Man-made super-flu could kill half humanity (& the scientist wants to publish the process)

[Are_grits_groceries]

A virus with the potential to kill up to half the world’s population has been made in a lab. Now academics and bioterrorism experts are arguing over whether to publish the recipe, and whether the research should have been done in the first place.

The virus is an H5N1 bird flu strain which was genetically altered to become much more contagious. It was created by Ron Fouchier of the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, who first presented his work to the public at an influenza conference in Malta in September.

Fouchier said the strain circulates in animals, particularly birds, but rarely affects humans.

In the ten or so years since bird flu first emerged in Asia, fewer than 600 cases have been reported in humans. But the H5N1 strain is particularly vicious, killing roughly half of patients diagnosed with it. What stops it from becoming a major threat to public health is that it does not readily transmit from human to human. Or at least it didn’t – until now.

Researchers in Fouchier’s team used ferrets – test animals which closely mimic the human response to influenza – and transmitted H5N1 from one to another to make it more adaptable to new hosts. After 10 generations, the virus had mutated to become airborne, which means ferrets became ill from merely being near other diseased animals.
<snip>
http://rt.com/news/bird-flu-killer-strain-119/

Okaaaaaaaaaaay!
Let's just give away this method so that everybody who can set up a lab might be able to make it.
I feel safe!

[Sancho]

1. what in the hell are they thinking?!?!

:grr:

[Ilsa]

2. How naive do you have to be to actually need a debate on

whether the process should be published?

Scary shit. :scared:

[lunatica]

3. And the reason for doing this was... what exactly?

[Orrex]

4. But most of the dead will be from the 99%, so what's the big deal?

[eilen]

12. But which 99%?

Pestilence, disease, deadly viruse-- do not care what your bank account says.

[Sirveri]

70. Yes, but HEPA filters and bio containment centers DO.

And the top 0.01% certainly has the cash for those, heck some of them probably already have stuff like that. I know the Waltons have some sort of civil unrest nuclear bomb shelter thing.

[snooper2]

24. I believe you are correct...out of 100% of the population

If half were to die, then yes, most of the dead would be from 99% of the 100% :rofl:

[eilen]

85. agreed lol

99% is 99%

You never know who will be immune.

wealthy inhabiters of HEPA filtered bunkers can't stay there forever.... well, maybe they can but isn't that much like being in jail?

There are a variety of virus caused apocalyptic scenarios filmed in modern media-- there was a series produced by the BBC in which while survivors were immune, the virus changed and became contagious to them; the one in which it was only adults who were susceptible, the classic superflu of The Stand's variety, the Zombie Apocalypse viruses -- Walking Dead, .. (the other one-- movie with Will Smith in it), etc. Nearly all had survivors who had a natural immunity and they were 1, maybe less than 1% of the population but not special in any other manner-- some may have been wealthy, most were not.

You have to ask yourself, which fate is worse? To die with the rest of humanity or to be left to try and survive, pick up the pieces of civilization. What makes our lives tolerable are the service and company of those around us and our capacity to serve and care for others.

[City Lights]

5. What could possibly go wrong?

What. The. Fuck.

:scared:

[RKP5637]

6. Yet another example of how truly fucked up the human species is... n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

59. Truly fucked up and apparently truly evil to have made this.

[greytdemocrat]

7. What???

JHC!!! What a bunch of idiots!!!

[raccoon]

8. I'm going to re-read THE STAND, just in case something like that happens. nt

[jeff47]

15. It should be noted that "The Stand" can't happen

One of the elements of "The Stand" is that only the few with a natural immunity survive. That doesn't happen in the real world. In the face of a pandemic, society collapses and people stop mixing. As a result, pockets of people who are not immune are not exposed.

Granted, we're still talking about a very bad situation. It's just not quite as apocalyptic as King wrote.

[raccoon]

18. I don't know, didn't the 1918 flu virus make it to some pretty remote places? nt

[jeff47]

19. 1918 wasn't sufficiently deadly to collapse society. (nt)

[Festivito]

67. This was just as soldiers returned from the Philippines. Travelers, traveling across the Americas.

They had just been to he perfect places where pigs, ducks, humans and feces could create a toxic brew.

My cousin was in upper Michigan spying with the other waitresses from the kitchen on the men in uniform entering their eating establishment to see which would serve whom. She caught a handsome one.

