https://web.archive.org/web/20200123174440/https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/lab-made-coronavirus-triggers-debate-34502 Wayback Machine [https://www.the-scie][Go] 372 captures 23 Jan 2020 - 11 Jan 2022 Dec JAN Feb Previous capture 23 Next capture 2019 2020 2021 success fail About this capture COLLECTED BY Organization: Internet Archive The Internet Archive discovers and captures web pages through many different web crawls. At any given time several distinct crawls are running, some for months, and some every day or longer. View the web archive through the Wayback Machine. Collection: Live Web Proxy Crawls Content crawled via the Wayback Machine Live Proxy mostly by the Save Page Now feature on web.archive.org. Liveweb proxy is a component of Internet Archive's wayback machine project. The liveweb proxy captures the content of a web page in real time, archives it into a ARC or WARC file and returns the ARC/WARC record back to the wayback machine to process. The recorded ARC/WARC file becomes part of the wayback machine in due course of time. TIMESTAMPS loading The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20200123174440/ https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/ lab-made-coronavirus-triggers-debate-34502 The Scientist Magazine(r) Search[ ] News & Opinion Magazine Current Issue Archives Features Infographics Top 10 Innovations Subjects Cancer Biology Careers Cell & Molecular Biology Clinical Research Developmental Biology Disease & Medicine Ecology & Environment Evolution Genetics & Genomics History Immunology Microbiology Neuroscience Obituaries Paleontology Pharma & Biotech Policy Profile Publishing Research Integrity Techniques Multimedia Infographics Sponsored Videos Image of the Day Sponsored Webinars Crossword Puzzles Sponsored Quizzes Videos Sponsored eBooks TechEdge Sponsored Infographics Careers Articles Job Listings Salary Survey Subscribe 1. Home 2. News & Opinion Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate The creation of a chimeric SARS-like virus has scientists discussing the risks of gain-of-function research. Nov 16, 2015 Jef Akst [coronaviru] MERS coronavirus flickr, niaid Ralph Baric, an infectious-disease researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, last week (November 9) published a study on his team's efforts to engineer a virus with the surface protein of the SHC014 coronavirus, found in horseshoe bats in China, and the backbone of to one that causes human-like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in mice. The hybrid virus could infect human airway cells and caused disease in mice, according to the team's results, which were published in Nature Medicine. The results demonstrate the ability of the SHC014 surface protein to bind and infect human cells, validating concerns that this virus--or other coronaviruses found in bat species--may be capable of making the leap to people without first evolving in an intermediate host, Nature reported. They also reignite a debate about whether that information justifies the risk of such work, known as gain-of-function research. "If the [new] virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory," Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, told Nature. In October 2013, the US government put a stop to all federal funding for gain-of-function studies, with particular concern rising about influenza, SARS, and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). "NIH [National Institutes of Health] has funded such studies because they help define the fundamental nature of human-pathogen interactions, enable the assessment of the pandemic potential of emerging infectious agents, and inform public health and preparedness efforts," NIH Director Francis Collins said in a statement at the time. "These studies, however, also entail biosafety and biosecurity risks, which need to be understood better." Baric's study on the SHC014-chimeric coronavirus began before the moratorium was announced, and the NIH allowed it to proceed during a review process, which eventually led to the conclusion that the work did not fall under the new restrictions, Baric told Nature. But some researchers, like Wain-Hobson, disagree with that decision. The debate comes down to how informative the results are. "The only impact of this work is the creation, in a lab, of a new, non-natural risk," Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist and biodefence expert at Rutgers University, told Nature. But Baric and others argued the study's importance. "[The results] move this virus from a candidate emerging pathogen to a clear and present danger," Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance, which samples viruses from animals and people in emerging-diseases hotspots across the globe, told Nature. Keywords: bats controversy coronavirus gain-of-function research infectious disease influenza MERS SARS Related Articles Experimental MERS Treatments Target Host Cell Receptor Experimental MERS Treatments Target Host Cell Receptor Experimental MERS Treatments Target Host Cell Receptor What Paraspeckles Can Teach Us About Basic Cell Biology What Paraspeckles Can Teach Us About Basic Cell Biology What Paraspeckles Can Teach Us About Basic Cell Biology Week in Review: April 3-7 Week in Review: April 3-7 Week in Review: April 3-7 Quantum Biology May Help Solve Some of Life’s Greatest Mysteries Quantum Biology May Help Solve Some of Life's Greatest Mysteries Quantum Biology May Help Solve Some of Life's Greatest Mysteries Stay Connected with E-Newsletter Sign-up Facebook Pages The Scientist The Scientist Careers The Genome Scientist The EnviroScientist The Cell Scientist The Micro Scientist The Cancer Scientist The NeuroScientist About & Contact Privacy Policy Job Listings Subscribe Advertise Now part of the LabX Media Group:Lab Manager Magazine|LabX|LabWrench (c) 1986-2020 The Scientist. All rights reserved.