Laws to keep terrorists out of the lab explained

Jacquelyn Curtis

Ms Thomas has enrolled as a University of Canberra PhD student

5 September 2006: An outbreak of a deadly virus, spreading quickly and endangering human lives sounds like a plot from a bad Hollywood movie - but these days the threat of biological terrorism and 'germ warfare' seems very real.

The 2001 Anthrax scares projected biological terrorism to the forefront of the media - and its implications in Australia ranged from the tightening of border security to increased screening of packages sent through postal services.

But what are the impacts of this heightened awareness for biological research and scientists?

University scientific officer Sandra Thomas discussed the issue as part of the GADI lecture series last month.

Ms Thomas' lecture canvassed the raft of legislation governing various aspects of laboratory use including environmental, ethical and health regulations designed to ensure safety within the lab and in the wider community.

She explained the legislative requirements varied depending on what was being used in the lab - for example, the Gene Technology Act (Cth) 2000 regulates the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and seeks to manage the risks imposed by gene technology.

According to Ms Thomas, who this week enrolled as a University PhD student, legislation to regulate other hazardous biological materials is currently under review is designed to "control substances that, if they fall into the wrong hands, could be used for biological warfare".

Ms Thomas described the balancing act the legislation seeks to achieve by encouraging scientific research and managing the risks involved with biological research.

"Intentional releases of biological material, such as for commercial releases and field trials, usually get the most media," she said.

"One particular success story is genetically modified cotton - which is now mostly insect resistant with some herbicide tolerance," she said.

"In 2005, 70 per cent of the Australian cotton crop was insect resistant, meaning the plants can control pest insects without the use of insecticides. Cotton is now cheaper to produce and less insecticide is sprayed over rural communities."

Ms Thomas said the repercussions of intentionally releasing a GMO without authorisation attracted heavy fines and prison sentences.