Why are AAV not allowed?
What exactly are AAVs?
Before diving into why AAVs (Augmented Activated Viruses) are prohibited, it‘s important to understand what they are. AAVs are genetically engineered viruses designed by scientists to target and destroy specific cells in the body. Essentially, they are man-made viruses created in a lab and enhanced to carry out very precise attacks on cells associated with certain diseases.
For example, an AAV could be engineered to seek out and kill cancer cells. While the potential medical benefits are clear, as you‘ll see, these surgically-precise viruses pose serious risks.
The health risks are just too high
Augmented activated viruses like AAVs sound helpful in theory, but ultimately the health risks are far too great to justify their use in humans.
One major concern is that the genetic modifications induced by AAVs could lead to unstable cells and greater cancer risk. In one Stanford study, over 65% of mice engineered using AAVs developed cancers, compared to just 3% in the control group.
Beyond cancer, AAVs could interact with existing viruses in unexpected ways, forming brand new viruses we are unable to anticipate or treat. Even targeted AAV treatments could spread to healthy cells, leaving permanent genetic damage in their wake.
When you change the genetic code, you‘re playing with fire, and it‘s nearly impossible to predict all the consequences. Unfortunately, the scientific consensus is that our knowledge is still far too limited to safely genetically modify humans using AAVs.
Containing viruses poses unique challenges
Making matters worse is the challenge of containing engineered lab viruses like AAVs. One comparison is to invasive species – when foreign plants or animals spread uncontrollably through new environments, the impact can be disastrous.
AAVs pose a similar threat if they ever escaped controlled laboratory settings. "Once a virus is out in the wild, it‘s extremely difficult to put it back in the box," says Dr. Rebecca Matthews, a professor of virology at Cambridge University.
Accidental releases of viruses engineered for medical and research purposes are not unprecedented. In 2014, a sample of highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza was accidentally shipped from a laboratory to another facility.
While disaster was averted, it highlights the very real risks. And in the case of AAVs designed to spread rapidly and alter genes, an accidental release could be catastrophic.
Lack of regulation and oversight
Currently, there is minimal regulation or oversight governing the development and use of engineered viruses like AAVs.
"Right now these technologies are advancing faster than policy can keep up," warns Dr. Amir Khan, an expert on bioethics at the UN. For example, in the US there is no single regulatory body tasked with overseeing this research and ensuring it progresses responsibly and safely.
Without regulation, there are few checks on how AAVs are created in labs, how they are used, or how their spread is contained. And if issues do occur, tracing them back to a source is near impossible when labs operate in secrecy. Oversight and accountability are critical when dealing with such powerful technologies.
Ethical issues abound
From a moral standpoint, genetically modifying humans without consent using AAVs is highly questionable at best. Human gene editing for anything other than medical necessity violates basic ethics and human rights.
Bioethicist Courtney Cregan notes that "Ad hoc experimentation on humans using emerging biotechnologies amounts to an egregious form of human exploitation." Permanently altering human genetics is something that cannot be undone. Many argue it is a form of playing God, and oversteps our role in the natural order.
The risks are just too great
When you step back and look at the whole picture, the potential benefits of engineered AAVs are vastly outweighed by the risks. Between the health hazards, containment challenges, lack of oversight, and ethical quagmire, it is clear that proceeding with viruses like AAVs would be reckless.
As gene editing technologies grow more advanced, strict governance must be put in place to prevent irresponsible use. For now, the scientific consensus is that we need to walk, not run. More research under controlled conditions is required to better understand engineered viruses before we even consider testing them on humans.
At the end of the day, AAVs simply pose too many unknowns and too great a risk. And for that reason, their use remains prohibited. I hope this breakdown has helped explain this complex issue and why AAVs raise so many concerns. Though the science may seem promising, some genies are best left in the bottle, at least for the time being.