A Forgotten Air Filter and a Catastrophic Outbreak
In the spring of 1979, a lab worker in Sverdlovsk, USSR made a simple mistake that had devastating consequences. He removed a clogged air filter in the ventilation system and failed to replace it. Unfortunately, his note to the supervisor about the issue was never transferred to the official logbook, so when the next shift came in, they were unaware of the problem and started production as usual.
This might have been a minor oversight in most labs, but this particular facility was a biological weapons lab, tasked with producing large quantities of anthrax. Anthrax, when inhaled, can be fatal to up to 90% of those it infects. As a result of the missing air filter, deadly anthrax powder was released into the air, causing the largest recorded outbreak of inhalation anthrax. Tragically, at least 64 people lost their lives.
The Perils of Gain-of-Function Research
Since the 1970s, scientists have been conducting research known as "gain of function" work. This involves manipulating the DNA of microbes to enhance their abilities. While most of this work is beneficial and carries minimal risk, there is a sub-field within gain-of-function research that raises serious concerns.
Known as "enhanced potential pandemic pathogens" (ePPPs), these engineered superbugs are typically variants of well-known viruses like Ebola or avian influenza. Scientists modify these viruses to make them more transmissible or more deadly. The potential consequences of a lab leak involving such a virus are immense, as it could trigger a global pandemic.
Proponents of developing ePPPs argue that this research could help us prepare for future pandemics and save lives. They highlight examples like the creation of a deadly strain of bird flu that could spread through the air between mammals. By studying such a virus in controlled conditions, scientists believe they can gain valuable insights into worst-case scenarios.
However, critics argue that it is uncertain whether these engineered viruses would ever naturally evolve in the wild. They question the justification for creating such dangerous pathogens in the first place, considering the potential risks involved. Both sides of the debate share the goal of saving lives but differ on the approach to achieve it.
The Nightmare Scenario: An ePPP Lab Leak
While labs working with dangerous pathogens have multiple safety measures in place, including ventilation systems and airtight spacesuits, there is always a risk of human error. Even with the best technology, mistakes can happen. Several incidents in the past have highlighted the potential dangers.
In 2009, a researcher accidentally pricked themselves with an Ebola-contaminated needle, endangering their own life and the lives of others involved in their treatment. In 2014, six vials containing the smallpox virus were discovered in an unsecured storage room after being forgotten for decades. That same year, a CDC scientist unknowingly contaminated a sample of relatively harmless bird flu with a deadly lab-grown variant and inadvertently shipped it to the USDA.
While these incidents did not escalate into larger crises, they underscore the catastrophic consequences that could arise from a lab leak involving an ePPP. The potential risks have led many scientists to call for a halt to this type of research altogether.
Minimizing the Risk: Learning from Mistakes
If a complete halt to ePPP research is not feasible, there are measures that can be taken to minimize the risk of lab leaks. Learning from past mistakes is a crucial step in reducing human error.
Experts have suggested the creation of an international database to track leaks, near-misses, and the solutions implemented. This information would help labs adapt their protocols to minimize the chances of human errors occurring. Additionally, a well-funded pandemic early warning system would provide early detection and response to any disease outbreak, regardless of whether it originates from a lab leak or a natural spillover.
However, implementing these changes would require extensive international collaboration and transparency. Developing global standards and databases presents significant challenges, but they are necessary to overcome in order to protect against pandemics that transcend borders and politics.
Conclusion
The risk of lab leaks involving enhanced potential pandemic pathogens is a pressing concern for biosecurity experts. While gain-of-function research has the potential to provide valuable insights for pandemic preparedness, the potential consequences of a lab leak are too significant to ignore.
Minimizing human errors and establishing robust early warning systems are crucial steps in mitigating the risk. Learning from past incidents and sharing information globally can help laboratories adopt best practices and protocols to prevent future leaks. The challenges of achieving international collaboration and transparency must be overcome to ensure the safety and security of the global community.
Pandemics do not discriminate based on borders or political affiliations. The actions we take today can have far-reaching consequences for the future. By prioritizing the prevention of lab leaks and investing in global biosecurity, we can work towards a safer world for all.
