Advertisement

BioSocieties

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 22–45 | Cite as

Ferreting things out: Biosecurity, pandemic flu and the transformation of experimental systems

  • Natalie Hannah Porter
Original Article

Abstract

At the end of 2011, microbiologists created a scientific and media frenzy by genetically engineering mutant avian flu viruses that transmitted through the air between ferrets, the animal most widely used to model human flu. Though the studies offered new evidence of avian flu’s pandemic potential, they were nevertheless restricted from publication because of concerns about their possible threat to human health and security. In this article, I examine the mutant flu controversy to show how nascent biosecurity regulations engender transformations in experimental systems; namely, in the use and interpretation of experimental organisms, and in the establishment of a culture of security among a globalizing community of scientists. Drawing on analyses of academic publications, interviews with microbiologists and biosecurity regulators, and ethnographic observations at a biosecure laboratory, I show how these experimental transformations are structured by the local demands of scientific production as well as by broader concerns about biosecurity made visible in formal and informal regulations on scientific conduct. I further argue that while the controversy signals unprecedented controls over publication in the biological sciences, such controls build upon and extend on-going shifts in scientific thought and practice in the wake of pandemic threats.

Keywords

H5N1 pandemic flu dual-use research biosecurity biosafety animal models 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research on which this original material is based has been subject to ethical review at the University of Oxford. I do not have any competing intellectual or financial interests in the research detailed in the manuscript. The research for this article was provided by the European Research Council under the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FPT/2007-2013/ERC grant agreement no. 263447 (BioProperty). I would like to thank my colleagues at the Institute for Science, Innnovation, and Society and the Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology at the University of Oxford for their insightful comments on this article. I also gratefully acknowledge the critical commentary provided by Amy Hinterberger, Sabina Leonelli, Javier Lezaun, Catherine Montgomery, Kaushik Sunder Rajan, and the anonymous reviewers at BioSocieties. A special thanks is due to the numerous participants and interlocutors of this research in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam, who generously shared their time, facilities, resources, and insights to inform this article.

