Saeed Khan, Ph.D., Head of the Department of Molecular Pathology at Dow diagnostic research and reference laboratory and President of the Pakistan Biological Safety Association discusses the importance and challenges of biosafety/biosecurity practices on both a local and global scale. He highlights key steps for biorisk assessment and management and stresses the importance of training, timing and technology.
“We need to have basic biosafety and biosecurity to stay away from these bugs and the modern challenges, like cyber biosecurity and genomics. These are the new areas, which are potential threats for the future, and where we need to train our researchers and students.”
“Starting from simple hand washing or hand hygiene, the basic things we use are gloves, goggles and PPE to protect the workers, the staff and the patient from getting infected from the environment, laboratory or hospitals. These are the basic things, and it's very crucial, because if one is not using gloves in the lab or not wearing the lab coat, he or she may get infected from the sample, and the patient can get infected from the physician and doctors or nurse if they are not following the basic biosafety rules. These [things] are routinely important. Every day we should practice this.”
“But there are [also] new challenges. Particularly in the microbiology lab, we [used to] think that once we killed the bacteria, then it's fine. But nowadays, it's not the way we should think about it. Though you kill the bacteria practically, it still has a sequence, [which] we call the genome, and if you have that information with you, you theoretically have the potential to recreate that pathogen… that can be used or maybe misused as well.”
“[Working with] scripts of pathogens, like smallpox or the polioviruses, we call this synthetic biology. Different scientists are doing it for the right purposes, like for production of vaccines, to find new therapeutics, to understand the pathology of the diseases. But on [the other hand]—we call it dual use research of concern (DURC)—the same can be misused as well. That's why it's very important to be aware of the bugs that we are working with, and the potential of that pathogen or microbe, to the extent that can be useful or otherwise.”
“So, we should be aware of the new concern of the technology, synthetic biology and DURC. These are new concepts—cyber, biosecurity and information security [are all] very much important these days. You cannot be relaxed being in the microbiology lab. Once we have identified a pathogen, declared a result to the patient and the physician, and it's been treated, we [still] need to be worried about waste management—that we discard that waste properly and we have proper inventory control of our culture. It should be safe in the locker or on in the freezers and properly locked, so we should not be losing any single tube of the culture, otherwise it may be misused.”
Risk Assessment
“The best word that you have used is risk assessment. So, it should gage the severity of the issue. We should not over exaggerate the risk, and we should not undermine the risk. Once the risk assessment been made, we can proceed.”
“Right from the beginning of touching a patient or a sample of the patient until the end of discarding the sample, that is called biorisk management. It's a complete science that we need to be aware of—not in bits and pieces. Rather a comprehensive approach should be adopted, and each and every person in the organization should be involved. Otherwise, we may think [we are] doing something good, but someone else may spoil the whole thing, and it will be counterproductive at the end.”
“We should involve each and every person working with us and the lab, and we should empower them. They should feel ownership that they are working with us, and they are [as] responsible as we are. So, this the whole process needs to be properly engaged. People must be engaged, and they should be empowered, and they should be responsible.”
“Each and every lab has different weaknesses and strengths of their own, which play an important role in the risk assessment.”
“There is inherent risk, which is linked with the pathogen, and there is another thing we call residual risk. So, residual risk everywhere and varies. Though the inherent risk may be the same, the residual risk is based on the training of the person, the lab facility that is available, the resources that labs have and the potential threats from the environment.”
“It's not usually possible that you do a risk assessment every day. So, when you have different factors involving a new pathogen in your lab, you have new equipment in your in your lab, or some new employee in your lab—[a new] variable factor that is involved—you should [perform] the risk assessment. Otherwise, [a routine risk assessment] should [be done] twice a year, after 6 months.”
“Training is important, and response time is very much crucial. And different technology plays a vital role, but the lack of technology should not be an excuse for not responding. There is always an alternative on the ground that you may do the risk assessment. And within the given resources and facility, we should mimic the technology and respond to any outbreaks or disease within our given resources.”