Why gain-of-function research matters?

• Both the U.S. government and scientists have called for a deeper examination into the validity of claims that a virus could have escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China.
• Questions are also being raised, why researchers do gain-of-function work on potentially dangerous pathogens, and whether the benefits outweigh the risks.

• The term “gain of function” by itself covers much more than this type of research.

What is gain-of-function research?

• In virology, gain-of-function research involves deliberately altering an organism in the lab, altering a gene, or introducing a mutation in a pathogen to study its transmissibility, virulence and immunogenicity.
• Any organism can acquire a new ability or property, or “gain” a “function.”
• Gain of function can occur in an organism in either nature or the laboratory.
• It is believed that this allows researchers to study potential therapies, vaccine possibilities and ways to control the disease better in future.

• Gain-of-function research involves manipulations that make certain pathogenic microbes more deadly or more transmissible.
• This is done by genetically engineering the virus and by allowing them to grow in different growth mediums, a technique called as serial passage.

To understand better some lab examples include:

• Creating more salt- and drought-resistant plants or modifying disease vectors to produce mosquitoes that are resistant to transmitting dengue fever.
• Gain of function can also be useful for environmental reasons, such as modifying E. coli so that it can convert plastic waste into a valuable commodity.

But Associated risks Can't be ignored:

• Some forms of gain-of-function research reportedly carry inherent biosafety and biosecurity risks and are thus referred to as ‘dual-use research of concern’ (DURC).

• This indicates that while the research may result in benefits for humanity, there is also the potential to cause harm — accidental or deliberate escape of these altered pathogens from labs may cause even pandemics.

• Gain-of-function research that focuses on potential pandemic pathogens has been supported on the premise that it will help researchers better understand the evolving pathogenic landscape, be better prepared for a pandemic response and develop treatments and countermeasures.

What is the situation in India?

• Last year, the Department of Biotechnology issued guidelines for the establishment of containment facilities, called ‘Biosafety labs’, at levels two and three.

Should research continue?

• Scientists have differing opinions on the issue, particularly since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Proponents of gain-of-function research believe that “nature is the ultimate bioterrorist and we need to do all we can to stay one step ahead”.
• Some researchers thinks it is time to stop such research.

To Conclude, we can say that, there is no such thing as zero risk in conducting experiments,

• So the question is whether certain gain-of-function research can be performed at an acceptable level of safety and security by utilizing risk-mitigation measures.

• These strategies for reducing risk include the use of biocontainment facilities, exposure control plans, strict operating procedures and training, incident response planning and much more.
• These efforts involve dedication and meticulous attention to detail at multiple levels of an institution.

• A robust biosafety and biosecurity system, along with appropriate institutional response, helps to ensure that these incidents are inconsequential.

• The challenge is to make sure that any research conducted – gain-of-function or otherwise – doesn’t pose unreasonable risks to researchers, the public and the environment.

• Determining whether specific experiments with potential pathogens should be conducted remains a difficult and contentious topic.