[MilesColtrane]

82. Yeah, and that was basically before global commercial air traffic existed.

If something really contagious and really deadly got loose now, it would be all over the world in a matter of days.

[The Straight Story]

22. In the Stand we intentionally spread it to other areas (China, Etc) (nt)

[jeff47]

25. Yes, but you can't infect everyone.

Spreading it to other areas still doesn't infect everyone. You'll still get clumps of people who aren't exposed who disconnect from the rest of society and remain unexposed.

If everyone outside your town was dying, you're not going to leave the town, and you're not going to let outsiders in.

[The Straight Story]

27. True - like folks on a submarine :) (nt)

[yawnmaster]

60. There was more involved in the Stand than simple transmission of disease. eom

[csziggy]

62. To heck with Stephen King, I'm watching "12 Monkeys" again! n/t

[RKP5637]

65. +1, n/t

[WinkyDink]

9. NPI, but this is, in all seriousness, the sickest thing I have EVER known of. PSYCHOPATHIC SCIENCE.

[Javaman]

16. You're a half empty type of person aren't you?

it said half if humanity will die. Half will live!!

Sorry, I snark, I snark. ;)

cheers!

[WinkyDink]

58. Well, maybe if I could pick the half....... :-)

[Javaman]

68. LOL good one! nt

[queenjane]

10. I work with scientists. The end game is "Can we do this?"

NOT "should we do this?"

For whatever reasons (ego, career advancement, grant monies, Nobel Prizes, etc), they give no thought to the repercussions of their research.

Some of the docs here think extending human lifespans to 120 or more is just a great, dandy idea. When I point out that:

a. They're not extending healthy, vibrant, productive years, but extreme old age & dependency, AND
b. There won't be infrastructure (assisted living facilities, Medicare, Social Security) to care for/support all these very old and
sick people, AND
c. Family members, themselves aged and ill, won't be able to care for their parents/grandparents, AND
d. The planet is already bulging with humanity, resulting in the increasing extinction of other species, AND
e. All these people and their needs will just speed up climate change and the loss of arable land and potable water,

They regard me as some cranky malcontent who wants to impede "great and valuable scientific research" and basically just piss in their cornflakes.

So the fact that someone developed a killer virus AND WANTS TO PUBLISH THE RESULTS TO ENHANCE THEIR CV & FUNDING surprises me not one iota.

[jeff47]

13. Your argument also applied to the 1900s

We extended lifespans despite your concerns. So now people aren't regularly dying by 55.

Since then:

a) "healthy, vibrant, productive years" were also extended.
b) Infrastructure was built
c) Long-term-care insurance was created

D and E are mostly driven by countries full of young people. Such as India and China, where people do not get sufficient medical care to live to the ages you are worried about. In the US, we're having children pretty close to the replacement rate.

[WildNovember]

72. Folks never did "regularly die by 55" if they made it past childhood except under specific

conditions.

Even in the Bible, it's "threescore and ten".

[Xithras]

54. Science is the pursuit of knowledge.

Scientists pursue knowledge. It is the job of society and governments to determine how to deal with that knowledge. Knowledge should never be avoided simply because it's "risky". That's fundie, dark age thinking.

Sometimes I'm glad that my branch of science is dedicated to computers. Aside from the occasional "The computers are going to overthrow us" paranoia, we don't have to deal with this kind of fear mongering.

But, to pursue that line of reasoning: Eventually, computers will gain the ability to reason, communicate, and make decisions on their own. Once this happens, tens of millions of people will lose their jobs as virtually every computer-related position on the planet becomes obsolete. Hundreds of millions more will become unemployed as AI controlled robots take over repetitive manual jobs in factories and assembly lines, performing the labor at a fraction of a humans cost. By many estimates, true sentient AI's will have a devastatingly negative impact on the long term global economy.

So should we stop researching AI's?

I say no. Scientists pursue knowledge, as we have since the beginning of the Enlightenment. It's the job of others to determine how, or if, that knowledge should be used.

[Yo_Mama]

55. I think you've got it wrong

If scientists ever did extend human lifespans to 120 years, they could only do it by extending the productive years and years of general health.

As it is now, most human beings die around 100 if they last that long from organ failure, but of course most people see some degree of loss of organ function long before that. Extending human life to 120 years could only be done with some revolutionary technique that extended tissue regeneration years, which would inevitably extend the healthy years.