References

  1. Ankeny, R.A. and Leonelli, S. (2011) What’s so special about model organisms? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (2): 313–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belser, J.A., Katz, J.M. and Tumpey, T.M. (2011) The ferret as a model organism to study influenza A virus infection. Disease Models & Mechanisms 4 (5): 575–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berns, K.I. et al (2012) Policy: Adaptations of avian flu virus are a cause for concern. Nature 482 (7384): 153–154.Google Scholar
  4. Bezuidenhout, L. and Rappert, B. (2012) The ethical issues of dual-use and the life sciences. CORE Issues in Professional and Research Ethics 1 (1): 1–25.Google Scholar
  5. Bouvier, N.M. and Lowen, A.C. (2010) Animal models for influenza virus pathogenesis and transmission. Viruses 2 (8): 1530–1563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Braun, B. (2007) Biopolitics and the molecularization of life. Cultural Geographies 14 (1): 6–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, H. and Kelly, A.H. (2014) Material proximities and hotspots: Toward an anthropology of viral hemorrhagic fevers. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 28 (2): 280–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Butler, D. (2012) WHO meeting calls for mutant-flu research to be published “in full”. Nature Newsblog, 17 February, http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/02/who-meeting-calls-for-mutant-flu-research-to-be-published-in-full.html, accessed 19 September 2013.
  9. Caduff, C. (2012) The semiotics of security: Infectious disease research and the biopolitics of informational bodies in the United States. Cultural Anthropology 27 (2): 333–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caduff, C. (2014) Pandemic prophecy, or how to have faith in reason. Current Anthropology 55 (3): 296–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Candea, M. (2010) “I fell in love with Carlos the meerkat”: Engagement and detachment in human–animal relations. American Ethnologist 37 (2): 241–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carvajal, D. (2011) Security in H5N1 bird flu study was paramount, scientist says. The New York Times 21 December, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/health/security-in-h5n1-bird-flu-study-was-paramount-scientist-says.html, accessed 1 December 2013.
  13. Committee on Research Standards and Practices to Prevent the Destructive Application of Biotechnology, National Research Council (2004) Biotechnology Research in an Age of Terrorism. Washington DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  14. Creager, A. (2001) The Life of a Virus. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Daston, L. (1995) The moral economy of science. Osiris 10: 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davies, G. (2013) Writing biology with mutant mice: The monstrous potential of post genomic life. Geoforum 48: 268–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Evans, S.A.W. and Valdivia, W.D. (2012) Export controls and the tensions between academic freedom and national security. Minerva 50 (2): 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fearnley, L. (2013) The birds of Poyang lake: Sentinels at the interface of wild and domestic. Limn (3): Sentinel Devices.Google Scholar
  19. Fidler, D. (2008) Influenza virus samples, international law, and global health diplomacy. Emerging Infectious Diseases 14 (1): 88–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fischer, M.M.J. (2013) Biopolis: Asian science in the global circuitry. Science Technology & Society 18 (3): 379–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fouchier, R. (2012) Perspectives from an investigator. In NSABB’s Publication Recommendations for NIH-Funded Research on the Transmissibility of H5N1. Washington DC, 26–29 February, http://www.microbeworld.org/component/content/article?id=1140, accessed 20 December 2013.
  22. Friese, C. (2013) Realizing potential in translational medicine: The uncanny emergence of care as science. Current Anthropology 54 (7): 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Friese, C. and Clarke, A.E. (2012) Transposing bodies of knowledge and technique: Animal models at work in reproductive sciences. Social Studies of Science 42 (1): 31–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gao, R. et al (2013) Human infection with a novel avian-origin influenza a (H7N9) virus. New England Journal of Medicine 368 (20): 1888–1897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Greenhough, B. (2012) Where species meet and mingle: Endemic human-virus relations, embodied communication and more-than-human agency at the common cold unit 1946–90. Cultural Geographies 19 (3): 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gronvall, G. (2013) H5N1: A Case Study for Dual-Use Research. Council on Foreign Relations. New York. CFR Working Paper, http://www.cfr.org/public-health-threats-and-pandemics/h5n1-case-study-dual-use-research/p30711.
  27. Gusterson, H. (1998) Nuclear Rites: A Weapons Laboratory at the End of the Cold War. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Harmon, K. (2011) What will the next influenza pandemic look like? Scientific American. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/next-influenza-pandemic/, accessed 4 March 2015.
  29. Herfst, S. et al (2012) Airborne transmission of influenza A/H5N1 virus between ferrets. Science 336 (6088): 1534–1541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hinchliffe, S., Enticott, G. and Bingham, N. (2008) Biosecurity: Spaces, practices, and boundaries. Environment and Planning A 40 (7): 1528–1533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hinterberger, A. and Porter, N. (2015) Genomic and viral sovereignty: Tethering the materials of global biomedicine. Public Culture 27 (2): 361–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Imai, M. et al (2012) Experimental adaptation of an influenza H5 HA confers respiratory droplet transmission to a reassortant H5 HA/H1N1 virus in ferrets. Nature 486 (7403): 420–428.Google Scholar
  33. Jasanoff, S. (2005) In the democracies of DNA: Ontological uncertainty and political order in three states. New Genetics & Society 24 (2): 139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keck, F. (2014) Birds as sentinels for pandemic influenza. BioSocieties 9 (2): 223–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kelly, A. and Lezaun, J. (2014) Urban mosquitoes, situational publics, and the pursuit of interspecies separation in Dar es Salaam. American Ethnologist 41 (2): 361–383.Google Scholar
  36. Kirk, R.G.W. (2010) A brave new animal for a brave new world: The British laboratory animals bureau and the constitution of international standards of laboratory animal production and use, Circa 1947–1968. Isis; an International Review Devoted to the History of Science and Its Cultural Influences 101 (1): 62–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kirksey, S.E. and Helmreich, S. (2010) The emergence of multispecies ethnography. Cultural Anthropology 25 (4): 545–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kohler, R.E. (1994) Lords of the Fly: Drosophila Genetics and the Experimental Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  39. Krimsky, S. (1982) Genetic Alchemy: The Social History of the Recombinant DNA Controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kuhlau, F., Eriksson, S., Evers, K. and Hoglund, A.T. (2008) Taking due care: Moral obligations in dual use research. Bioethics 22 (9): 477–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lakoff, A. (2012) The risks of preparedness: Mutant bird flu. Public Culture 24 (3 68): 457–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lakoff, A. and Collier, S. (eds.) (2008) Biosecurity Interventions: Global Health and Security in Question. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Latimer, J. and Miele, M. (2013) Naturecultures? Science, affect and the non-human. Theory, Culture and Society 30 (7–8): 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Latour, B. (1988) The Pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Latour, B. (2005) Reassembling the Social. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Leonelli, S. (2007) Growing weed, producing knowledge: An epistemic history of Arabidopsis thaliana. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 29 (2): 193–223.Google Scholar
