr. Goodman. Correct.1243    Mr. Burlison. With completely different DNA. It would make1244sense. Thank you. I appreciate what you do. Thank you for1245exposing all of this. It is shameful that we are still sending1246money to these, but I will do everything we can to try to stop1247this.1248    Mr. Goodman. Thank you so much.1249    Ms. Mace. All right. Thank you, Mr. Burlison. With1250agreement from the Ranking Member, the Chair and Ranking Member1251will each get an additional 5 minutes to ask questions, so I am1252going to yield to the Ranking Member first.1253    Ms. Brown. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. So, I want to1254circle back to you, Ms. Baker, with regards to potential1255legislative solutions that Congress can do to support and1256increase oversight of animal experimentation.1257    Ms. Baker. Yes. Thank you for this question. You know, one1258of the things that was mentioned is the numbers of animals. It1259is unbelievable that in 2025, in the United States, we still do1260not know how many animals are used in research. The estimate is1261up to 100 million, but we need to know that number, and one of1262the reasons we do not know that number is that a lot of the1263animals that are used in research are not even recognized as1264animals under the law. Mice, rats, birds bred for research,1265invertebrates, they are not animals under the law, and so they1266are not counted. We can amend the Animal Welfare Act to count1267those animals by including them in the definition of1268``animals.'' If there is no appetite for amending the Animal1269Welfare Act, there are other solutions, and especially focused1270on Federal Government spending.1271    So, the NIH does require recipients of NIH funding to do1272some reporting, but it is not transparent, and it is not1273accurate. If you receive NIH grants, every 4 years you need to1274provide some assurances that you are complying with NIH1275policies, and in that is an average daily inventory of animals.1276It is just an estimate. It is not transparent. To get that1277information, you would have to do FOIA requests. And so, there1278is actually some proposed legislation--the Federal Animal1279Research Accountability Act--that could change this. Simply1280put, if you receive NIH grants, then once a year you need to1281report on how many animals have been housed, bred, used in1282research, and that should be made transparent.1283    Ms. Brown. Thank you for that. I appreciate you giving your1284testimony today. Mr. Goodman, I do have a question. We keep1285hearing about the gender-affirming care, and I do find that1286concerning. Just for clarification purposes, can you let me1287know, what is that dollar figure and where is the source from?1288    Mr. Goodman. For those experiments?1289    Ms. Brown. Yes.1290    Mr. Goodman. The source of that is NIH RePORTER website and1291the USAspending.gov website.1292    Ms. Brown. OK. And what was the dollar figure?1293    Mr. Goodman. Let me get it for you, and I have a1294spreadsheet with all those projects.1295    Ms. Brown. OK.1296    Mr. Goodman. I would be happy to share it. The dollar1297figure was $240 million in recent grants; $26 million of those1298are active grants.1299    Ms. Brown. OK. And the----1300    Mr. Goodman. And those----1301    Ms. Brown [continuing]. Two-hundred-forty-one million is1302for?1303    Mr. Goodman. So, that is grants that are available in the1304NIH RePORTER data base, and again, I have this actual search1305saved. If you use search terms ``transgender'' and ``animal1306models,'' those were the hits that came up.1307    Ms. Brown. OK, because I think the article that you cited1308in your statement indicated there was $10 million.1309    Mr. Goodman. Yes. That was----1310    Ms. Brown. I was just trying to get clarity.1311    Mr. Goodman. Yes. That was just a sub-selection of the1312projects. It was not everything.1313    Ms. Brown. OK.1314    Mr. Goodman. Yes.1315    Ms. Brown. All right. Thank you very much.1316    Mr. Goodman. You are welcome.1317    Ms. Brown. All right, and I will yield back.1318    Ms. Mace. Thank you, and I am going to yield to myself for13195 minutes, and, Congresswoman Boebert, I am going to yield to1320you for a minute or two. I think you had a couple extra1321questions you want to ask. My first question, Mr. Goodman, what1322is the worst animal testing experiment you have ever heard of1323and uncovered? There are some really bad ones out there, but1324what is the absolute worst one you have ever heard of and1325uncovered?1326    Mr. Goodman. The kitten cannibalism was pretty horrendous:1327breeding kittens just to force them to eat cat