by Ronit Langer, iGEM 2020 Ambassador Program Coordinator

“Welcome to Atlanta, Georgia – the home of the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). You are a member of the Emergency Response and Recovery Board. You have been called to this meeting because the CDC has received a troubling report from the US Department of Agriculture that an engineered virus has been detected in a population of field mice outside of Savannah, Georgia.”

Students and experts from the iGEM Community at the After iGEM Biosecurity Policy Conference. Photo credit Laura Kerwin from MIT

This was the situation presented to the students, advisors, academics and policy experts attending the After iGEM Biosecurity Policy Conference that took place on November 5th, 2019 at MIT’s Walker Memorial. The crisis was completely fictional, but the responses necessary for developing clear containment and communication strategies to address that crisis were real. And the insights, knowledge and training shared at that conference are prescient as we face the global COVID-19 pandemic today.

The vision for this conference was guided by three goals: connection, consciousness and community. Specifically:

First, we wanted to create a space for students, advisors, academics, and policy experts to have meaningful discussions around biosecurity policy. In particular, we wanted to focus on dual use research, the role of regulation at the local, national and international level, and how to think about the security of emerging biotechnologies.

Second, we wanted to alert participants to the issues that are critical today. The world is innovating rapidly and we need to ensure that this innovation continues in a safe, secure and effective framework. We wanted to bring these issues to the forefront of their minds today, so that those issues would be in the back of their minds throughout their scientific journeys.
Finally, we want participants to recognize that they are part of a larger community that includes not only themselves, but also mentors, regulators, policy experts and the general public who all have a stake in making sure that biotechnology and synthetic biology flourish and stay secure.

The conference was opened to everyone at no cost, and participants came from all over the world – ranging from local MIT students to iGEMers from Egypt and Indonesia. Those sharing their expertise at the conference included faculty from the MIT Media Lab, leading members of iGEM’s Human Practices and Safety & Security committees, and policy experts from the United Nations Office of Disarmament, the CDC, and the US Department of Agriculture. The diversity at the conference allowed for many creative solutions to the daunting task at hand – orchestrating a global, collective response to a simulated viral pathogen outbreak in real time.

Students worked together to create a response strategy for the simulation. Photo credit Laura Kerwin from MIT

The Simulated Crisis

Conference participants were briefed on the situation:

“The virus is related to the Rabbit Hemorrhagic Disease Virus, or RHDV, a virus that spreads rapidly in rabbits through direct contact. RHDV is notoriously hard to kill, and there are lengthy protocols online detailing how to decontaminate yourself of RHDV. This is the first time an RHDV-related virus has been seen in another mammal population, and it appears to be equally virulent in mice as it is in rabbits. The virus has clearly been engineered and its release appears accidental, but the engineers and their motives are currently unknown.

The folks over at the USDA believe the engineers of this virus may have been inspired by the 1991 initiative in Australia, when a group of Australian researchers was trying to control the rabbit pest population in Australia by importing RHDV. The result of that initiative was that the virus killed 10 million rabbits in the span of 8 weeks. We cannot allow our mice to share the same fate. Mice are a crucial part of the ecosystem and therefore containment is key in this situation. However, due to the resilient nature of the virus it is believed to be transmitted through direct contact with the plants in the field, as well as direct contact between mice. This transmission is extremely troubling because Georgia’s farmers are preparing to ship out their crops such as peanuts and peaches globally. Agriculture makes up almost 10% of Georgia’s GDP and losing the revenue from these crops could devastate the local economy.

The director of the CDC, Robert Redfield, is demanding that you bring him a containment plan within the next hour. Specifically, he needs two versions of the plan. One that addresses scientists at the USDA and the CDC about what they need to do next to stop this virus from spreading. The second version is addressed to national security officials from the US government. The main question they need answered right now is whether or not to let the crops be shipped, and if they were to go with quarantine, how large should the quarantine be? Just the farm? All of Georgia? They need your assessment of the threat level to make their decision. Additionally, you have reports that some of the information about the virus has been leaked to the press and news outlets are demanding a statement. If they do not hear from you soon, they will assume and print the worst. Once you have contained both the virus itself and the information about the virus, you will then be asked to turn over a list of recommendations about how to prevent these incidents moving forward.”

Pete Carr, Director of Judging, lends his expertise discussing biosecurity issues. Photo credit Laura Kerwin from MIT.

The Collective Response

Conference participants were divided into teams of students and policy experts who considered what to do in the face of the challenge posed. The teams spent two hours asking questions about the origin of the virus, the rate of its’ spread, and the authority of the CDC and other regulatory groups. Their questioning lead to meaningful discussions about how to address a crisis with so many unknowns. At the end of the two hours, each team reported on their findings.

Three issues were identified by each of the teams – the need for sampling to understand the scope of the problem, the need for containment so that the virus would not spread globally, and the need for clear communication so that the problem was clearly understood by all relevant parties. The fact every team identified these three issues highlights their importance in addressing a global biological threat.

Interestingly, each team also focused on a different piece of the puzzle. One team mainly focused on media coverage and drafted an example press release for the White House. Another team wanted to deeply understand the science of the virus and focused on the lab protocols that would be needed for diagnosis and monitoring of the viral outbreak. Yet another team focused on the regulations that would need to be in place were an accidental release of a genetically engineered virus to actually occur. The diversity of each team’s focus illustrates the need for the many styles of thinking and types of backgrounds that can be applied in developing creative and effective solutions to such a challenge.

Then and now

As I write this blog post, I am struck by the parallels between the findings of the After iGEM Biosecurity Policy Conference last November and the actions of scientists and policy makers across the world in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic today. The three issues identified by our teams – scope, containment, and communication – are the same three issues that scientists and policy makers must address in developing effective ways to mitigate harm from the COVID-19 pandemic. And many people with different thinking styles and backgrounds are applying their knowledge and skills in developing creative and effective solutions.

Now that the iGEM 2020 season is unfolding amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, the iGEM community continues to demonstrate leadership in providing guidance for safe and responsible innovation and flexibility in accommodating the needs of iGEM teams. I am honored and humbled to be a part of the iGEM community, and I have confidence in the new generation of scientists who are developing the technologies and tools of synthetic biology and also addressing the human practices, safety & security, and policy considerations for engineering biological solutions to global challenges.

I’d love to hear your thoughts. Please contact me at Ronit[AT]igem[DOT]org if you have any questions or would like to run this simulation in your own lab or group.