I'm 50 myself, and when I was a kid in elementary school, not only did you expect older people to die in their mid 70s, you weren't surprised at all when they died in their 60s. A 78 year old was truly considered old back then. And people honestly did age quicker back then - the number of physically fit and active people I see in their 70s now is far more than I saw back then.

If you look at the overall productivity of human society, the first 20 and the last 20 are mostly negative. We spend a lot on educating our people - it's the nature of societies like ours. For every "good" five years we gain, we get a high net payoff.

[shockra]

83. Agreed on all points.

There's a lack of gender balance in science and this is one of the ways it manifests.

Thinking about the practical aspects? You must not love the patriarchy enough. :sarcasm:

[jeff47]

11. For all those freaking out, there's a good reason for this research

Finding out what, exactly, makes a flu virus more contagious is extremely helpful.

It identifies what makes it more contagious. Which can then lead to treatments, vaccines, and better tests. But you only get those follow-on discoveries if you publish this research. And if we can do it in a lab, it's only a matter of time before nature does it on her own...such as in 1918.

We're living in a world where you can literally mail-order bubonic plague. People with ill intent can already conduct biowarfare.

[Modern_Matthew]

17. But getting hold of some marijuana is a tedious process...

:-(

[AverageJoe90]

57. It didn't sound like it to me.

Until I find proof of these supposed good intentions, I'm sticking to what I said earlier: Throw this guy in prison and destroy this shit before terrorists can get ahold of it.

[Codeine]

91. That's why we shouldn't let people like you make decisions.

Folks like you gave us the Patriot Act and TSA security theater.

[AverageJoe90]

109. It's just that I have done a bit of research on biowarfare, and.......

This smelled really off to me. BUT, if there is indeed a good motive behind this research.....then I'll take back what I said earlier. :)

[mrs_p]

76. Ah, yes, the DU science freak out

You are right. This research is important. And is being done in influenza labs around the world to understand how influenza jumps from one species to another.

[Marrah_G]

96. I can see them doing this for good reasons, but...

I question why the heck they would want people to know they were successful and who was successful. Seems to me that that opens some doors for bad people to try and gain the knowledge for nefarious purposes.

[Javaman]

14. sounds like the repuke back up plan.

and then call it the rapture.

[backtoblue]

20. What kind of person would test such a thing???

This is definitely not the direction science needs to go.

[jeff47]

23. Yes, clearly we shouldn't try to figure out what makes flu more contagious.

If we did that, we might come up with treatments and procedures that help prevent flu from spreading.

[backtoblue]

26. There could be devestating consequences to this.

[jeff47]

31. And there could be fantastically good consequences to this

Like virtually all scientific work, it can be used for good or evil.

The flu virus mutates constantly. Mother nature will create a highly contagious and highly deadly flu on her own. It's better to study how that "highly contagious" part works so we can fight it.

[backtoblue]

37. Checking the virulence of an existing strand is understandable.

But manufacturing a virus that is devastatingly contagious could be that they are creating the very thing that they are trying to prevent.

[jeff47]

44. We're not talking about a virus that can not be produced outside a lab

Flu mutates constantly. It's very sloppy when packaging its DNA, and so it mutates very, very frequently.

A highly deadly and highly contagious flu will develop naturally. In fact, this one did. It was highly contagious and highly deadly to birds. One that is highly contagious and highly deadly to humans is simply a matter of time. So we'd better study this one so we know what makes flu highly contagious.

[Are_grits_groceries]

32. That's not the point.

I do see the need for research so that these types of viruses can be dealt with. However, to publish a 'recipe' that Gawd and everybody can find is irresponsible.

I am not naive enough to believe that other countries aren't working on this already. Why in the hell do you give them any help?

In a perfect world, other scientists and people would use the info to also work on 'cures.' however, that won't happen in this world. Not by a long shot.

They are arguing about academic freedom. That is a valid idea to contemplate. Every right has a limit somewhere. There is a constant fight to set that limit. I believe that not publishing this method is one such limit. I am very reluctant to put restrictions on any rights. There are a few times

[jeff47]

34. The research is worthless without publishing

The "recipe" isn't in the form of "mix 1/2 cup water, 3 oz flu....". It's discussing what, exactly, changed to make that flu more contagious. That is the information that other researchers will need to develop methods of countering that change.

