Dual use issues in research – A subject of increasing concern?

• Published in: Vaccine Vol. 35; no. 44; pp. 5990 - 5994
• Main Authors: Drew, Trevor W., Mueller-Doblies, Uwe Ulex
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier Ltd 20.10.2017; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Animals; Bioethics; Biological risk management; Biological Science Disciplines - legislation & jurisprudence; Biomedical Research - legislation & jurisprudence; Biosecurity; Bioterrorism; Bioterrorism - legislation & jurisprudence; Bioviolence; BWTC; Conventions; Data processing; Data retrieval; Dual use research of concern; Dual-use export control; DURC; Ethics; Funding; Genetic engineering; Genetics; GOF; Humans; issues and policy; Life sciences; Medical research; Pathogenicity; Pathogens; Policies; Scientists; Self-governance; Studies; synthetic biology; Toxins; vaccines; Viruses; United Kingdom > UK; United States > US; Union of Soviet Socialist Republics > USSR; Self-governance; Dual use research of concern; DURC; Dual-use export control; Bioviolence; Bioethics; Biological risk management; BWTC; Biosecurity; Bioterrorism; GOF
• ISSN: 0264-410X; 1873-2518; 1873-2518
• DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.07.109

Dual use is defined as the application of materials, knowledge or technologies for military or terrorist purposes, as well as for good. In biological science, it is considered to be a growing threat as the genetics of pathogenicity traits and toxins are becoming on one hand elucidated in a detail that was not anticipated 20years ago and on the other hand technological advances in genetic engineering and synthetic biology are continually enabling easier access to these technologies. On a theoretical and policy level, much has happened over the past decade, but translating these policies and concepts to operational level awareness and robust processes requires more attention. Where the research is conducted, scientists have to make ethical judgements and account for their data sharing and publication policies. How can we ensure the requirement for dual use review is taken on board, but is not skewing research detrimentally and imposing a disproportionate burden?