Assessing dual use research of concern (DURC)-lessons learned from the United States government institutional DURC policy.

Life science research was analyzed for potential misuse in the 2004 report "Biotechnology Research in an Age of Bioterrorism". However, it was not until 2015 that the United States Government (USG) Institutional Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) policy went into effect. Institutions receiving USG funding for life science research are required to scan their research portfolios for research involving one of 15 agents and subsequent 7 experimental effects described in the policy. In practice, this policy was implemented in a variety of ways with varying outcomes and lessons learned. First and foremost, reviewing research for potential DURC is a highly subjective process that differs depending on the risk tolerance, experience, and training of the individuals charged with reviewing research for an institution as well as the review process itself. The information being reviewed also lends to the subjectivity of the process, that is, the experimental data provided. It is difficult to determine whether research is potential DURC without experimental data. Any review process is hypothetical until there is data. Lastly, reviewers of the research should look beyond the research proposals, like how compounding existing research information can create new risks, potential use in other organisms or systems, or the creation of a roadmap that, for example, shows how to create a concerning organism or could be used in a pathogen.

Proceedings of the Dual Use Research of Concern Panel Discussion: challenges and perspectives.

To address real and perceived emerging risks originating from the ever-accelerating breakthroughs in life science research, the Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) Panel Discussion, organized by Synbio Canada and the Alberta RNA Research and Training Institute (ARRTI), took place on June 23rd, 2021. It brought together six stakeholders from different levels of academic research, administration, governance, and science publishing to explore the current and future challenges in addressing DURC. Technological advancements within the life sciences, especially within the field of omics technology, make it difficult to apply a simple checklist for dual-use assessment and require continuous and integrated effort. Bottom-up approaches from within the scientific community are suggested by all stakeholders to enable efficient governance and address the true risks resulting from DURC, not just the alleged risks. To address such alleged risks, open and broadscale communication of DURC and its oversight policies may be required. At the same time, any form of open communication also contains the risk of information hazards, defined as potentially creating public fear or informing malicious actors. Here, an overview of the DURC panel and its outcomes is provided.

Factors associated with dual use of waterpipe tobacco and cigarettes among adults in Pakistan

Background: Little is known about dual use of waterpipe tobacco and cigarettes, especially in countries where both are prevalent. Aims: This study aimed to assess demographic correlates, patterns of use and quit behaviours of waterpipe users in Pakistan who also smoke cigarettes. Methods: Data were taken from a randomized controlled trial in Pakistan that assessed smoking cessation in 510 adult waterpipe users, stratified on concurrent cigarette use. Logistic regression analysis was done to assess the association between waterpipe tobacco users who also smoke cigarettes (dual use)and their demographic characteristics, smoking history and quit behaviour. Unadjusted odds ratios (OR)and adjusted OR (ORa)and 95% confidence intervals (CI)were determined. Results: Dual use was significantly associated with younger age (ORa = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.19–0.70)and middle-school educational level (11–15 years), versus no formal education, (ORa = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.15–3.50). Dual use was also associated with smoking less than all day versus all day (defined as continuously for several hours)(ORa = 2.71, 95%: CI 1.73–4.25)and younger age at starting smoking (ORa = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.93–0.98). No association was found between dual use and sex, marital status, duration of smoking, nicotine dependence or quit history. Conclusion: Waterpipe tobacco users who also smoke cigarettes differ from waterpipe-only users, particularly in demographic characteristics. More research is needed to explore the interaction between these two smoking behaviours. Health promotion and cessation interventions in Pakistan should consider tailoring their approach to account for the unique characteristics of dual waterpipe and cigarette users.

Does Biotechnology Pose New Catastrophic Risks?

Advances in biotechnology in the twenty-first century, fueled in large part by the field of synthetic biology, have greatly accelerated capabilities to manipulate and re-program bacteria, viruses, and other organisms. These genetic engineering capabilities are driving innovation and progress in drug manufacturing, bioremediation, and tissue engineering, as well as biosecurity preparedness. However, biotechnology is largely dual use, holding the potential of misuse for deliberate harm along with positive applications; defenses against those threats need to be anticipated and prepared. This chapter describes the challenges of managing dual-use capabilities enabled by modern biotechnology and synthetic biology and highlights a framework tool developed by a National Academies committee to aid analysis of the security effects of new scientific discoveries and prioritization of concerns. The positive aspects of synthetic biology in preparedness are also detailed, and policy directions are highlighted for taking advantage of the positive aspects of these emerging technologies while minimizing risks.