Yes, it could be used to create a weapon for biowarfare. But you can order biowarfare weapons out of a mail-order catalog today. It's easy to infect one person. But it's hard to infect 100,000 without some specialized research. That weaponization should remain unpublished.

But we're not talking about weaponization research here.

[Are_grits_groceries]

35. It is more related to publishing the process.

You're right that the ingredients are not the essential part. However, the author wants to publish the steps to create this virulent virus. This is specialized research that creates an airborne virus instead of one spread by contact.

It isn't ok with me to go into that detail. Tough beans if everybody doesn't have access to it. Would you have advocated publishing specific info about triggers, creation of specific materials and the shape needed for atomic bombs to work in WWII?

[jeff47]

45. Again, making a virus that can infect in a lab is not a weapon

Infecting an animal in the next cage is not the same as infecting a large mass of people. To do that, you've got to spread the virus far and wide, which isn't actually easy to do.

To use your WWII analogy, this is like publishing the existence of Uranium. It's nowhere near usable as a weapon.

[Are_grits_groceries]

49. If you are able to make this virus

catchable through air, it is a problem. That is the problem with spreading avian flu. You have to touch it. Make a virus that lives over a period of time that can travel by air and spread by it, we could be SOL.

That is exactly what this scientist did. He mucked around with it enough so that it is extremely virulent AND can be caught through the air. He has the process spelled out and wants to publish it.

Even if he hasn't made every leap to the worst possible case, this info could give somebody a huge hand in getting to it. It could be a significan't bioweapon.

[mrs_p]

79. Most likely was done in a BSL3 facility

Where much influenza and other infectious agent research is done. BTW - influenza is fairly easy to kill. Just a little bleach or UV light. So, wash hands and hang outside in the sun.

[jeff47]

87. He didn't "muck around with it". He let a natural mutation happen

Bullets can be a significant weapon, but without a way to fire them they are not dangerous.

He did not genetically engineer a new virus. "Recipe" in the original story is a gross oversimplification like you often see in popular press coverage of science.

[Dont call me Shirley]

53. And that's what chemtrails can do, right now.

[jeff47]

94. No, they really can't

You can't just dump a bacteria or virus into water and spray it to infect a wide area.

First, we're talking about a virus that dies under UV light. So as it slowly descends from 10,000 feet, it dies from sunlight.

"AH-ha! They'll spray it at night!!" you say. Well, still doesn't work. First, you're not sure that the virus will actually descend. Viruses are extremely light, and the slightest updraft will keep the virus up away from the people you're targeting. And due to the heat island effect, cities tend to produce updrafts on a calm night. On a windy night, you have no clue where your virus will land.

Second, bacteria and viruses clump together in air due to chemical properties and static cling. So your fine mist at 10,000 ends up as lumps as it reaches the ground. Lumps are not easily inhaled. So if we pretend the air was absolutely still over the city, instead of infecting 1M people in a city you get 50 or so. Which causes the disease to not be spread very far. People react to the disease and change behavior, plus public health efforts come into play and contain it.

There are other steps necessary to actually spread a bioweapon effectively. That information isn't widely available for good reason.

[Are_grits_groceries]

74. No it's not.

I am talking about the PROCESS!

In WWII, it would be analogous to publishing the process to enrich the right type of uranium, how to make the right type of trigger, the shape the material would need to be to create the wanted reaction and so on.

That is what he wants to publish: the PROCESS to create an airborne virus.
As I said, even if he didn't reach the worst possible outcome to study, this would give someone a huge leg up on reaching that point themselves.

[jeff47]

89. "Recipe" in the original article is grossly missleading

It's a massive oversimplification, which you often see in popular news coverage of science. The problem is it makes you think that anyone could repeat this experiment. That's not the case.

From what I can gather from the article, he did not genetically engineer a new virus. That would be a 'recipe'. Instead, he created an environment for flu to thrive and let natural selection create a better virus. Someone repeating that could end up with a weaker flu, or a stronger flu.

But remember that is what happens every year out in the real world. A mutation already created a highly contagious and deadly flu - the very strain this guy was studying. The only difference is it was highly contagious to birds, not mammals. But a flu that is highly contagious and deadly to humans is only a matter of time.

That's why we need to study it, and it can not be studied if you do not publish.

