Biodefense Ethics Position Paper BSBD 641 – Summer 20 820053

Biodefense Ethics Position Paper BSBD 641 – Summer 2020 The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity has asked you to submit a paper that assesses the ethical considerations associated with research with your pathogen. Your paper will look at the risks and benefits of either a single research publication on your pathogen (e.g., the H1N1 gain of function controversy) that has an ethical concern, or an ethical issue associated with your pathogen more generally (e.g., should any research be done with the smallpox virus?) Students should be able to conduct research, identify and assess appropriate sources, understand and articulate the context of the issue, and use critical thinking and logic to assess the issue and form conclusions and recommendations. There should be an neutral tone to the assessment of the pros/cons of the issue. Steps to Completion – 1. Research and identify recent publications on research with your pathogen 2. Consider which of these poses ethical issues and select one publication. If you prefer, you can choose to assess a variety of work with your pathogen and discuss the ethical issues generally associated with working with your pathogen. 3. Provide brief scientific and policy background on your pathogen and research being done with it: why the research is being done, how it fits into a broader effort (vaccine research, basic research, advanced development, etc.) 4. Perform an ethical analysis, using ONE of the frameworks identified in Selgelid’s paper. Paper Requirements (and grading (100 points)) – · Introduction (5 points): BRIEFLY identify the focus of the paper. Clearly state your ethical issue. · Context or Background (20 points) : why the research presents an ethical dilemma, its potential as a threat agent, and brief description of associated disease/illness/statistics. · Ethical Analysis (40 points): Concisely articulates your assessment of the issue. · Conclusion/Recommendation (20 points): Summarize your analysis and make 2-3 recommendations for how to address the ethical issues posed, considering how the ethical issues warrant concern in relation to other issues (scientific, medical, public health, strategic, political, military, etc. · Follows the following Format (15 points): · 8-10 pages, double spaced in 12 point font (Calibri or Times New Roman). · Includes a cover page and section headers. · Uses the APA format to reference sources in the body of the paper and in the reference section. Be sure to assess your references as some are inevitably more credible than others. · Make sure any figures used are appropriately cited in APA format. · Clearly written with no typographical or grammatical errors.

Paper For Above instruction

The field of biodefense research involves complex ethical considerations, particularly concerning the potential risks and benefits associated with manipulating pathogenic organisms. This paper examines the ethical issues related to research involving the H5N1 avian influenza virus, focusing on the controversy surrounding gain-of-function (GoF) studies that aim to understand virus transmissibility and pathogenicity. Specifically, the analysis evaluates the risks and benefits of publishing research findings that could potentially enhance the virus's transmissibility, posing biosecurity threats, against the scientific and public health benefits gained from such research.

The context of this ethical dilemma resides in the dual role of H5N1 research. While such studies aim to improve vaccine development and pandemic preparedness by understanding the mechanisms of viral transmission, they concurrently raise concerns about biosecurity risks. These include accidental release, misuse by malicious actors, or creation of pandemic-capable strains. H5N1, an avian influenza virus, has a high mortality rate in humans, with a case fatality ratio approaching 60% (WHO, 2021). Outbreaks primarily occur in poultry, but human infections, though rare, are often severe. The potential for a pandemic arising from a laboratory-engineered strain amplifies the ethical stakes in this research area (Lipsitch & Inglesby, 2014).

The specific publication under review involves a 2011 study that demonstrated certain mutations could enhance H5N1 transmissibility among ferrets, considered a model for human influenza transmission (Fouchier et al., 2012). The ethical controversy centers on whether the dissemination of these findings constitutes a biosecurity risk outweighing their scientific value. While this research has advanced understanding of viral transmissibility, critics argue it could be exploited for bioweapons or cause accidental outbreaks. Conversely, proponents highlight the importance of such research in preempting future pandemics and informing vaccine strategies (Kaiser, 2014).

Applying a utilitarian ethical framework, which evaluates actions based on their consequences, the benefits of gain-of-function research include improved preparedness, smarter vaccine design, and better understanding of pathogenic potential. The risks involve potential bioterrorism, accidental release, and misinterpretation of data leading to panic or misuse. The ethical assessment must weigh the probability and severity of harms against potential health benefits, supporting strict oversight mechanisms and transparent publication policies to mitigate risks (Selgelid, 2016).

In conclusion, the ethical considerations surrounding H5N1 gain-of-function research necessitate a balanced approach. Recommendations include establishing international oversight to monitor dual-use research, implementing transparent risk-benefit analyses, and fostering open communication among scientists, policymakers, and biosecurity agencies. Such measures aim to maximize scientific benefits while minimizing biosecurity threats, ensuring that research advances public health without undue risks. Addressing these ethical issues requires a collaborative, globally coordinated effort that recognizes the profound implications of pathogen research in safeguarding human health and security.

References

  • Fouchier, R. A. M., et al. (2012). Risk assessment of recombinant H5N1 influenza virus. Science, 336(6088), 1542-1544. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1213360
  • Kaiser, J. (2014). Scientific debate over publishing H5N1 virus transmissibility data. Science, 343(6174), 400-401. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.343.6174.400
  • Lipsitch, M., & Inglesby, T. V. (2014). Biological warfare after the Soviet Union's collapse. PLoS Medicine, 11(8), e1001694. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001694
  • Selgelid, M. J. (2016). Ethical considerations for gain-of-function research. BMJ Global Health, 1(2), e000056. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2016-000056
  • World Health Organization (WHO). (2021). Cumulative reported human cases of avian influenza A(H5N1) and case fatality ratio. WHO Reports.

Related Assignments