BioSafety Levels and Why They Matter
BioSafety Levels and Why They Matter
The cost of entry to pathogen research
When working with bacteria, fungi, parasites, and viruses, there are protections in place in order to prevent infection from those pathogens. The protections are in place to protect two parties: the individuals doing the work and society at large. As such, there are pathogens that carry differing levels of risk to the individuals doing the work and society at large. Here are a few examples:
HIV research represents a moderate risk to the individual doing the work and a low risk to society at large, due to the inefficient means of its spread AND the ability for us to treat those who have lab accidents to avoid community spread. Additionally, the risk of infection is low as the virus must be introduced to only a few sites to make infection. It is BSL 2/3.
Yersinia Pestis (plague) research carries a high risk to the person and a high risk to society at large, it is lethal and spreads easily. It is BSL 3 as it is airborne and deadly.
Adenovirus research carries a low risk to the individual, and a low risk to society at large. For this reason it is used often for gene therapies and methods in genetic engineering. It is generally BSL 2, and often is modified to not be able to replicate.
Ebola research carries a severe risk to the person and a severe risk to society at large. If it escapes from a lab it has the potential to create a pandemic. It is BSL-4.
SARS coronaviruses are regarded as a severe threat to human health and did not circulate in humans other than briefly before, and were contained. They have high pandemic potential and a high threat to life. They were BSL-3 in the united states, but due to their high potential to uncontrollably integrate themselves in the human and animal populations, should have been BSL-4.
Lab accidents happen as humans are not infallible. What matters are layers of protection. These include redundancies, both systematic and on the level of personal protective equipment for the person doing the research. The higher the BSL level, the higher these redundancies and personal protection levels. If there is a pathogen not in circulation in humans and that has the potential to kill and maim, why should it not be at the highest level? This question is not rhetorical; it is not at the highest level due to financial parsimony and the cost barrier of entry to performing such research. We have treated biosafety with the lowest levels of safety acceptable due to financial parsimony and institutional laxity. Think of the Titan, the ship chartered and constructed by billionaires who scoffed at safety protocols and mechanisms, and became victims of their own hubris. They were intelligent people but became intoxicated by their own perception of control, authority, and power. The difference is, they are not taking the rest of society down on their ship. The higher the intelligence, the higher the ability to self-delude and rationalize.
It is easy to speak now from the position of hindsight, but indeed numerous advocates and scientists have argued before 2019 that SARS coronavirus research has had the potential to ignite the very epidemic it seeks to prevent. There is a scientist named Richard Ebright who has argued the enhancement of SARS coronaviruses and sars-like viruses carries little benefit to society at large. Indeed, the shining example of such a benefit faced poor results on clinical trial and were inferior to treatments made for SARS Cov 2 that were based on hypothesis-driven science.
Societal threats should be treated as never-events, not something simply reduced to an “acceptable level.” Unfortunately this creates a barrier of entry to research that some people will chafe at. But aren’t the innocent people worth constructing that barrier for? If sars cov 2 was found in a cave, cultured in a lab, and escaped in a city, wouldn’t you be bitter about the years of life expectancy the average person has lost?
We will discuss this all in a discussion on Twitter at 6 pm EST. https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1BRJjPakQWpKw?s=20
Enjoy.
AJ
In the USA, the people who die or who are disabled by covid19 are an acceptable loss.
In the USA, the people who die or who are disabled by guns are an acceptable loss.
In the USA, the people who die or who are disabled due systemic health inequities are an acceptable loss.
I accept that I am disabled due to one “mild” case of covid19. I accept that my quality of life is 10% of what it was prior to the covid19 infection, which I got from my spouse, whom I share a bed with. I accept that my life will be shortened due to covid19 infections.