[wtmusic]

102. Ah, viruses don't kill people...people do.

Where have I heard that logic before?

[treestar]

111. If they didn't publish it, Wikileaks will, no?

[mrs_p]

78. This is a common research design

for influenza experiments. The objective is most likely to determine what genetic mutations determine influenza's ability to jump from one species to another. The rationale is that if we can predict such a thing, we can be prepared for pandemics to come...

[Romulox]

21. I can see a bright side to this. nt

[hobbit709]

28. It would definitely cut down on global warming and depletion of resources.

[dimbear]

51. There's a pretty clear connection between the Black Death and the Renaissance.

With the ranks of serfs thinned out, those who remained could demand and get the right to organize. It's all in the history books.

[wtmusic]

100. No, with the ranks of cheap labor thinned out the price went up

for everyone who survived. Killing off your competition tends to have that effect.

[wtmusic]

97. Yes, and the poor people who will die had it coming

They should have gotten a job so they could pay for treatment

[hobbit709]

98. the Black Death cut down the privileged as well as the poor.

Not even royalty was immune.

[wtmusic]

101. A simple comparison of malaria stats between the U.S. and sub-Saharan Africa

makes that analogy fairly worthless.

[DainBramaged]

29. Teh stupid, it burns...............

[Scuba]

30. Which half?

[NorthCarolina]

52. Wild guess...the half without access to proper medical care? nt

[csziggy]

63. Not necessarily - the Black Death did not just kill the people without resources

Though the best medical science of the time was pretty primitive, you'd think the people with the most resources, such as better food, cleaner water and better sanitation, would have survived better. It turned out that the people with a natural immunity were the best survivors.

PBS - Secrets of the Dead: Mystery of the Black Death

For a disease-causing microorganism to infect the human body there must be a gateway or portal through which it enters into human cells. The plague bacterium works this way, hijacking the white blood cells sent to eliminate it. Traveling inside the white blood cells to the lymph nodes, the bacteria break out and attack the focal point of the human immune system. Dr. Stephen O'Brien felt that the mutated CCR5 gene, delta 32, may have prevented the plague from being able to enter its host's white blood cells.

Eyam provided O'Brien an ideal opportunity to test this theory. Specifically, Eyam was an isolated population known to have survived a plague epidemic. Everyone in the town would have been exposed to the bacterium, so it's likely that any life-saving genetic trait would have been possessed by each of these survivors. "Like a Xerox machine," says O'Brien, "their gene frequencies have been replicated for several generations without a lot of infusion from outside," thus providing a viable pool of survivor-descendents who would have inherited such a trait.

Knowing who died and who lived through the early years of the plague is somewhat problematic. Deaths among the general English population were not recorded in the 14th Century -- the height of the Plague -- and most communities did not begin recording parish registers until around 1538. Fortunately, Eyam began keeping a parish register in 1630. Thus historian John Clifford began by examining the register, noting everyone who was alive in 1665, the year the plague came to Eyam. He searched for evidence of life through the year 1725 -- marriages, baptisms, burials that took place years after the plague had left the village. Deleting the names of those lost during the plague period, he was able to determine who the survivors were.

<SNIP>

Meanwhile, recent work with another disease strikingly similar to the plague, AIDS, suggests O'Brien was on the right track. HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, tricks the immune system in a similar manner as the plague bacterium, targeting and taking over white blood cells. Virologist Dr. Bill Paxton at the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center in New York City noticed, "the center had no study of people who were exposed to HIV but who had remained negative." He began testing the blood of high-risk, HIV-negative individuals like Steve Crohn, exposing their blood to three thousand times the amount of HIV normally needed to infect a cell. Steve's blood never became infected. "We thought maybe we had infected the culture with bacteria or whatever," says Paxton. "So we went back to Steve. But it was the same result. We went back again and again. Same result." Paxton began studying Crohn's DNA, and concluded there was some sort of blocking mechanism preventing the virus from binding to his cells. Further research showed that that mechanism was delta 32.

More: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/previous_seasons/case_plague/clues.html

Also see the related interview: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/previous_seasons/case_plague/interview.html

Unless a disease evolves a new mechanism for infecting cells, delta 32 will provide resistance if not full immunity to the people who are lucky enough to carry that genetic trait.

[Evasporque]

33. from the "what could possibly go wrong?" department....nt

[mike_c]

36. for all the folks condemning the creation of this virus...

