Study Finds 3,625 High-Containment Biolabs Worldwide — 73% Don't Disclose Their Locations or Pathogen Activities

The U.S. houses 47% of global BSL-3 facilities — and 91.6% of countries operating them lack dual-use research oversight.

by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

As public discussion around biolabs intensifies following law enforcement’s recent raid of an illicit biolab in Las Vegas, now is a good time to become informed.

Unauthorized “basement biolabs” are undeniably dangerous. But risk is not limited to rogue operators. Government-run and NGO-run high-containment laboratories also handle some of the world’s most dangerous pathogens — and most operate within poorly enforced oversight frameworks.

A newly published global mapping study in the Journal of Public Health provides the most comprehensive count to date of Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3) and Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratories worldwide. The numbers are striking — not just for scale, but for the massive oversight gaps.

---

THE GLOBAL COUNT

• 3,625 total high-containment labs identified

  • 3,515 BSL-3 laboratories

  • 110 BSL-4 laboratories

• 149 countries have at least one BSL-3 lab

• 34 countries have at least one BSL-4 lab

This exceeds prior WHO and Global Biolabs estimates, reflecting rapid expansion and incomplete global tracking systems .

BSL-3 Labs

• 47.1% of all BSL-3 labs are in the United States

• 17.2% are in the United Kingdom

  

Together, the US + UK account for nearly two-thirds of all BSL-3 facilities globally. Of the 3,515 BSL-3 labs identified, detailed geolocation and pathogen information was publicly available for only 955 laboratories (~27%). That means roughly 2,500+ labs lack publicly accessible detailed location/pathogen data.

BSL-4 Labs (Highest Containment)

• 17 BSL-4 labs in the United States (highest globally)

• 13 BSL-4 labs in the United Kingdom

• 17 countries have only one BSL-4 lab

---

OVERSIGHT FAILURE

This is where the findings become most concerning.

Among countries with at least one BSL-3 laboratory, 91.6% (131 of 143 countries) have no guidelines or oversight for dual-use research of concern (DURC) . Only 12 countries (8.39%) report having DURC-related training or formal guidelines.

Dual-use research refers to experiments conducted for legitimate scientific purposes that could also be misused to enhance the danger or functionality of pathogens for nefarious purposes.

---

DOCUMENTED LAB LEAKS

The study cites prior data documenting 309 laboratory-acquired infections involving 51 different pathogens between 2000 and 2021, including cases that resulted in fatalities .

Yet despite these incidents, there is no comprehensive global registry of high-containment labs, no standardized international oversight mechanism, and no mandatory global reporting framework for dual-use research of concern (DURC) .

---

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• 3,625 high-containment labs worldwide

• Nearly half of BSL-3 labs in the US alone

• >90% of countries with BSL-3 labs lack dual-use oversight

• Only ~27% of BSL-3 labs have publicly available detailed geolocation data

• No unified global registry exists

The infrastructure handling some of the world’s most dangerous pathogens is expanding — while global oversight remains fragmented, inconsistent, and in many regions virtually absent.

There must be an immediate and complete global moratorium on gain-of-function research, along with comprehensive investigations into the growing number of U.S. and international biolabs—including their funders—that may be conducting bioweapon research, to prevent another man-made pandemic:

---

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

Support our mission: mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.