Expert panel backs sweeping new curbs on virus experiments

An expert panel Friday endorsed a sweeping set of proposed changes to the federal government’s program for regulating experiments that involve tinkering with risky viruses and other viruses, setting the stage for a closely watched decision by the Biden administration about its approach to protecting against lab disasters that could kick off a pandemic.

The experts unanimously approved draft recommendations that, among other things, ask health officials to extend their oversight to less dangerous viruses, including ones similar to the coronavirus. They also recommended an end to exemptions for research related to vaccine development and surveillance of emerging viruses.

“We have a lot of oversight on paper but not really a lot of oversight,” said Dr. Kenneth Bernard, a retired rear admiral and member of the expert panel, making the case for the proposed changes, which will still undergo some slight modifications.

The proposals have added to the momentum in Washington for tightening government oversight of studies of dangerous pathogens.

Two internal federal watchdogs recently issued reports that criticized the monitoring of such studies. Congressional Republicans are preparing to seek testimony from Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is responsible for funding much of the country’s virus research.

The Biden administration has signaled a willingness to act, describing biological threats as among the most serious dangers facing the United States.

The expert panel, the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, is charged with advising the government on biosecurity issues. Its proposals emerged out of a decade of debate over so-called gain of function studies, in which viruses are endowed with new abilities.

Members of the board began discussing their latest reforms in January 2020, only to put the process on hold so they could focus on pandemic-related research.

The pandemic reinforced what some critics of risky virus research saw as a need for oversight of a broader set of viruses: Despite killing only a tiny fraction of those it infected, the coronavirus created a global catastrophe.

Proponents of stronger oversight have largely been heartened by the recommendations and applauded their focus on experiments that could be expected to produce a virus with pandemic potential.

Other experts have warned that even the existing proposals go too far. Some have said the recommendations would create an oversight system so expansive and confusing that it could discourage minimally risky experiments with huge potential public health benefits.