...you should be aware that this was done to answer the very question that so many skeptics asked back when H5N1 was decimating Asian bird populations but only occasional humans: how difficult would it be for H5N1 to jump hosts and express similar virulence in humans? Many dismissed that likelihood then-- I remember the discussions right here on DU. Well, guess what? It's not so easily dismissed now, is it?

This was REALLY important research because it showed not only how easily H5N1 could mutate into a human virulent strain, but also because it details the specific loci where mutations will increase virulence. Those mutations can now be watched. This is prudent, due diligence IMO.

[Are_grits_groceries]

71. The virulence isn't the major point.

The ability to travel without a vector such as a bird or some other mechanism is the key. This scientist was trying to create a virus like this that could be spread through the air. THAT is the process he was able to make.

[mike_c]

105. influenza ALWAYS spreads through airborne aerosols....

This work did NOT weaponize H5N1. Instead, it simply showed the ease with which the virus can switch hosts without loss of virulence after a few mutations, something that influenza has historically been very prone to do. This is simply basic public health research.

[Swede]

38. Some men just want to watch the world burn.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efHCdKb5UWc

[quispquake]

39. Patton Oswalt had it right...

"Science...it's all about 'coulda', not about 'shoulda'..."

[LynneSin]

40. They could make it a kiddie toy! Remember the Atomic Labatory kits...

:sarcasm:

[Xithras]

41. You can find detailed plans for building nuclear weapons on the Internet.

So far, nobody has built one in their garage.

Just as with nuclear weapons, the technical skill, educational level, and equipment needed to produce something like this is FAR beyond the reach of laymen, terrorists, or even small rogue governments.

[jeff47]

46. Actually, its the material availibility

A "little boy"-style nuke is really easy to make...once you have about 115lbs of U-235. Getting that much U-235 is so hard we developed implosion bombs (like "fat man"). And that was with virtually unlimited access to a whole lot of uranium mines.

[and-justice-for-all]

42. They need to be working on curing diseases..

not making new monsters. Publishing this purely unethical

[jeff47]

47. You can't cure what you don't understand

This experiment is a significant step forward in understanding how flu works.

[Union Scribe]

48. Great. Spread the results and destroy the virus. And keep the recipe locked up. nt

[jeff47]

86. The "recipe" is the results, and you need the virus to test with.

"Recipe" is a gross simplification anyway, as you often see in popular press coverage of science. It's not "Mix 1/2 c water, 1 oz flu..." that anyone could follow, nor would following the same protocol yield exactly the same results. This virus is the result of a random mutation.

[and-justice-for-all]

107. All you need is the virues DNA...

and while attempting to understand it, you create an stronger stain, it needs to be documented and then destroyed.

[mrs_p]

80. This is part of that process

Studies like this are published all the time. It sounds like someone wanted to sensationalize the research.

[bloomington-lib]

43. Don't let the makers of Tamiflu or similar flu vaccine producers get a hold of this

What they would do with an outbreak: Lobby the Govt to make vaccinations mandatory, plan a shortage, and take a bath in all that money.

[mrs_p]

77. already much Tamiflu resistant strains

it day may be coming to an end.

[woo me with science]

50. K&R nt

[AverageJoe90]

56. Kill half the world's population? Really?

This smells like more extreme fearmongering, and not so surprising coming from Russia Today.
And who else thinks Fouchier ought to be thrown in prison for this reckless endeavor which could kill hundreds of thousands or even millions if unchecked?

[yawnmaster]

61. Let's stop teaching science; the knowledge is too risky.

and also reading because then our children can read about science, even if it's not taught.
Oh and stop the internets.

[leeroysphitz]

64. I wish they'd find a way to control the subjects of Man's studies.

A maniac with a lot of knowledge is a threat.

[Motown_Johnny]

66. "The White Plague" by Frank Herbert should be required reading for these people

n/t

[varelse]

69. one possible reason to research this

is to come up with a cure. It's true that this virus is 'man-made' but it's entirely possible for an equally lethal virus to evolve in nature.

[JCMach1]

73. +1, the last version of bird flu was just 5 mutations away from a global pandemic

Seems like we could make a pretty damn good bird flu vaccine now...

