Dangerous Pathogens as a Potential Problem for Public Health.

Pathogens are various organisms, such as viruses, bacteria, fungi, and protozoa, which can cause severe illnesses to their hosts. Throughout history, pathogens have accompanied human populations and caused various epidemics. One of the most significant outbreaks was the Black Death, which occurred in the 14th century and caused the death of one-third of Europe's population. Pathogens have also been studied for their use as biological warfare agents by the former Soviet Union, Japan, and the USA. Among bacteria and viruses, there are high priority agents that have a significant impact on public health. Bacillus anthracis, Francisella tularensis, Yersinia pestis, Variola virus, Filoviruses (Ebola, Marburg), Arenoviruses (Lassa), and influenza viruses are included in this group of agents. Outbreaks and infections caused by them might result in social disruption and panic, which is why special operations are needed for public health preparedness. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria that significantly impede treatment and recovery of patients are also valid threats. Furthermore, recent events related to the massive spread of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are an example of how virus-induced diseases cannot be ignored. The impact of outbreaks, such as SARS-CoV-2, have had far-reaching consequences beyond public health. The economic losses due to lockdowns are difficult to estimate, but it would take years to restore countries to pre-outbreak status. For countries affected by the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19), their health systems have been overwhelmed, resulting in an increase in the mortality rate caused by diseases or injuries. Furthermore, outbreaks, such as SARS-CoV-2, will induce serious, wide-ranging (and possibly long-lasting) psychological problems among, not only health workers, but ordinary citizens (this is due to isolation, quarantine, etc.). The aim of this paper is to present the most dangerous pathogens, as well as general characterizations, mechanisms of action, and treatments.

Federal Funding for Health Security in FY2017.

This latest article in the Federal Funding for Health Security series assesses FY2017 US government funding in 5 domains critical to strengthening health security: biosecurity, radiological and nuclear security, chemical security, pandemic influenza and emerging infectious disease, and multiple-hazard and general preparedness.

Preventing biological weapon development through the governance of life science research.

The dual-use dilemma in the life sciences-that illicit applications draw on the same science and technology base as legitimate applications-makes it inherently difficult to control one without inhibiting the other. Since before the September 11 attacks, the science and security communities in the United States have struggled to develop governance processes that can simultaneously minimize the risk of misuse of the life sciences, promote their beneficial applications, and protect the public trust. What has become clear over that time is that while procedural steps can be specified for assessing and managing dual-use risks in the review of research proposals, oversight of ongoing research, and communication of research results, the actions or decisions to be taken at each of these steps to mitigate dual-use risk defy codification. Yet the stakes are too high to do nothing, or to be seen as doing nothing. The U.S. government should therefore adopt an oversight framework largely along the lines recommended by the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity almost 5 years ago-one that builds on existing processes, can gain buy-in from the scientific community, and can be implemented at modest cost (both direct and opportunity), while providing assurance that a considered and independent examination of dual-use risks is being applied. Without extraordinary visibility into the actions of those who would misuse biology, it may be impossible to know how well such an oversight system will actually succeed at mitigating misuse. But maintaining the public trust will require a system to be established in which reasonably foreseeable dual-use consequences of life science research are anticipated, evaluated, and addressed.

DNA synthesis security.

It is generally assumed that genetic engineering advances will, inevitably, facilitate the misapplication of biotechnology toward the production of biological weapons. Unexpectedly, however, some of these very advances in the areas of DNA synthesis and sequencing may enable the implementation of automated and nonintrusive safeguards to avert the illicit applications of biotechnology. In the case of DNA synthesis, automated DNA screening tools could be built into DNA synthesizers in order to block the synthesis of hazardous agents. In addition, a comprehensive safety and security regime for dual-use genetic engineering research could include nonintrusive monitoring of DNA sequencing. This is increasingly feasible as laboratories outsource this service to just a few centralized sequencing factories. The adoption of automated, nonintrusive monitoring and surveillance of the DNA synthesis and sequencing pipelines may avert many risks associated with dual-use biotechnology. Here, we describe the historical background and current challenges associated with dual-use biotechnologies and propose strategies to address these challenges.

Modernizing confidence-building measures for the Biological Weapons Convention.