meat, and then1328killing them, even though they were perfectly healthy, after1329they collected their feces out of a litter box. I mean, that is1330literally what was happening. They were doing that to thousands1331and thousands of kittens. The DOJ, until recently, was1332stabbing, shooting, and blowing up live animals for training1333exercises. We were able to cut that and defund that. The1334experiments that the NIH funded and Fauci funded in Tunisia,1335where they were putting the dogs' heads in mesh cages and1336filling them with biting flies. Yes, there is a lot of1337nightmarish stuff that we are being forced to fund, and1338taxpayers do not like it, and they do not even know how bad the1339situation is. If they did, they would be marching in the1340streets.1341    Ms. Mace. Yes, and Dr. Locke, a question for you. What are1342the prospects of a drug therapy that fails animal testing? Is1343it likely to receive regulatory approval?1344    Dr. Locke. Thank you for your question. I am not an expert1345on the drug development process, but the way you have described1346things, I think if the drug would not make it through the tests1347that are required, it would not be able to be in the market. If1348I could just add, though, that Congress has really looked1349closely at this issue about developing drugs and passed a law,1350the FDA Modernization Act----1351    Ms. Mace. Uh-huh.1352    Dr. Locke [continuing]. That removed the requirements for1353testing drugs. And my understanding is that there is bipartisan1354support for another law, because Congress feels that the FDA is1355not moving more quickly in this area. That is the FDA1356Modernization Act 3.0 that would force the Agency to really pay1357a lot more attention to using alternatives.1358    Ms. Mace. OK. And then, Ms. Baker, before I hand it over to1359Ms. Boebert, I love your idea of revisiting the Animal Welfare1360Act. I would be open to working with you in finding that1361language and doing a bill that would insert that language, to1362define what an animal is. I think that is very important. I am1363all about small parts, big difference. Of course, I would like1364to eradicate animal testing altogether, but that seems like an1365easy win that we could work on together in a nonpartisan1366manner. So, I would love to talk to you about that, and I will1367yield the last 2-and-a-half minutes to Ms. Boebert.1368    Ms. Boebert. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think the NIH1369probably should change their acronym to FOD--Faces of Death.1370This very much sounds like a show that my mother would not let1371me watch as a child and just hearing how egregious this is.1372There are many more things that I have listed here. Of course,1373we have heard of the beagles who were in the mesh cages. I do1374not know if their vocal cords were paralyzed or if they were1375removed, but they were prevented from barking, correct?1376    Mr. Goodman. Yes. There was a project that Dr. Fauci1377funded, actually we worked with Chairwoman Mace to expose, that1378they were doing drug testing where they were poisoning puppies1379with massive doses of drugs. There was actually a line item in1380the contract for a cordectomy----1381    Ms. Boebert. Wow.1382    Mr. Goodman [continuing]. To cut the vocal cords so the1383dogs would not bark in the lab.1384    Ms. Boebert. Wow. And so, we have heard that. We have heard1385electroshock therapy, even to the point where cats had their1386spinal cords exposed, their backs sliced open, and that1387electroshock therapy was given to test for erectile dysfunction1388and cognitive issues, and so many other things. And so, I ended1389my last round of questioning talking about the implantation of1390aborted fetal tissues, and you said that universities partner1391with clinics who are performing these abortions. Now, how does1392that process work and who funds that? Are the mothers of these1393aborted babies giving permission? Do they know it is taking1394place? Is there taxpayer funding in the crosshairs of that,1395other than the actual testing itself?1396    Mr. Goodman. That is outside of my wheelhouse.1397    Ms. Boebert. OK. Again, Madam Chair, I think this is1398something we should look into. I would love to see just what1399permissions are granted and given for that. I know that we have1400some regulatory framework within the Department of Health and1401Human Services and the Public Health Service Act, and1402regulations include prohibitions on buying or selling the1403tissue of valuable consideration, but they allow for1404compensation for costs associated with the tissue handling. And1405so, I would love to look into that, so not only can we prevent1406the cruelty in the animals like these beautiful beagles we see1407here today, but also even our children who are being harmed in1408this process as well, for whatever reason it may be. But, Madam1409Chair, I would love to continue to work with you on this and1410hold Dr. Fauci, the NIH, NIAID, and everyone else accountable1411for this wasteful spending, and I yield.1412    Ms. Mace. Thank you. I would now like to yield 5 minutes to1413Mr. McGuire.1414    Mr. McGuire. