A brain drain to increased regulation of influenza virus research is highly speculative
Derrin Culp
mBio 5: e01814-14 (2014). doi: 10.1128/mBio.01814-14
DC comments on an earlier commentary in mBio from Arturo Casadevall and Mike Imperiale. Risks and benefits of gain-of-function experiments with pathogens of pandemic potential, such as influenza virus: a call for a science-based discussion. MBio. 2014 Aug 1;5(4):e01730-14. doi: 10.1128/mBio.01730-14.
DC is concerned that virtually no evidence has been offered to substantiate the claims “that up-and-coming young virologists might eschew virology careers” or “may drive select agent research out of academia”. He offers some very interesting perspectives from US federal nuclear facilities, and concludes that elevating this brain drain issue “to a potentially existential threat is totally unjustified”.
Scientists are not fans of regulations. One follows the logic that people will avoid working with select agents, although people continue do so when they could work on important human microbes with far fewer restrictions – HIV, HPV, HBV and HCV to name but four viruses.
In the same issue Casadevall and Imperiale reply to Derrin Culp’s letter.
mBio 5(5):e01860-14 (2014). doi:10.1128/mBio.01860-14.
“Although we do not have any data at this time to support our belief that increased regulations in influenza research will drive some young scientists to look for less-restrictive pastures, it is reasonable to suspect that changes that affect their work environment will have some effect on career choices.”
DC wrote a singular and very interesting piece entitled:
Lessons not learned: insider threats in pathogen research.
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, April 3, 2013