The Seventh Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention in December 2011 provides an opportunity to modernize the treaty to better address the challenges of the 21st century. The key to this modernization is to redesign the treaty's Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs), the only formal mechanism for increasing transparency and demonstrating compliance with the treaty, to address changes in the global scientific, health, and security environments since the end of the Cold War. The scope of the CBMs should be expanded beyond state-run biological warfare programs to encompass a broader array of threats to global security, such as biological terrorism, laboratory accidents, dual-use research, and disease pandemics. Modernizing the CBM mechanism to take into account these new risks would extend the transparency-enhancing benefits of CBMs to a range of new and important topics, such as biosafety, laboratory biosecurity, and dual-use research oversight; make the CBMs and the treaty itself more relevant to the concerns and priorities of more states; and build on progress made during the recent series of intersessional meetings. To accomplish this, the CBMs need to be revised to shift their focus from hardware, the dual-use capabilities relevant to the treaty, to software, the political and legal institutions that govern the development and use of these capabilities. A more modern CBM mechanism should encourage greater participation in the confidence-building process, improve international cooperation against the full spectrum of biological risks, and promote the goal of universal membership in the treaty.

Emerging antibody products and Nicotiana manufacturing.

Antibody based products are not widely available to address multiple global health challenges due to high costs, limited manufacturing capacity, and long manufacturing lead times. Nicotiana-based manufacturing of antibody products may now begin to address these challenges as a result of revolutionary advances in transient expression and altered glycosylation pathways. This review provides examples of emerging antibody-based products (mucosal and systemic) that could be competitive and commercially viable when the attributes of Nicotiana-based manufacturing (large scale, versatile, rapid, low cost) are utilized.

Managing biosecurity threats in China.

Compared to the extensive literature on bioterrorism and biosecurity in the United States, less analysis has been conducted on similar challenges in China. This article seeks to fill this void by providing an integrated and updated assessment of 3 major biosecurity threats China faces: biowarfare, bioterrorism, and biocrimes. An analysis of China's biosecurity threats and biodefense building suggest varying levels of risk associated with each threat type. First, a direct bioweapons attack on China is highly unlikely, although the threat of biowarfare cannot be simply written off. Second, potential perpetrators of bioterrorism have capabilities at their disposal for carrying out such attacks. While terrorist organizations in China do not have a strong interest in bioterrorism, the limited state capability to counter such a threat may increase the risk in the future. Third, unlike the threats of biowarfare and bioterrorism, potential perpetrators of biocrimes have both incentives and capabilities, and biocrimes can produce reactions far out of proportion to the actual number of casualties. Despite the distinct biosecurity challenges it faces, China has yet to articulate a differentiated and coherent strategy to effectively tackle the challenges. Assessing different types of biosecurity threats in terms of degrees of risk not only provides greater analytical clarity but also has important implications for the strategies required to manage the risks.

A precautionary principle for dual use research in the life sciences.

Most life science research entails dual-use complexity and may be misused for harmful purposes, e.g. biological weapons. The Precautionary Principle applies to special problems characterized by complexity in the relationship between human activities and their consequences. This article examines whether the principle, so far mainly used in environmental and public health issues, is applicable and suitable to the field of dual-use life science research. Four central elements of the principle are examined: threat, uncertainty, prescription and action. Although charges against the principle exist - for example that it stifles scientific development, lacks practical applicability and is poorly defined and vague - the analysis concludes that a Precautionary Principle is applicable to the field. Certain factors such as credibility of the threat, availability of information, clear prescriptive demands on responsibility and directives on how to act, determine the suitability and success of a Precautionary Principle. Moreover, policy-makers and researchers share a responsibility for providing and seeking information about potential sources of harm. A central conclusion is that the principle is meaningful and useful if applied as a context-dependent moral principle and allowed flexibility in its practical use. The principle may then inspire awareness-raising and the establishment of practical routines which appropriately reflect the fact that life science research may be misused for harmful purposes.

Development pathway for biodefense vaccines.

At the present time it is estimated that the process of development of a vaccine from discovery to licensure takes approximately 18-20 years and costs in excess of US$500 million. For "routine" vaccines, the case for developing a vaccine is straightforward in terms of economics and large scale public health utilization each year. For vaccines used for biodefense and emerging diseases, the considerations are somewhat different as the vaccine may not be needed every year to control outbreaks and may be stockpiled only as a countermeasure that hopefully may never be needed. Furthermore, efficacy trials are often difficult as the natural disease may be rare or not present. Consequently, animal models will play a critical role in demonstrating efficacy. Nonetheless, the vaccine pathway still requires the same fundamental components of basic science/discovery, preclinical development, clinical trials, registration/licensure, and a plan for implementation.

[Viruses as biological weapons]. / Biyolojik silah olarak viruslar.

The destruction made by nuclear, biological and chemical weapons used by governments and terrorist groups in the near history is posing anxiety and fear for human being. Rumour about the possible use of these agents leads to the development of serious negative effects on populations. Since there are no vaccine and therapy for most viral agents and cost of production as biological weapons is low, interest rate is rising for viruses. In this review, general characteristics, diagnosis, therapy and protective measures for viral agents such as variola virus, hemorrhagic fever viruses, encephalitis viruses, Hantaviruses and Nipah viruses, those can be used as biological weapon, have been summarized.