Biotechnology risk

Short description: Existential threat from biological sources

Biotechnology risk is a form of existential risk from biological sources, such as genetically engineered biological agents.[1][2] The release of such high-consequence pathogens could be

* deliberate (in the form of bioterrorism or biological weapons)
* accidental, or
* a naturally occurring event.

A chapter on biotechnology and biosecurity was included in Nick Bostrom's 2008 anthology Global Catastrophic Risks, which covered risks including viral agents.[3] Since then, new technologies like CRISPR and gene drives have been introduced.

While the ability to deliberately engineer pathogens has been constrained to high-end labs run by top researchers, the technology to achieve this is rapidly becoming cheaper and more widespread.[4] For example, the diminishing cost of sequencing the human genome (from $10 million to $1,000), the accumulation of large datasets of genetic information, the discovery of gene drives, and the discovery of CRISPR.[5] Biotechnology risk is therefore a credible explanation for the Fermi paradox.[6]

## Contents

* 1 Genetically modified organisms (GMO)
* 1.1 1\. Health risks
* 1.1.1 Unexpected gene interactions
* 1.1.2 Cancer risks
* 1.1.3 Allergenic potential
* 1.1.4 Horizontal gene transfer (HGT)
* 1.1.5 Antibiotic resistance
* 2 Gain-of-function mutations
* 2.1 Research
* 2.1.1 Mousepox
* 2.1.2 Influenza
* 2.2 Regulation
* 3 CRISPR
* 4 See also
* 5 References
* 6 External links

## Genetically modified organisms (GMO)

There are several advantages and disadvantages of genetically modified organisms. The disadvantages include many risks, which have been classified into six classes: 1. Health risks, 2. Environmental risks, 3. Threat to biodiversity, 4. Increase in social differences, 5. Scientific concerns, 6. Potential threat to the autonomy and welfare of farmers who wish to produce non-GM products.[7]

### 1\. Health risks

The following are potential health risks related to the consumption of GMOs.

#### Unexpected gene interactions

The expected outcomes of the transferred gene construct may differ due to gene interactions. It has been hypothesized that genetic modification can potentially cause changes in metabolism, though results are conflicting in animal studies.[8]

#### Cancer risks

GM crops require lower amounts of pesticide compared to non-GM crops.[9][10][11] Because some pesticides' main component is glyphosate, the lower amounts of pesticides needed on GM crops may reduce the risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in workers who handle raw GM products.[12][13]

#### Allergenic potential

Allergenic potential is the potential to elicit an allergic reaction in already sensitized consumers. A particular gene that has been added to a GM crop possibly can create new allergens, and constant exposure to a particular protein allergen may have resulted in developing new allergies. This is not related directly to the use of GM technology; but since no test can predict allergenicity, it is highly possible that the new proteins or their interactions with usual proteins could produce new allergies.[7]

#### Horizontal gene transfer (HGT)

Horizontal gene transfer is any process by which an organism acquires genetic material from a second organism without descending from it. In contrast, the vertical transfer is when an organism acquires genetic material from its ancestors (i.e., its parents). HGT is the transfer of DNA between cells of the same generation. Humans and animals have been in contact with "foreign DNA". In humans, DNA has absorbed through food daily through fragments of plant and animal genes and bacterial DNA.

#### Antibiotic resistance

Theoretically, antibiotic resistance can occur by consuming genetically modified plants. Genes can be transferred to bacteria in the human gastrointestinal tract and develop resistance to that specific antibiotic. Considering this risk factor, more research is needed.[7]

## Gain-of-function mutations

Main page: Biology:Gain-of-function research

### Research

Pathogens may be intentionally or unintentionally genetically modified to change their characteristics, including virulence or toxicity.[2] When intentional, these mutations can serve to adapt the pathogen to a laboratory setting, understand the mechanism of transmission or pathogenesis, or in the development of therapeutics. Such mutations have also been used in the development of biological weapons, and dual-use risk continues to be a concern in the research of pathogens.[14] The greatest concern is frequently associated with gain-of-function mutations, which confer novel or increased functionality, and the risk of their release. Gain-of-function research on viruses has been occurring since the 1970s, and came to notoriety after influenza vaccines were serially passed through animal hosts.[citation needed]

#### Mousepox

A group of Australian researchers unintentionally changed characteristics of the mousepox virus while trying to develop a virus to sterilize rodents as a means of biological pest control.[2][15][16] The modified virus became highly lethal even in vaccinated and naturally resistant mice.[17]