  47. Leonelli, S. (2013) Global data for local science: Assessing the scale of data infrastructures in biological and biomedical research. BioSocieties 8 (4): 449–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lipsitch, M. (2013) Avian influenza: Ferret H7N9 flu model questioned. Nature 501 (7465): 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lowe, C. (2010) Viral clouds: Becoming H5N1 in Indonesia. Cultural Anthropology 25 (4): 625–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lynch, M.E. (1988) Sacrifice and the transformation of the animal body into a scientific object: Laboratory culture and ritual practice in the neurosciences. Social Studies of Science 18 (2): 265–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Maher, J. and DeStefano, J. (2004) The ferret: An animal model to study influenza virus. Lab Animal 33 (9): 50–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mubareka, S., Lowen, A.C., Steel, J., Coates, A.L., García-Sastre, A. and Palese, P. (2009) Transmission of influenza virus via aerosols and fomites in the guinea pig model. Journal of Infectious Diseases 199 (6): 858–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. NRC (National Research Council) (2011) Challenges and Opportunities for Education about Dual-Use Issues in the Life Sciences. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  54. Nelson, N.C. (2013) Modeling mouse, human, and discipline: Epistemic scaffolds in animal behavior genetics. Social Studies of Science 43 (1): 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. NSABB (National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity) (2007a) Responsible communication of life sciences research with dual use potential. National Institutes of Health, 27 June, http://oba.od.nih.gov/biosecurity/pdf/Communication_Tools%20_Dual_Use_Potential.pdf, accessed 12 March 2012.
  56. NSABB (National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity) (2007b) Proposed framework for the oversight of dual use life sciences research: Strategies for minimizing the potential misuse of research information. National Institutes of Health, 28 September, http://oba.od.nih.gov/biosecurity/pdf/Framework%20for%20transmittal%200807_sept07.pdf, accessed 12 March 2012.
  57. NSABB (National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity) (2012) [NSABB] National science advisory board for biosecurity findings and recommendations. National Institutes of Health, 29 March, http://oba.od.nih.gov/oba/biosecurity/PDF/03302012_NSABB_Recommendations.pdf, accessed 10 September 2013.
  58. Ong, A. and Chen, N.N. (2010) Asian Biotech: Ethics and Communities of Fate. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Osterholm, M.T. and Kelley, N.S. (2012) Mammalian-transmissible H5N1 influenza: Facts and perspective. mBio 3 (2): e00045–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Parry, B. (2004) Trading the Genome: Investigating the Commodification of Bio-Information. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Patterson, A., Tabak, L., Fauci, A., Collins, F. and Howard, S. (2013) A framework for decisions about research with HPAI H5N1 viruses. Science 339 (6123): 1036–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rappert, B. (ed.) (2010) Introduction: Education as …. In: Education and Ethics in the Life Sciences: Strengthening the Prohibition of Biological Warfare. Canberra, Australia: Australian University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Rader, K.A. (2004) Making Mice: Standardizing Animals for American Biomedical Research, 1900–1955. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Resnik, D.B. (2013) H5N1 avian flu research and the ethics of knowledge. Hastings Center Report 43 (2): 22–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rheinberger, H.-J. (1997) Toward a History of Epistemic Things: Synthesizing Proteins in the Test Tube (Writing Science). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Roos, R. (2012) Dutch export rules could block publication of Fouchier H5N1 study. CIDRAP, http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2012/03/dutch-export-rules-could-block-publication-fouchier-h5n1-study, accessed 6 August 2013.
  67. Rose, N. (2013) The human sciences in a biological age. Theory, Culture & Society 30 (1): 3–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Russell, C.A. et al (2012) The potential for respiratory droplet – Transmissible A/H5N1 influenza virus to evolve in a mammalian host. Science 336 (6088): 1541–1547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Satyanarayana, K. (2011) Dual dual-use research of concern: Publish and perish? The Indian Journal of Medical Research 133 (1): 1–4.Google Scholar
  70. Schmidt, M. (2008) Diffusion of synthetic biology: A challenge to biosafety. Systems and Synthetic Biology 2 (1–2): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sharma, S. (2012) Lab-grown super flu a boon, not threat – Hindustan Times 28 January, http://www.hindustantimes.com/Entertainment/Wellness/Lab-grown-super-flu-a-boon-not-threat/Article1-803505.aspx, accessed 12 August 2013.
  72. Smith, F.L. (2014) Advancing science diplomacy: Indonesia and the US naval medical research unit. Social Studies of Science 44 (6): 825–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sunder Rajan, K. (2006) Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tucker, J.B. (2012) Innovation, Dual Use, and Security: Managing the Risks of Emerging Biological and Chemical Technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  75. Vogel, K. (2006) Bioweapons proliferation: Where science studies and public policy collide. Social Studies of Science 36 (5): 659–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vogel, K.M. (2008) Framing biosecurity: An alternative to the biotech revolution model? Science and Public Policy 35 (1): 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wolinetz, C. (2012) Implementing the new U.S. dual-use policy. Science Insider 336(6088), http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6088/1525.full.
  78. World Health Organization (WHO) (2006) WHO|collecting, preserving and shipping specimens for the diagnosis of avian influenza A(H5N1) virus infection, Guide for Field Operations. WHO, October, http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/surveillance/WHO_CDS_EPR_ARO_2006_1/en/index.html, accessed 12 August 2013.
  79. World Health Organization (WHO) (2012) Global influenza surveillance and response system (GISRS). WHO. 30 August 2013, http://www.who.int/influenza/gisrs_laboratory/en/, accessed 13 December 2013.
  80. Zhang, Y. et al (2013) H5N1 hybrid viruses bearing 2009/H1N1 virus genes transmit in guinea pigs by respiratory droplet. Science 340 (6139): 1459–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zitzow, L.A., Rowe, T., Morken, T., Shieh, W.J., Zaki, S. and Katz, J.M. (2002) Pathogenesis of avian influenza a (H5N1) viruses in ferrets. Journal of Virology 76 (9): 4420–4429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The London School of Economics and Political Science 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Natalie Hannah Porter
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of New HampshireDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations