Why India is vulnerable to biological risks

A recent analysis from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace states that India faces a host of biological risk factors. Drawing lessons from the coronavirus pandemic and prior biological disasters, India’s government should pursue new safety protocols and develop new institutions to manage future biological risk.

Titled ‘Biological Risks in India: Perspectives and Analysis’, the research paper by Shruti Sharma points out that India is especially vulnerable to such infections because of its geographical position, large population, low healthcare spending, minimal expenditure on research that benefits public health, weak coordination between central and state health authorities, limited involvement of private actors, poor awareness of biosecurity, and the rickety state of public health infrastructure.

Like any country, India faces three major biological threats: naturally occurring infections in humans or animals, or agricultural infestations; infections arising from accidental release of pathogens into the environment; and possible outbreaks caused by deliberate weaponisation of dangerous pathogens that affect humans, animals, or crops. These threats—either alone or together—will force India to strengthen its capacity to detect and respond to them.

In all of this, there is a further challenge to wisely manage the trade-offs between regulations to reduce the risks of accidents and attacks, on the one hand, and on the other, policies that enable government, scientific researchers, and industry to develop and market beneficial applications of biotechnology. Breakthroughs in biotechnology will be necessary to treat or vaccinate people against naturally occurring diseases as well as to detect and counter potential human-made threats and their consequences. This means researchers, businesses, regulators, media platforms, nongovernmental organisations, and voters must strive to educate themselves and their audiences or constituencies about possible threats and about the socially beneficial ways to prevent and manage them.

India’s threats and risks include naturally occurring infections. Given India’s climate conditions, the country is vulnerable to vector-borne diseases such as malaria and dengue fever, among others. A high-density livestock population and a poorly guarded animal-human interface make India susceptible to zoonotic infections such as avian influenza, commonly called bird flu; pig influenza, commonly called swine flu; Nipah virus disease; and coronavirus diseases, such as COVID-19. Poor patient adherence to antibiotic treatment, non therapeutic use of antibiotics to promote growth in farm animals, self-medication, and illegal over-the-counter access to antibiotics makes antibiotic resistance an emerging health threat that demands immediate policy attention.

There are safety concerns. India has multiple laboratories with different biosafety levels (BSLs) set up across the country. Although new biosafety guidelines issued by the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) mention certification and validation for the higher-standard BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs, the country lacks accredited government or private agencies to certify and validate the lower-standard BSL-2 laboratories’ compliance with safety rules.

The implementation of the proper disinfection protocol to dispose of biomedical waste is also posing a serious biosafety hazard. Unforeseen infection of laboratory personnel or the accidental release of pathogens or other biological materials from designated laboratories, either due to negligence or poor understanding of biosafety protocols among laboratory workers. Deliberate introduction of genetically engineered organisms for beneficial purposes might have unintentional harmful consequences.

The security concerns are worrying too. Disease-causing pathogens are abundantly available in nature. Technologies needed to manipulate them are becoming more easily accessible.

A study published in the journal ‘Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology’ by Ana Cláudia and García Díez Juan, titled ‘Biological Risks and Laboratory-Acquired Infections: A Reality That Cannot be Ignored in Health Biotechnology’ flags several dangers. It highlights that advances and research in biotechnology have applications over a wide range of areas, such as microbiology, medicine, the food industry, agriculture, genetically modified organisms, and nanotechnology, among others.

However, research with pathogenic agents, such as virus, parasites, fungi, rickettsia, bacterial microorganisms, or genetic modified organisms, has generated concern because of their potential biological risk – not only for people, but also for the environment due to their unpredictable behaviour. In addition, concern for biosafety is associated with the emergence of new diseases or re-emergence of diseases that were already under control.

The study’s abstract stresses that biotechnology laboratories require biosafety measures designed to protect their staff, the population, and the environment, which may be exposed to hazardous organisms and materials. Biological risk can be reduced and controlled by the correct application of internationally recognised procedures such as proper microbiological techniques, proper containment apparatus, adequate facilities, protective barriers, and special training and education of laboratory workers.