House Committee Probes Merck, AbbVie China Trials

A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers has opened national security inquiries into whether Merck and AbbVie ran clinical trials in China that may have helped strengthen the country's military capabilities, according to letters reviewed by Reuters and dated Monday.

At a Glance

• Letters led by Republican Representative John Moolenaar of Michigan, chair of the China Select Committee, went to Merck and AbbVie this week.
• Lawmakers want details on trial sites in Xinjiang and at Chinese military hospitals by July 17.
• China's share of global early stage drug trials rose from 8% in 2015 to over 32% in 2024.
• The U.S. share of that same market fell from 48% to around 37% over the same period.
• Both companies say they follow global ethical and safety standards; China's embassy called the inquiry baseless.

What the Lawmakers Are Asking

The letters, addressed to AbbVie chief executive Robert Michael and Merck chief executive Robert Davis, request a full accounting of due diligence practices, data protection measures, and other safeguards used at the companies' trial sites in China. Lawmakers singled out Xinjiang and military hospitals as areas of particular concern, giving both companies until July 17 to respond.

Representative Moolenaar's committee has built its case around a specific worry: that clinical trial data or biological material gathered in China could end up feeding the country's military biotechnology ambitions. The letters stop short of accusing either drugmaker of wrongdoing. In fact, they explicitly state there is no evidence Merck or AbbVie broke any laws. Instead, the concern is that operating trial sites inside China exposes American companies to what the letters describe as ethical and security risks simply by virtue of doing business there.

Why Xinjiang Is at the Center of This

Xinjiang carries particular weight in Washington because it is where Beijing has carried out what the letters call a genocide against Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities. Lawmakers point to documentation from Chinese researchers themselves showing gaps in how informed consent was obtained from some trial participants there.

The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act of 2021 does not mention clinical trials directly, but the letters argue its spirit still applies. The law reflects a broader principle, they say: companies operating in Xinjiang need to prove their supply chains and operations are free of forced labor, and that same scrutiny should extend to how patients are recruited and treated in medical research.

How China Became a Trial Hub

The letters describe a blunt calculation. Through regulatory changes, government subsidies, and what lawmakers call questionable ethics, China has turned itself into the fastest and cheapest place in the world to run early stage human drug trials. The numbers back up how quickly that shift happened.

That reversal has not gone unnoticed inside the U.S. government. A December report from the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology warned that China has built a vertically integrated biotech ecosystem positioned to challenge American leadership in the field.

How the Companies and Beijing Are Responding

Merck said patient safety and ethical integrity remain top priorities for its clinical research program and that it adheres to global guidelines wherever it operates. AbbVie declined to comment on the letters.

A spokesperson for China's embassy in Washington pushed back hard, saying there is nothing credible behind the committee's actions and accusing the U.S. of trying to politicize trade and technology disputes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What triggered these investigations into Merck and AbbVie?

Lawmakers on the China Select Committee sent letters asking both companies for detailed information about their clinical trial operations in China, particularly in Xinjiang and at military hospitals, citing national security and ethical concerns.

Are Merck or AbbVie accused of breaking any laws?

No. The letters explicitly state there is no evidence either company engaged in illegal activity, but they argue that running trials in China still carries ethical and security risks.

Why does Xinjiang matter in this story?

Xinjiang is where the U.S. government has said Beijing carried out genocide against Uyghurs and other minorities, and lawmakers cite documented lapses in obtaining informed consent from trial participants there.

How much has China's role in drug trials grown?

China's share of global early stage drug development rose from about 8% in 2015 to over 32% by 2024, while the U.S. share fell from 48% to around 37% over that same period.

What Comes Next

Both companies have until July 17 to hand over the requested records. How they respond, and what the committee does with that information, could shape how much scrutiny other drugmakers with China operations face in the months ahead.