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thanks for1415bringing this egregious and evil issue to our attention. It is1416not working? All right. The new guy is learning. All right.1417Thank you, Chairwoman for bringing----1418    Ms. Mace. You are doing great.1419    Mr. McGuire. Thank you for bringing this egregious and evil1420issue to my attention. I do not think anyone in my district or1421our country would approve. I want to thank you for our1422witnesses for coming in. As a veteran, as a Navy Seal, we use1423dogs, and they save many lives. We call them furry missiles.1424And my wife and I have a Great Pyrenees, and our dog is part of1425the family, and I was not aware of what you have brought to our1426attention. And after listening to what the Chairwoman talked1427about, this being a bipartisan issue, it should be. It is1428definitely evidence that evil does exist. We spend more in our1429country per day than we bring in per day, which is going to1430sink this country if we do not get it under control. I cannot1431believe the amount of money that we are spending to do these1432crazy things.1433    I want to start with Dr. Locke. Approximately how many1434drugs on the market today rely on safety and efficacy data from1435multiple animal models before being allowed to move to human1436clinical trials?1437    Dr. Locke. Thank you for your question. I do not have a1438good figure for you other than to say that, as you correctly1439stated, the law requires safety and efficacy. And before the1440FDA Modernization Act was passed and probably even after it was1441passed, most of those drugs almost certainly had to go through1442some sort of animal testing, but I cannot put a number on it. I1443am sorry.1444    Mr. McGuire. No worries. I strongly advocate for the1445welfare of animals. Dr. Locke, would you agree that eliminating1446animal testing entirely from the research and development of1447drugs and vaccines could significantly hinder our ability to1448assess safety and efficacy, potentially delaying lifesaving1449treatments?1450    Dr. Locke. At the present time, we would need to transition1451away from animals. Yes, I do agree with that statement.1452    Mr. McGuire. That is what I think. All right. Dr. Locke,1453given your knowledge in alternative testing models, can you1454briefly list and describe different examples of technological1455alternatives?1456    Dr. Locke. Yes. Thank you for your question. One of the1457ones I mentioned in my testimony are these things called organs1458on a chip, which are just like what they sound like. They are1459small, engineered devices, and they mimic the organs that we1460have in our body. So, there is a lung on a chip, there is a1461heart on a chip, there is a liver on a chip, and those do not1462have the same functions that our organs do, but they have1463enough so that you can make good decisions based on the biology1464that you learn from those. In many cases, you can actually put1465human cells in there. You are putting human cells in there to1466study chemicals, and you can also begin to link these together1467to get a whole body on a chip.1468    Another area where we have had a lot of advances in1469developing these things is called organoids. So, organoids are1470groups of cells from, let us say, a brain or a liver or a1471heart, and you put them in a dish, and they actually organize1472themselves into something that looks like a human organ, but it1473is not exactly the same. But again, it has enough function so1474you can study it, and you can expose it to chemicals, and you1475can expose it to other things so that you might know what is1476going to impact it. The important thing to remember about1477these, too, is that, in terms of cost effectiveness, you can1478put these in a well plate, and you can do many, many studies at1479the same time. Unlike with animals, where you have a very, very1480slow throughput, these, you have either a medium or a high1481throughput. So, those are two examples that I am most familiar1482with.1483    Our other witnesses have mentioned AI computational models.1484That is another very, very powerful one, but we have