What Happens If An Engineered Virus Escapes The Lab

The Sverdlovsk Tragedy: A Lesson in Biosecurity

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 Threat of Lab Leaks Today

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.

Gain of Function Research and Its Risks

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.

The Debate Over ePPP Research

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.

Lab Safety Measures and Human Error

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.

Minimizing Risk in Biosecurity

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.