共 43 条
Bridging biosafety and biosecurity gaps: DURC and ePPP policy insights from US institutions
被引:0
|作者:
Gillum, David R.
[1
,2
]
Tran, An
[3
]
Fletcher, Jennifer
[4
]
Vogel, Kathleen M.
[1
]
机构:
[1] Arizona State Univ, Sch Future Innovat & Soc, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
[2] Univ Nevada, Res & Innovat, Reno, NV 89557 USA
[3] Univ Nevada, Environm Sci & Hlth, Reno, NV USA
[4] Chandler Unified Sch Dist, Accountabil Assessment & Res, Chandler, AZ USA
来源:
关键词:
dual use research of concern (DURC);
enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (ePPP);
biosafety;
biosecurity;
non-compliance reporting;
risk management;
biosafety survey;
organizational safety;
DUAL-USE RESEARCH;
AWARENESS;
SCIENCE;
ETHICS;
D O I:
10.3389/fbioe.2024.1476527
中图分类号:
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)];
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号:
071005 ;
0836 ;
090102 ;
100705 ;
摘要:
Overview This study provides empirical data on the knowledge and practices of biosafety and biosecurity professionals and researchers involved in research on enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens (ePPPs) and Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) within various U.S. sectors. The goal is to improve public health interventions and oversight for DURC and ePPP, contributing valuable insights for policy development. A notable finding was the association between larger biosafety/biosecurity teams and a higher likelihood of conducting high-risk biological research.Methods A survey of 541 biosafety and biosecurity professionals was conducted between March 8 and 10 April 2024, with results analyzed using SAS at a significance level of 0.05. The study received approval from the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at Arizona State University and the University of Nevada, Reno.Results Government organizations were more likely to conduct DURC compared to other sectors (e.g., Academic, Commercial, Consulting). Public institutions reviewed more experiments outside the scope of the U.S. DURC Policy than private for-profit institutions. Institutions with larger biosafety/biosecurity teams reported greater research activity and more effective non-compliance reporting mechanisms (e.g., anonymous hotlines, reporting forms). Additionally, financial support and the challenges of policy implementation varied significantly across sectors.Discussion The findings emphasize the need for appropriate staffing and resource allocation for high-risk biosafety and biosecurity research. A differentiated regulatory approach and equitable distribution of resources are essential for effective oversight. Moreover, robust non-compliance reporting systems are critical to mitigating the risks associated with DURC and ePPP research.
引用
收藏
页数:23
相关论文