2026/01/17 by Christopher Bobier, Daniel J. Hurst · 1 voice · 1 citation
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology · Medicine · Veterinary · #Animal testing and alternatives #Bacillus and Francisella bacterial research #Ethics in Clinical Research
paper · doi:10.1177/17470161251413317
openalex publication_date 2026/01/17 · openalex created_date 2026/01/19 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/14
Dual-use research of concern (DURC) is research that can benefit humanity but poses substantial potential risk as well. There is scholarly agreement that each stakeholder has ethical responsibilities vis-à-vis DURC, from researchers to the broader international community, and that ethical DURC requires each stakeholder fulfill their ethical responsibilities. In this paper, we argue that few if any stakeholders are presently fulfilling their ethical responsibilities; therefore, present-day DURC may be unethical. This conclusion does not rest on the assumption that any particular stakeholder is acting with malicious intent. Rather, we contend that the unprecedented pace of scientific and technological advancement has significantly outstripped the development of corresponding ethical oversight mechanisms, regulatory frameworks, and systems of public accountability. As a result, the institutional and normative infrastructure required to ensure that DURC is conducted in a responsible and ethically defensible manner has failed to keep pace.