In the spring of 1979, a seemingly minor oversight at a lab in Sverdlovsk, USSR, led to a major disaster. A lab worker removed a clogged air filter in the ventilation system and failed to replace it. His note to the supervisor was never transferred to the official logbook, so when the next shift rolled in, workers simply resumed production as usual. This lab, however, was not an ordinary one. It was a biological weapons facility producing large quantities of anthrax, a deadly bacterium that can kill up to 90% of those it infects if inhaled. The anthrax powder floated out into the sky for hours, causing the largest documented outbreak of inhalation anthrax on record and resulting in at least 64 deaths.
The tragedy at Sverdlovsk was a violation of international law and a stark reminder of the dangers of biological weapons. However, today’s biosecurity experts are not just worried about state-sponsored bioweapons programs. They are concerned about an even more dangerous kind of lab leak, one involving genetically engineered microbes.
Since the 1970s, researchers have been manipulating the DNA of microbes to give them abilities they didn’t have before, a process known as “gain of function” work. This field of research has contributed significantly to humanity, with engineered viruses being used in vaccine production, gene therapy, and cancer treatments. However, within this realm lies a controversial sub-field where scientists engineer superbugs, officially known as “enhanced potential pandemic pathogens” (ePPPs). These are typically variants of well-known viruses, such as Ebola or avian influenza, that have been engineered to be more transmissible or deadly. If even one of these unusually dangerous viruses escaped a lab, it could cause a global pandemic.
Advocates of ePPP research argue that it could help us prepare for future pandemics by allowing us to jump-start treatments and potentially save lives. Critics, however, believe that the knowledge gained by studying these dangerous viruses isn’t worth the risk of creating them in the first place. Both sides of this ongoing debate are trying to save lives; they just disagree on the best way to do it. Everyone agrees, however, that an ePPP lab leak could be catastrophic.
Labs that work with dangerous pathogens are designed with numerous safety features to protect the scientists who work there, as well as the outside world. These include ventilation systems that decontaminate air, airtight “spacesuits” with dedicated oxygen, and sometimes buildings nested inside each other to prevent natural disasters from breaching the closed environment. Despite these precautions, there’s still room for the most common kind of mistake: human error. Many human errors are inconsequential, but some can be much more concerning, as evidenced by several incidents in recent years.
The potentially catastrophic consequences of an ePPP leak have convinced many scientists that we should stop this kind of research altogether. However, if it continues, there are steps we can take to minimize risk. Some experts have suggested creating an international database of leaks, near-misses, and fixes taken that would help labs adapt their protocols to minimize human errors. A robust, well-funded pandemic early warning system would also help protect us from any disease outbreak, whether it comes from a lab leak or a natural spillover. Developing the kind of global standards and databases necessary for these changes would be difficult, requiring unprecedented international collaboration and transparency. But we need to overcome these hurdles because pandemics don’t care about borders or politics.
Analyze the Sverdlovsk tragedy in detail. Identify the key failures in biosecurity and human error that led to the disaster. Discuss how these failures could have been prevented with better protocols and communication. Present your findings in a report or presentation.
Divide into two groups and hold a structured debate on the merits and risks of gain of function research, particularly focusing on enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (ePPPs). One group will argue in favor of continuing this research for its potential benefits, while the other will argue against it due to the risks involved.
Work in small groups to design a comprehensive biosecurity protocol for a hypothetical lab working with dangerous pathogens. Include measures to prevent human error, such as checklists, training programs, and communication protocols. Present your protocol to the class and discuss its strengths and potential weaknesses.
Participate in a simulation exercise where you must respond to a hypothetical lab leak of a genetically engineered microbe. Develop a response plan that includes immediate containment measures, communication with public health authorities, and long-term strategies to prevent future incidents. Reflect on the challenges and lessons learned from the exercise.
Research other historical incidents of lab leaks and their consequences. Compare and contrast these incidents with the Sverdlovsk tragedy. Create a presentation that highlights the common factors in these incidents and suggests improvements in biosecurity practices based on these case studies.
biosecurity – the measures taken to prevent the accidental release or intentional misuse of harmful biological agents – Proper biosecurity protocols are essential in laboratories working with dangerous pathogens to ensure the safety of both researchers and the public.
lab leaks – accidental release of harmful substances or organisms from a laboratory – The recent lab leak of a deadly virus sparked concerns about the safety practices in the facility.
gain of function research – scientific studies that modify organisms to enhance their abilities, often to understand disease mechanisms or to develop countermeasures – The controversial gain of function research aims to better comprehend the potential risks of pathogens and devise strategies to combat them.
genetically engineered microbes – microorganisms that have been altered through genetic manipulation for specific purposes – Genetically engineered microbes can be used to produce valuable pharmaceuticals or to clean up environmental pollutants.
enhanced potential pandemic pathogens – microorganisms that have been modified in the laboratory to possess increased transmissibility or virulence, potentially posing a higher risk of causing a pandemic – The creation of enhanced potential pandemic pathogens raises ethical concerns due to the potential for accidental release or misuse.
ePPP – abbreviation for enhanced potential pandemic pathogens – The research facility was criticized for conducting experiments with ePPP without sufficient risk assessment and containment measures.
lab safety measures – procedures and precautions put in place to ensure the safety of laboratory personnel and prevent accidents or exposures to hazardous materials – Wearing personal protective equipment and following strict containment protocols are essential lab safety measures.
human error – mistakes or failures resulting from human action or inaction – The accidental contamination of samples was attributed to human error in handling the materials.
minimizing risk – taking actions to reduce the likelihood or impact of potential harm or adverse events – Regular safety audits and training programs help in minimizing the risk of accidents in the laboratory.
pandemic early warning system – a system designed to detect and provide early alerts for potential pandemics, enabling timely response and containment measures – A robust pandemic early warning system can help prevent the spread of infectious diseases by providing early detection and response capabilities.
