Written by Jon Fleetwood via Substack,
In recent years, the world has witnessed a surge in high-containment biological research facilities, with a significant increase in laboratories capable of handling the most deadly viruses known to mankind.
These laboratories adhere to the highest biosafety standard, Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4), and pose a dual threat of either protecting against pandemics or facilitating the creation of bioweapons, whether intentionally or accidentally.
An investigation published in the May 2025 Journal of Public Health revealed that more than 90% of countries with at least one BSL-3 laboratory lacked oversight on dual-use research of concern.
Dual-use research involves experiments that have both beneficial (e.g., drug development) and harmful (e.g., bioweapon creation) applications.
The study sought to analyze the global distribution of BSL-3 and BSL-4 laboratories and uncovered alarming findings:
“No international body oversees Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3)/BSL-4 laboratories, and countries have varying standards for pathogen classification and lab designation.”
“Over 90% of countries with BSL-3 labs lack regulations on dual-use research.”
BSL-3 labs handle dangerous pathogens that can spread through the air and typically have available treatments, such as tuberculosis, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), and avian influenza.
In contrast, BSL-4 labs deal with the most lethal and exotic pathogens that often lead to deadly diseases without known cures, like Ebola and Marburg viruses.
The proliferation of BSL-3 and BSL-4 laboratories worldwide raises concerns about national security, informed consent, and conflicts of interest.
- It poses national security risks as accidental or deliberate lab leaks endanger lives, as evidenced by the COVID-19 pandemic. Various government bodies, including Congress, the White House, the Department of Energy, the FBI, and the CIA, have acknowledged that the COVID pandemic likely resulted from engineered pathogens released from a lab.
- The lack of informed consent arises from citizens unknowingly facing risks from nearby labs or experimental pathogen releases conducted without public knowledge or consent.
- Conflict of interest concerns stem from many labs being funded by entities that stand to profit from the development of pathogens and related drugs, creating a financial incentive for potential lab leaks that trigger outbreaks.
Even Dr. Anthony Fauci, former NIAID Director, who initially dismissed claims of a lab leak causing the COVID pandemic, acknowledged in a publication that the primary biosecurity threat in pathogen research comes from insiders with direct access to the pathogens or external collaborators.
Given the mounting evidence of accidents, lack of transparency, and conflicts of interest, the operation of these bioweapons labs poses a significant threat to global safety.
The only responsible action is to close all BSL-4 facilities worldwide and impose a worldwide ban on high-risk pathogen experiments to prevent future disasters.
Despite this, governments worldwide are expanding these facilities, as warned by the Journal of Public Health authors:
“The number of BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs continues to rise, with many lacking adequate biosafety guidelines.”
Dr. Richard Bartlett highlighted that COVID-19 originated from risky lab experiments and called for a global ban on bioweapons, describing the unchecked proliferation of BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs, where these pathogens are developed, as a dire threat to humanity.
“President Trump recently addressed the UN General Assembly, attributing COVID to hazardous lab experiments and pledging U.S. leadership in banning bioweapons,” he stated.
“Various U.S. agencies, including the White House, Congress, FBI, CIA, German intelligence, and Department of Energy, have acknowledged the possible lab origin of COVID. Bioweapons are created in BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs. Yet, no one has been held accountable for this catastrophic event. The ongoing rise of BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs worldwide indicates a failure to learn from this crisis. Bioweapons, like nuclear weapons, pose a grave threat to humanity—and the stockpiling of pathogens like avian flu represents an existential danger.”
Global Increase in Bioweapons Labs
Prior to the COVID outbreak, the number of BSL-4 labs worldwide was limited.
Mapping studies published recently reveal over 100 operational BSL-4 labs in 34 countries.
Researchers identified a staggering 3,515 BSL-3 labs in 149 countries.
In their publication in the Journal of Public Health, they noted:
“We found 3,515 BSL-3 labs across 149 countries, with almost half (47.1%) located in the United States. Details on locations and handled pathogens are available for 955 labs. The UK has the highest rate of BSL-3 labs per million population, while Bangladesh has the lowest. High-income nations host 82% of these labs. There are 110 BSL-4 labs in 34 middle- and high-income countries, with 46% in the WHO’s Europe region. Alarmingly, 91.6% of countries with a BSL-3 lab lack dual-use research guidelines.”
India’s Ambitious Plans
In India, the Defence Research & Development Establishment (DRDE) in Gwalior unveiled a BSL-4 facility in November 2024, focusing on research involving Nipah virus and Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus.
Plans for additional high-containment labs are in progress, potentially establishing one of the largest BSL-4 networks in Asia.
Russia’s Biosecurity Initiatives
Russia’s prominent BSL-4 facility at the State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology VECTOR (Koltsovo) plays a crucial role in the country’s biosecurity infrastructure.
Under the “Sanitary Shield” program, Moscow announced intentions to build up to 15 new labs with maximum biosafety levels by 2024.
While not all details are public, satellite imagery and defense analysis suggest that facilities like the one in Sergiev Posad-6 near Moscow exhibit features consistent with BSL-4 specifications.
United States: Enhancing Existing Infrastructure
The U.S. boasts one of the largest arrays of BSL-4 labs globally, with approximately 14 operational facilities as of 2023.
These include establishments like the Galveston National Laboratory, Boston University National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories (NEIDL), and others managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Construction is ongoing for a new cutting-edge BSL-4 lab at the CDC’s Roybal campus in Atlanta, Georgia as part of the CDC’s 2025 Masterplan.
The new facility, known as the High Containment Continuity Laboratory (HCCL), will be a multi-story research building covering 160,000 square feet, accommodating around 80 laboratory researchers.
Latin America’s Venture: Brazil and Argentina
In Brazil, the Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM) laid the foundation for a proposed BSL-4 complex named “Orion” in 2024, integrated with the Sirius synchrotron light-source.
If realized, it would become South America’s most advanced high-containment biology facility.
In Argentina, the Malbrán Institute in Buenos Aires recently inaugurated the nation’s first BSL-4 lab.
Being a key hub for migratory birds crossing hemispheres, Argentina’s strategic position places it at the forefront of global avian flu surveillance and research, fitting it into the broader international preparation for a potential bird flu pandemic.
Conclusion
The rapid expansion of BSL-4 laboratories worldwide signifies not progress, but peril.
What governments term as “pandemic preparedness” has evolved into an unregulated race in bioweapon capabilities, with over 110 BSL-4 labs in operation across 34 countries—many lacking oversight on dual-use research.
The very systems meant to prevent pandemics are now generating the conditions for the next one.
With more than 90% of countries hosting BSL-3 labs lacking regulations on dual-use research, humanity is inadvertently establishing a global bioweapons network under the guise of scientific advancement.
These facilities have already exhibited serious oversights, lack of transparency, and conflicts of interest, with funding agencies often profiting from both pathogen creation and subsequent solutions they offer.
Given this scenario, only a universal ban on high-risk pathogen research and the immediate closure of all BSL-4 labs can safeguard public well-being.
The question is no longer about the possibility of another lab-induced outbreak, but about how many more opportunities we are willing to give for it to happen again.
Loading recommendations…