Biological Weapons and Gene-Editing Software

This piece was originally written pre-COVID 19 pandemic and last updated in September 2021.

A Gene-Edited Dreamland

Imagine a world where cancer can be removed from the human genome; people stop aging; HIV is eradicated; allergies no longer exist; new biofuels are created; and extinct animals are revived! The Jurassic Park experience at Universal Studios is no longer limited to animatronics because REAL dinosaurs can eat park guests! This cancer-free, dinosaur infested world sure does sound like a dream… until the same technology that put Zyrtec out of business creates a synthetic disease that wipes out a population.  What is this miracle technology? It is called CRISPR/Cas9 and was introduced 7 years ago, which means we only have about twenty years left before everything goes to heck in a heck-basket. But, perhaps mankind’s doom can be tempered by some common sense regulations that no country has any incentive to follow.

What is CRISPR/Cas9?

CRISPR/Cas9 is a revolutionary gene-editing technique which edits parts of the genome with the removal, addition or alteration of DNA sequences. It can rewrite genetic code in humans, animals, and plants with a range of applications.^[1] The technology may modify the human genome to eradicate diseases and has already been used to challenge Mendel’s law of inheritance.^[2]  CRISPR/Cas9 has boundless positive applications, but like all dual-use technologies, it may be used for nefarious purposes. 

Biological Weapons Use by State and Non-State Actors

There is anxiety that CRISPR/Cas9 will proliferate gene drives that can introduce a permanent alteration in an entire animal or plant population. Since CRISPR/Cas9 is cheap and more precise than previous genetic editing technologies, states, non-state actors, or “rogue scientists” might use it to develop sophisticated bioweapons that can spread more rapidly than traditional bioweapon vehicles.^[3]  In 2016, U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper added gene editing technology to a list of threats posed by “weapons of mass destruction and proliferation” in the Worldwide Threat Assessment.^[4] The technology has subsequently appeared on the list in 2017 and 2019.^[5]  

Concern of the technology’s use by non-state actors may be overblown. After extensive research, Sonia Ben Ouagraham-Gormley and Kathleen M. Vogel determined CRISPR/Cas9 is more likely to be used by state actors as part of a long-term bioweapons project. The technology is not as easily accessible as often believed, which hinders its potential use by non-state actors. “To date, interviews we have conducted with Crispr scientists suggest that making Crispr-related technologies work in practice can require particular kinds of skills, resources, equipment, and infrastructure that are not accessible to all—making the application of Crispr for bioweapons purposes perhaps not as easy as it might seem at first glance.”^[6] Putting the gene drive into organisms would also be easier for state actors.  Since states may use the technology, the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC) should be strengthened to curb the potential creation and use of new bioweapons while the technology is still in its infancy.

BS Suggested Improvements to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention

The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC), a disarmament treaty with 183 parties, prohibits the “development, production, acquisition, and storage of biological weapons.” Biological weapons have not been used in conflict since WWII and the international consensus that their use is objectionable persists.  No country admits it has a biological weapons program.^[7]  In light of new developments in gene editing; however, the BWC should reconsider the belief that states are not interested in biological weapons. Future bioweapons may not target a population with a debilitating disease, but can alter human function in other ways. When the convention was originally conceived, this type of bioweapon was not considered. The U.S. should negotiate a legally binding protocol to the BWC to address verification and compliance standards. Furthermore, the BWC can include a scientific advisory committee that consists of an independent review of biotechnological developments.  The BWC must also be modified so that binding decision can be made outside of the review conference, which only meets every five years.^[8] The speed that gene editing technology is developing far outpaces the five-year timeline that is currently in place. Since biotechnology has re-energized the possible use of bioweapons, it is necessary the BWC is modified to meet the threat.  

Will these suggestions prevent the introduction of a gene drive that creates an epidemic?

Maybe….

Maybe not…

But it sure is fun to think about. 

Sweet dreams,

BS

---

^[1]Antonio Regalado, Everything You Need to Know about CRISPR Gene
Editing’s Monster Year, MIT Technology Review, December 1, 2015,
 https://www.technologyreview.com/s/
543941/everything-you-need-to-know-about-crispr-gene-
editings-monster-year/. 

^[2]Steph Yin, What Is CRISPR/Cas9 and Why Is It Suddenly Everywhere?,
Vice, April 30, 2015, https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/
article/what-is-crisprcas9-and-why-is-it-suddenly-
everywhere.  

^[3]Sonia Ben Ouagraham-Gormley, Kathleen M. Vogel,
Gene Drives: The Good, the Bad, and the Hype, October 14, 2016,
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, http://thebulletin.org/gene-drives-
good-bad-and-hype10027. 

^[4]Antonio Regalado, Top U.S. Intelligence Official Calls Gene
Editing a WMD Threat, MIT Technology Review,
February 9, 2016, 
https://www.technologyreview.com
/s/600774/top-us-intelligence-official-calls-gene-
editing-a-wmd-threat/. 

^[5]2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment: https://www.dni.gov/files/
ODNI/documents/2019-ATA-SFR—SSCI.pdf

^[6]Gormley & Vogel. 

^[7]Oliver Meier, Governance or Arms Control? The Future of the
Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, October 26, 2106,
Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/councilof
councils/global_memos/p38432. 

^[8]Id.