Dual use research of concern in the pharmaceutical industry

Research that benefits the society but could also be applied to disrupt or harm this society is referred to as Dual Use Research (DUR). Although, certain experiments in nuclear physics, technology and engineering have some dual use character, all research conducted in the life sciences carries the potential to be deliberately misused. Minimising the risks and threats to society that are posed by the misuse of such research warrants putting in place mechanisms that caution, safeguard and prepare those that work with DUR. At the inter/national level, instruments to do so include laws and regulations that forbid the misuse of life sciences research techniques to develop weapons of mass destruction. They also restrict and control the exchange of high-risk biological agents and equipment. At the institutional level, efforts to govern DUR are often voluntary and done through codes of conduct, increasing awareness, as well as training members about the dual use potential of their research. This then equips an individual researcher working with such institutions to identify possible misuse of DUR to identify if misuse of and could with which DUR is conducted and it's misuse may be identified. While researchers associated with academic and government funded institutions carefully scrutinise the potential of misuse of DUR, the same is not reflected in privately funded biopharmaceutical institutions. Despite being a significant part of the life sciences community and carrying out extensive DUR only This implies that besides the laws and regulations that govern DUR at the (inter)national level, the biopharmaceutical industry is expected to voluntarily initiate and address dual use concerns at the institutional and individual level. Thus, following an inventory of the various instruments available for the governance of DUR, the approaches adopted by 10 leading companies in the global biopharmaceutical market to address dual use issues were analysed. The results revealed that only 1 out of the 10 companies identified the potential misuse of high risk biological agents and the need to ensure biosecurity within the company. However, there was no explicit mention of dual use issues even though, instruments that deal with other ethical problems encountered by an employee, are in place. Also, owing to insufficient attention given to dual use issues in this industry, there is a serious lack of awareness and expertise that is crucial to dealing with such dilemmas. The surprisingly limited attention given to the dual use dilemma in the biopharmaceutical industry justifies the need for codes and education to raise awareness and motivate efforts towards the ethical resolution of conflicts concerning the misuse of such research.