#### Influenza

In 2011, two laboratories published reports of mutational screens of avian influenza viruses, identifying variants which become transmissible through the air between ferrets. These viruses seem to overcome an obstacle which limits the global impact of natural H5N1.[18][19] In 2012, scientists further screened point mutations of the H5N1 virus genome to identify mutations which allowed airborne spread.[20][21] While the stated goal of this research was to improve surveillance and prepare for influenza viruses which are of particular risk in causing a pandemic,[22] there was significant concern that the laboratory strains themselves could escape.[23] Marc Lipsitch and Alison P. Galvani coauthored a paper in PLoS Medicine arguing that experiments in which scientists manipulate bird influenza viruses to make them transmissible in mammals deserve more intense scrutiny as to whether or not their risks outweigh their benefits.[24] Lipsitch also described influenza as the most frightening "potential pandemic pathogen".[25]

### Regulation

In 2014, the United States instituted a moratorium on gain-of-function research into influenza, MERS, and SARS.[26] This was in response to the particular risks these airborne pathogens pose. However, many scientists opposed the moratorium, arguing that this limited their ability to develop antiviral therapies.[27] The scientists argued gain-of-function mutations were necessary, such as adapting MERS to laboratory mice so it could be studied.

The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity also has instituted rules for research proposals using gain-of-function research of concern.[28] The rules outline how experiments are to be evaluated for risks, safety measures, and potential benefits; prior to funding.

In order to limit access to minimize the risk of easy access to genetic material from pathogens, including viruses, the members of the International Gene Synthesis Consortium screen orders for regulated pathogen and other dangerous sequences.[29] Orders for pathogenic or dangerous DNA are verified for customer identity, barring customers on governmental watch lists, and only to institutions "demonstrably engaged in legitimate research".

## CRISPR

Following surprisingly fast advances in CRISPR editing, an international summit proclaimed[clarification needed] in December 2015 that it was "irresponsible" to proceed with human gene editing until issues in safety and efficacy were addressed.[30] One way in which CRISPR editing can cause existential risk is through gene drives, which are said to have potential to "revolutionize" ecosystem management.[31] Gene drives are a novel technology that have potential to make genes spread through wild populations extremely quickly. They have the potential to rapidly spread resistance genes against malaria in order to rebuff the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum.[32] These gene drives were originally engineered in January 2015 by Ethan Bier and Valentino Gantz; this editing was spurred by the discovery of CRISPR-Cas9. In late 2015, DARPA started to study approaches that could halt gene drives if they went out of control and threatened biological species.[33]

