Horsepox Research Accentuates Urgency for Global Action to Reduce Biological Risks

Publication of “Construction of an infectious horsepox virus vaccine from chemically synthesized DNA fragments” by the journal PLOS ONE last week further accentuates the need for urgent global dialogue to develop clear norms and actions for reducing biological risks posed by advances in technology. As governmental oversight continues to lag behind biotechnology breakthroughs, academic and private stakeholders conducting, funding, and publishing research - as well as those developing new technologies – also must take responsibility for mitigating risk.  

The research demonstrates the potential to recreate the virus that causes smallpox—one of the greatest scourges the world has ever faced and eradicated. The risks posed by the publication of methods that could ease the pathway for synthesizing smallpox should have been carefully weighed from the outset. The investigators themselves highlight the dual-use potential of their work, yet there was no clear or routine process for taking those risks into account prior to publication.   

It won’t get easier to tackle these risks, and piecemeal approaches aren’t enough. These experiments were conducted in Canada with private funding from a U.S. company and involve an agent that is not on the U.S. Biological Select Agents and Toxins list. U.S. dual-use regulations don’t apply to privately funded research or research conducted outside of the country. And even if the research had been conducted in the United States with federal funding, the existing U.S. Dual Use Research of Concern policies would not likely have kicked in because the virus causing horsepox is not included on the list of agents in those policies.

Moving forward, it’s clear that the capability to create and modify biological agents is outpacing governmental oversight and public debate. Now more than ever, scientific stakeholders, private sector actors, and biotechnology leaders should develop and take specific actions to mitigate risk and accelerate biosecurity innovation.  

PLOS states that it wishes to encourage debate surrounding dual use issues, and we welcome that sentiment. However, for experiments with the potential to significantly increase pandemic risk, we hope for a future in which that conversation comes earlier—and not after—the research has been done and published.  

 

 

January 22, 2018
Authors
Elizabeth Cameron, PhD
Elizabeth Cameron, PhD

Vice President, Global Biological Policy and Programs

Most Popular

Atomic Pulse

NTI Seminar: Impressions and Implications of the Iran Nuclear Archive

The Israeli government invited a team from Harvard to review documents and media seized during a raid on Iran’s secret warehouse. Team leaders Matthew Bunn and Rolf Mowatt-Larssen published a paper on their findings in May 2019. They discussed their findings and implications for policy makers at an NTI Seminar.

Atomic Pulse

Get to Know NTI: Jake Jordan

Jake Jordan is NTI's senior director for Global Biological Policy and Programs where he works on a number of key programs, including NTI's Biosecurity Innovation and Risk Reduction Initiative. Find out why he never took a biology class in college and what he'd do if he won the lottery.