all these1485unbelievable techniques now where we can actually use these for1486personalized medicine. So, I think everyone here has a medical1487school in their district or a university in their district that1488does this. But for example, if I was suffering from a disease1489and there were two options for treatment for that disease, and1490one was, let us say, a chemical and the other was a radiation1491treatment, you could actually take cells from my body and you1492could regress those cells to stem cells, then make them organ1493cells----1494    Mr. McGuire. I apologize. I am running out of time----1495    Dr. Locke. Oh, I am sorry.1496    Mr. McGuire [continuing]. And I have another question.1497    Dr. Locke. OK.1498    Mr. McGuire. I wish I had a list of the egregious things1499that my colleague Lauren Boebert listed--I could not believe1500half of them, or any of them--but I heard them mention kitten1501cannibalism, which is unbelievable. Is that true, and if so,1502where did it happen? When did it happen? What did they think1503they were going to achieve?1504    Dr. Locke. I do not have any information on that question.1505I am sorry.1506    Mr. McGuire. Does any of the witnesses have----1507    Mr. Goodman. Yes. My organization exposed that in 2018. The1508USDA's Agricultural Research Service, ARS, in Beltsville, had a1509lab where they were breeding hundreds of kittens every year and1510doing feeding experiments with them, including going to wet1511markets in China and Brazil and other places, buying dog and1512cat meat, bringing it back to the United States, and force-1513feeding that meat to kittens for studies looking at the1514prevalence of toxoplasmosis in dog and cat meat in wet markets1515abroad.1516    Mr. McGuire. Proof that evil does exist. Thank you,1517Chairwoman, for bringing this to our attention, and hopefully1518we can stop this evil. Thank you.1519    Ms. Mace. Thank you, Mr. McGuire. I would now like to yield1520to Ranking Member Brown for any brief closing remarks she may1521have.1522    Ms. Brown. I just want to thank the witnesses for being1523here, and I look forward to doing some good work on this1524Subcommittee.1525    Ms. Mace. And I want to thank the Ranking Member, and I1526look forward to working with you. While we were just talking1527offline here, I was saying I want to get on her bill about1528cosmetics and animal testing, so all good things today. Today's1529conversation builds upon the work that I and many of us on1530Oversight and throughout Congress have been working on for1531years to end animal testing. There are many of us up here, and1532we are not working fast enough. We are trying as hard as we1533can, so we appreciate the witnesses being here today.1534    Last Congress, I introduced the Preventing Animal Abuse and1535Waste Act to prohibit the NIH from conducting or funding1536research that causes significant pain or distress to cats or1537dogs. As an animal lover, I have been disturbed to learn about1538these barbaric and unnecessary experiments to create1539transgender mice, rats, and monkeys. I, like many, most humans,1540have a deep adoration and love for all of God's creatures,1541including our animals, and one of my earliest memories as a1542child was being in Hampton, South Carolina. I was, like, 41543years old, and my grandmother had just made some great biscuits1544and breakfast, and she gave me this bright pink album, and it1545was just full of pictures of animals from the newspaper from1546Hampton, and ever since then, I have just loved them so much,1547and I grew up with seven pets. We had three dogs, three cats,1548and a parrot named Julio.1549    And so, it is just important for the work that we are doing1550that all of God's creatures, all animals, are treated with1551respect and dignity and love, and that they are not murdered1552and maimed and killed on these horrific experiments. So, this1553Congress, I will continue to fight to end all animal testing,1554including by introducing legislation that prohibits use of1555Federal funds for these cruel animal sex-change experiments.1556Thank you, again, to our panelists. The issue of taxpayer-1557funded animal cruelty deserves our time and attention. I am1558thankful for your expert testimony today.1559    And with that, without objection, all Members will have 51560legislative days within which to submit materials and to submit1561additional written questions for the witnesses, which will then1562be forwarded to the witnesses for their response.1563    Ms. Mace. And we are now adjourned.1564    [Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]15651566                                 [all]