## See also

* Global catastrophic risk
* Human extinction
* Biological warfare

## References

1. ↑ "Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios". http://www.nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html.
2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Ali Noun; Christopher F. Chyba (2008). "Chapter 20: Biotechnology and biosecurity". in Bostrom, Nick; Cirkovic, Milan M.. Global Catastrophic Risks. Oxford University Press.
3. ↑ Bostrom, Nick; Cirkovic, Milan M. (2011-09-29). Global Catastrophic Risks: Nick Bostrom, Milan M. Cirkovic: 9780199606504: Amazon.com: Books. ISBN 978-0199606504.
4. ↑ Collinge, David B.; Jørgensen, Hans J.L.; Lund, Ole S.; Lyngkjær, Michael F. (2010-07-01). "Engineering Pathogen Resistance in Crop Plants: Current Trends and Future Prospects". Annual Review of Phytopathology 48 (1): 269–291. doi:10.1146/annurev-phyto-073009-114430. ISSN 0066-4286. PMID 20687833. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-phyto-073009-114430.
5. ↑ "FLI – Future of Life Institute". http://futureoflife.org/background/risk-of-biotechnology/.
6. ↑ Sotos, John G. (2019-01-15). "Biotechnology and the lifetime of technical civilizations". International Journal of Astrobiology 18 (5): 445–454. doi:10.1017/s1473550418000447. ISSN 1473-5504. Bibcode: 2019IJAsB..18..445S.
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Hug, Kristina (February 2008). "Genetically modified organisms: Do the benefits outweigh the risks?" (in en). Medicina 44 (2): 87–99. doi:10.3390/medicina44020012. ISSN 1648-9144. PMID 18344661.
8. ↑ Bawa, A. S.; Anilakumar, K. R. (2012-12-19). "Genetically modified foods: safety, risks and public concerns—a review". Journal of Food Science and Technology 50 (6): 1035–1046. doi:10.1007/s13197-012-0899-1. ISSN 0022-1155. PMID 24426015. PMC 3791249. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13197-012-0899-1.
9. ↑ Klümper, Wilhelm; Qaim, Matin (3 November 2014). "A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops". PLOS ONE 9 (11): e111629. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111629. PMID 25365303. Bibcode: 2014PLoSO...9k1629K.
10. ↑ Raman, Ruchir (2 October 2017). "The impact of Genetically Modified (GM) crops in modern agriculture: A review". GM Crops & Food 8 (4): 195–208. doi:10.1080/21645698.2017.1413522. PMID 29235937.
11. ↑ Brookes, Graham (31 December 2022). "Genetically Modified (GM) Crop Use 1996–2020: Environmental Impacts Associated with Pesticide Use Change". GM Crops & Food 13 (1): 262–289. doi:10.1080/21645698.2022.2118497. PMID 36226624.
12. ↑ Zhang, Luoping; Rana, Iemaan; Shaffer, Rachel M.; Taioli, Emanuela; Sheppard, Lianne (July 2019). "Exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides and risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis and supporting evidence". Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research 781: 186–206. doi:10.1016/j.mrrev.2019.02.001. PMID 31342895.
13. ↑ Weisenburger, Dennis D. (September 2021). "A Review and Update with Perspective of Evidence that the Herbicide Glyphosate (Roundup) is a Cause of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma". Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma & Leukemia 21 (9): 621–630. doi:10.1016/j.clml.2021.04.009. ISSN 2152-2669. PMID 34052177.
14. ↑ Kloblentz, GD (2012). "From biodefence to biosecurity: the Obama administration's strategy for countering biological threats.". International Affairs 88 (1): 131–48. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01061.x. PMID 22400153.
15. ↑ Jackson, R; Ramshaw, I (January 2010). "The mousepox experience. An interview with Ronald Jackson and Ian Ramshaw on dual-use research. Interview by Michael J. Selgelid and Lorna Weir.". EMBO Reports 11 (1): 18–24. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.270. PMID 20010799.
16. ↑ Jackson, Ronald J.; Ramsay, Alistair J.; Christensen, Carina D.; Beaton, Sandra; Hall, Diana F.; Ramshaw, Ian A. (2001). "Expression of Mouse Interleukin-4 by a Recombinant Ectromelia Virus Suppresses Cytolytic Lymphocyte Responses and Overcomes Genetic Resistance to Mousepox". Journal of Virology 75 (3): 1205–1210. doi:10.1128/jvi.75.3.1205-1210.2001. PMID 11152493.
17. ↑ Sandberg, Anders. "The five biggest threats to human existence". http://theconversation.com/the-five-biggest-threats-to-human-existence-27053.
18. ↑ Imai, M; Watanabe, T; Hatta, M; Das, SC; Ozawa, M; Shinya, K; Zhong, G; Hanson, A et al. (2 May 2012). "Experimental adaptation of an influenza H5 HA confers respiratory droplet transmission to a reassortant H5 HA/H1N1 virus in ferrets.". Nature 486 (7403): 420–8. doi:10.1038/nature10831. PMID 22722205. Bibcode: 2012Natur.486..420I.
19. ↑ "The Risk from Super-Viruses – The European". http://www.theeuropean-magazine.com/marc-lipsitch--2/6691-the-risk-from-super-viruses.
20. ↑ Herfst, S; Schrauwen, EJ; Linster, M; Chutinimitkul, S; de Wit, E; Munster, VJ; Sorrell, EM; Bestebroer, TM et al. (22 June 2012). "Airborne transmission of influenza A/H5N1 virus between ferrets.". Science 336 (6088): 1534–41. doi:10.1126/science.1213362. PMID 22723413. Bibcode: 2012Sci...336.1534H.
21. ↑ "Five Mutations Make H5N1 Airborne". http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32247/title/Five-Mutations-Make-H5N1-Airborne/.
22. ↑ "Deliberating Over Danger". The Scientist. 1 April 2012. http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/31876/title/Deliberating-Over-Danger/.
23. ↑ Connor, Steve (20 December 2013). "'Untrue statements' anger over work to make H5N1 bird-flu virus MORE dangerous to humans". The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/untrue-statements-anger-over-work-to-make-h5n1-bird-flu-virus-more-dangerous-to-humans-9018666.html.
24. ↑ Lipsitch, M; Galvani, AP (May 2014). "Ethical alternatives to experiments with novel potential pandemic pathogens.". PLOS Medicine 11 (5): e1001646. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001646. PMID 24844931.
25. ↑ "Q & A: When lab research threatens humanity". 15 September 2014. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/when-lab-research-threatens-humanity/.
26. ↑ Kaiser, Jocelyn; Malakoff, David (17 October 2014). "U.S. halts funding for new risky virus studies, calls for voluntary moratorium". Science. https://www.science.org/content/article/us-halts-funding-new-risky-virus-studies-calls-voluntary-moratorium.
27. ↑ Kaiser, Jocelyn (22 October 2014). "Researchers rail against moratorium on risky virus experiments". Science. https://www.science.org/content/article/researchers-rail-against-moratorium-risky-virus-experiments.
28. ↑ Kaiser, Jocelyn (27 May 2016). "U.S. advisers sign off on plan for reviewing risky virus studies". Science. https://www.science.org/content/article/us-advisers-sign-plan-reviewing-risky-virus-studies.
29. ↑ "International Gene Synthesis Consortium (IGSC) - Harmonized Screening Protocol - Gene Sequence & Customer Screening to Promote Biosecurity". http://www.genesynthesisconsortium.org/images/pdf/IGSC-Harmonized-Screening-Protocol-11_18_09.pdf.
30. ↑ "Scientist Call For Moratorium on Human Genome Editing: The Dangers Of Using CRISPR To Create 'Designer Babies' : LIFE : Tech Times". 6 December 2015. http://www.techtimes.com/articles/113401/20151206/scientist-call-for-moratorium-on-human-genome-editing-the-dangers-of-using-crispr-to-create-designer-babies.htm.
31. ↑ ""Gene Drives" And CRISPR Could Revolutionize Ecosystem Management – Scientific American Blog Network". 17 July 2014. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/gene-drives-and-crispr-could-revolutionize-ecosystem-management/.
32. ↑ Ledford, Heidi; Callaway, Ewen (23 November 2015). 'Gene drive' mosquitoes engineered to fight malaria – Nature News & Comment. doi:10.1038/nature.2015.18858. http://www.nature.com/news/gene-drive-mosquitoes-engineered-to-fight-malaria-1.18858. Retrieved 3 April 2016.
33. ↑ Begley, Sharon (12 November 2015). "Why FBI and the Pentagon are afraid of gene drives". https://www.statnews.com/2015/11/12/gene-drive-bioterror-risk/.

