Lab-made SARS-CoV-2 study prompts gain-of-function questions

Media reports about work on a hybrid SARS-CoV-2 virus at a Boston University's biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) lab have inflamed more controversy about lab biosafety and raised questions about federal oversight, following the publication of the research team's preprint (not peer-reviewed) study that described their findings.BU refutes claimA story yesterday from the London Daily Mail claimed that researchers created a new deadly COVID strain, and other outlets picked up on the theme.In a statement yesterday, however, Boston University called the claims false and inaccurate, emphasizing that the school's Institutional Biosafety Committee had reviewed and approved the study.

The National Emerging Infectious Diseases Lab (NEIDL) was completed in 2008 but for a decade was barred from doing higher-security-level BSL-4 work, due to safety concerns, given the lab's urban location.Media reports claimed that the study included gain-of-function experiments, which have sparked concerns about dual-use and accidental release, especially in light of safety lapses at federal research facilities.

In 2016, a federal advisory group commissioned an extensive risk assessment that it used to issue its final guidance.Gain-of-function research involves manipulating organisms to increase their transmissibility, virulence, immunogenicity, or other capabilities. "Dual-use" refers to experiments that can be used for both good and ill.In yesterday's statement, Boston University denied that the research, designed to explore pathogenicity differences between the Omicron variant and the original SARS-CoV-2 virus, was gain of function.