The US military program could be considered a biological weapon

In an opinion piece published Thursday in the newspaper Science, the authors state that the United States must better justify the goal of its project Insects Allies in peacetime, in order to avoid being perceived as hostile to other countries. Other experts shared their concerns about the ethics and safety of research, which aims to transmit protective features to growing crops.

This would mark a change from the current widely used procedure of genetic modification of seeds for crops such as corn and soybeans, before they become plants.

The military research agency says its goal is to protect the country's food supply from threats such as drought, crop diseases and bioterrorism by using insects to infect plants with viruses that infect them. protect.

"Food security is national security," said Blake Bextine, who heads the two-year-old project of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, a branch of the US Department of Defense.

The State Department stated that the project had peaceful aims and did not violate the Biological Weapons Convention. The US Department of Agriculture said its scientists were part of the research, which is conducted in confined laboratories.

The technology could work in different ways. In the first phase, aphids – tiny insects that feed on sucking plant sap – infect plants with a virus that temporarily causes a stroke. But researchers are also trying to see if viruses can alter the plant's genes to withstand hazards throughout the life of the plant.

Nevertheless, the research raises concerns.

"They are talking about a massive release of genetic modification by means of insects," said Gregory Kaebnick, an ethicist at the Hastings Center's Bioethics Research Institute in Garrison, New York, who said studied genetic modification. It was not part of the scientific paper, but said the Insects Allies technology could be destructive.

Kaebnick asked how viruses and insects carrying them could be controlled. "When you talk about very small things – insects and microbes – it may be impossible to remove them" once they are introduced into farmers' fields, he said.

Dr. David Relman, professor of medicine and microbiology at Stanford, who advised the Obama administration on bio-defense but is not part of DARPA's research, said the project could be a long-standing fear that enemy countries seek to harm their crops. .

Also according to Relman, this technology could potentially help farmers fight against "a pest plant virus moving in the plains" or to protect crops from bioterrorism. As insects often spread crop diseases, Mr. Relman said that DARPA was trying to use the biology of these insects to "recruit them as allies" in the propagation of protective traits.

Although it is not a well-known name, DARPA has contributed to the development of the Internet and its mission is to search for potentially new and potentially crucial technologies. The agency announced the project Insect Allies in 2016.

Guy Reeves, co-author of the paper Science and Biologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Germany, said that technology is more of a feasible weapon – to kill plants – than an agricultural tool. As a result, he said that DARPA could send an alarming message, regardless of its intentions.

"It's really how it's perceived," he said.

European newspaper authors claim that the mere announcement of the program may have motivated other countries to develop their own capabilities in the field. In their view, the project also highlights the need to further discuss the regulatory and ethical concerns of these developing technologies.

Todd Kuiken, senior researcher at North Carolina State University, said he did not think the army would want to attack another country with insects. But he said that it seemed unfortunate that DARPA is funding the project.

"The mere fact that it is a military program will naturally raise such issues," said Kuiken, who had expressed last year similar concerns to those published in Science.

Tom Inglesby, professor of environmental health engineering and engineering at Johns Hopkins, said the technology is developed specifically to protect crops. But he acknowledged that it could be misused.

One can expect that a new technology can be militarized, even if that is not the intention, said Paul Thompson, professor of agriculture and agriculture. Ethics at Michigan State University, which sits on the DARPA Advisory Board.

"Once you've made that kind of breakthrough, you're in a new world, it's a morally ambiguous place, you're wondering, is it something we should never do?", A-t -he declares.

Some experts questioned whether the ambitious goals of the project were achievable.

The entomologist at North Carolina State University, Fred Gould, who chaired a National Academy of Sciences committee on genetically modified foods and is not part of DARPA research, said that too much biological interactions should be fully manipulated. close to zero. "

It may never work, but Relman said it was the role of DARPA: to explore the "bottom of a hard job" to anticipate future threats.

Explore further:
US military invests $ 2 billion in artificial intelligence of the "next generation"

More information:
"Agricultural research or a new biological weapon system?" Science (2018). science.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi… 1126 / science.aat7664