## External links

* Nuclear Threat Initiative report on Preventing Global Catastrophic Biological Risks (September 2020)
* 80,000 Hours problem profile on Reducing Global Catastrophic Biological Risks (March 2020)

* v
* t
* e

Global catastrophic risks

* Future of the Earth
* Ultimate fate of the universe

Technological|

* Gray goo
* Kinetic bombardment
* Mutual assured destruction
* Dead Hand
* Doomsday device
* Antimatter weapon
* Synthetic intelligence / Artificial intelligence
* Existential risk from artificial intelligence
* AI takeover
* Technological singularity
* Transhumanism
* Year 2000 problem

Sociological|

* Malthusian catastrophe
* New World Order (conspiracy theory)
* Nuclear holocaust
* winter
* famine
* cobalt
* Societal collapse
* World War III

Ecological|

| Climate change|

* Extinction risk from global warming
* Tipping points in the climate system
* Global terrestrial stilling
* Global warming
* Hypercane
* Ice age
* Ecocide
* Human impact on the environment
* Ozone depletion
* Cascade effect
* Supervolcano
* winter

|

Earth Overshoot Day|

* Overexploitation
* Overpopulation
* Human overpopulation

Biological|

| Extinction|

* Extinction event
* Human extinction
* Genetic erosion
* Genetic pollution

|

Others|

* Dysgenics
* Pandemic
* Biological agent
* Transhumanism

Astronomical|

* Big Crunch
* Big Rip
* Coronal mass ejection
* Gamma-ray burst
* Impact event
* Asteroid impact avoidance
* Potentially hazardous object
* Near-Earth supernova
* Solar flare
* Stellar collision

Mythological|

| Eschatology|

* Buddhist
* Hindu
* Last Judgment
* Christian
* Book of Revelation
* Islamic
* Jewish
* Norse
* Zoroastrian

|

Others|

* 2011 end times prediction
* 2012 phenomenon
* Apocalypse
* Armageddon
* Blood moon prophecy
* Doomsday Clock
* End time
* List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events
* Nibiru cataclysm
* Rapture
* Revelation 12 sign prophecy
* Third Temple

Fictional|

* Alien invasion
* Apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction
* List of apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic fiction
* List of apocalyptic films
* Climate fiction
* Disaster films
* List of disaster films
* List of fictional doomsday devices
* Zombie apocalypse

* Categories
* Apocalypticism
* Future problems
* Hazards
* Risk analysis
* Doomsday scenarios

0.00

(0 votes)

|

Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Engineering:Biotechnology_risk&oldid=3241128"
*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template