A new classification system for describing concurrent use of nicotine vaping products alongside cigarettes (so-called 'dual use'): findings from the ITC-4 Country Smoking and Vaping wave 1 Survey.

AIMS: To determine whether a simple combination of level of smoking and level of vaping results in a useful typology for characterizing smoking and vaping behaviours. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from adults (≥ 18 years) in the 2016 wave 1 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey in the United States (n = 2291), England (n = 3591), Australia (n = 1376) and Canada (n = 2784) were used. Participants who either smoked, vaped or concurrently used both at least monthly were included and divided into eight groups based on use frequency of each product (daily, non-daily, no current use). This resulted in four concurrent use groups (predominant smokers, dual daily users, predominant vapers and concurrent non-daily users). These groups were compared with each other and with the four exclusive use groups, on socio-demographics, nicotine dependence, beliefs and attitudes about both products, and quit-related measures using data weighted to reference population surveys in each country. RESULTS: Of the sample, 10.8% were concurrent users, with daily smokers vaping non-daily (predominant smokers), constituting 51.6% of this group. All eight categories differed from other categories on at least some measures. Concurrent daily nicotine users reported higher levels of indicators of nicotine dependence, and generally more positive attitudes toward both smoking and vaping than concurrent non-daily users. Among daily nicotine users, compared with exclusive daily smokers, reports of interest in quitting were higher in all concurrent use groups. Dual daily users had the most positive attitudes about smoking overall, and saw it as the least denormalized, and at the same time were equally interested in quitting as other concurrent users and were most likely to report intending to continue vaping. CONCLUSIONS: In Australia, Canada, England and the United States in 2016, daily nicotine users differed considerably from non-daily nicotine users. Among daily nicotine users, dual daily users (those who smoke and vape concurrently) should be treated as a distinct grouping when studying relationships between smoking and vaping. The eight-level typology characterizing concurrent and exclusive use of smoking and vaping should be considered when studying both products.

Social Simulation Models at the Ethical Crossroads.

Computational models of group opinion dynamics are one of the most active fields of sociophysics. In recent years, advances in model complexity and, in particular, the possibility to connect these models with detailed data describing individual behaviors, preferences and activities, have opened the way for the simulations to describe quantitatively selected, real world social systems. The simulations could be then used to study 'what-if' scenarios for opinion change campaigns, political, ideological or commercial. The possibility of the practical application of the attitude change models necessitates that the research community working in the field should consider more seriously the moral aspects of their efforts, in particular the potential for their use for unintended goals. The paper discusses these issues, and offers a suggestion for a new research direction: using the attitude models to increase the awareness and detection of social manipulation cases. Such research would offer a scientific challenge and meet the ethical criteria.

The dual use of research ethics committees: why professional self-governance falls short in preserving biosecurity.

BACKGROUND: Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) constitutes a major challenge for research practice and oversight on the local, national and international level. The situation in Germany is shaped by two partly competing suggestions of how to regulate security-related research: The German Ethics Council, as an independent political advisory body, recommended a series of measures, including national legislation on DURC. Competing with that, the German National Academy of Sciences and the German Research Foundation, as two major professional bodies, presented a strategy which draws on the self-control of science and, inter alia, suggests expanding the scope of research ethics committees (RECs) to an evaluation of DURC. MAIN BODY: This situation is taken as an occasion to further discuss the scope and limits of professional self-control with respect to security-related research. The role of RECs as professional bodies of science is particularly analyzed, referring to the theoretical backgrounds of professionalism. Two key sociological features of professionalism - ethical orientation and professional self-control - are discussed with respect to the practice of biomedical science. Both attributes are then analyzed with respect to the assessment of DURC by RECs. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, it is stated that issues of biosecurity transcend the boundaries of the scientific community and that a more comprehensive strategy should be implemented encompassing both professional self-control and legal oversight.

From Healthcare to Warfare and Reverse: How Should We Regulate Dual-Use Neurotechnology?

Recent advances in military-funded neurotechnology and novel opportunities for misusing neurodevices show that the problem of dual use is inherent to neuroscience. This paper discusses how the neuroscience community should respond to these dilemmas and delineates a neuroscience-specific biosecurity framework. This neurosecurity framework involves calibrated regulation, (neuro)ethical guidelines, and awareness-raising activities within the scientific community.