[mrs_p]

75. This is a long process

Probably involves making plasmids for each influenza gene, performing reverse genetics, then site directed mutagenesis All that before passing in live animals. Any flu lab could already do this if they wanted and had all the protocols and viruses in place. This is not something you could do in your garage as it takes special skill and obtaining the isolates from established labs that don't just collaborate with anyone.

I haven't read this particular paper, but these types of studies are done to determine how influenza jumps the species barrier. It is actually pretty important for protecting human health.

FWIW: The focus of my PhD is influenza viruses....

[mrs_p]

81. BTW

Drs. Fouchier and Kawaoka are well-respected influenza experts. They have done much to advance the field of influenza research, particularly understanding molecular determinants of influenza viruses.

[joshcryer]

84. Any primitivists here advocate this?

[cyberpj]

88. SEE THESE 3 ARTICLES - I posted back in 2009 to little response but now, take another look:

I believe this just means they've been working on this for quite a while now.

Unique Strain: Is the Swine Flu Outbreak a Bio-Terror Attack? (See these 3 items)

(1)
Unique Strain: Is the Swine Flu Outbreak a Bio-Terror Attack?
April 25, 2009

On 23 rd April 2009 the world began to become aware of a very strange new version of swine flu H1N1 in Mexico with limited cases in Texas and California. By the morning of the 24th of April, we began hear that there were hundreds of sick and 20 or so dead. By late in the day, we have learned that over 1,000 are now reported ill and over 60 are reported dead.

There are solid reasons to suspect that this new Mexican Swine Flu is NOT a naturally occurring event but instead is an Advanced Biological Warfare recombination DNA genetically engineered virus.

snip-
The new Mexican Swine Flu has elements of DNA from the following: avian flu, human flu Type A, human flu Type B, Asian swine flu, and European swine flu. A strange combination never seen before and having less than 1/10% chance of being a natural event. Human and animal viruses from four or more continents suddenly recombine in a new flu during a non-flu season that spreads from human-to-human with a 10% fatality rating.

(NOTE - see 'missing epidemic flu viruses info from 2005 below)

snip-
Over 1,000 reported infected in Mexico; true rate may be much higher. Mexico City seems to be the epicenter of the new virus. Mexico City has 20 million citizens, most terribly poor. Mexico City is notorious for its poor sanitation and public health. "Don't drink the water" has been the byword in Mexico City for decades. It is the perfect breading ground for an explosive growth of this new killer virus. Mexico City has closed all schools, public gatherings, public buildings. People are wearing medical masks on the streets. The government has announced a massive new emergency swine flu vaccination program that will be, at best, either totally non-effective or of very limited effect, and could be, at worst, a deadly option for patients. It is thought that the authorities are trying to contain public panic by announcing the vaccination program.

MUCH MORE PLUS COMMENTS HERE:
http://europebusines.blogspot.com/
edited to note: this blog article has apparently been archived

-----------------------------------------------------------------
(2)
Security fears as flu virus that killed 50 million is recreated
Ian Sample, science correspondent
Thursday October 6, 2005
The Guardian

Undisclosed quantities of the virus are being held in a high-security government laboratory in Atlanta, Georgia, after a nine-year effort to rebuild the agent that swept the globe in record time and claimed the lives of an estimated 50 million people.

The genetic sequence is also being made available to scientists online, a move which some fear adds a further risk of the virus being created in other labs....

...The government and military researchers who reconstructed the virus say their work has already provided invaluable insight into its unique genetic make-up and helps explain its lethality. But other researchers warned yesterday the that virus could escape from the laboratory. "This will raise clear questions among some as to whether they have really created a biological weapon," said Professor Ronald Atlas at the centre for deterrence of biowarfare and bioterrorism at the University of Louisville in Kentucky.

Publication of the work and the filing of the virus's genetic make-up to an online database followed an emergency meeting last week by the US National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, which concluded that the benefits of publishing the work outweighed the risks. Many scientists remained sceptical. "Once the genetic sequence is publicly available, there's a theoretical risk that any molecular biologist with sufficient knowledge could recreate this virus," said Dr John Wood, a virologist at the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control in Potters Bar.

FULL ARTICLE HERE:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1585977,00.html

----------------------------------------------------------------
(3)
Labs scramble to purge virus
Samples sent out worldwide traced to 1957 pandemic
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Authorities are trying to work out how many labs got the samples.

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Authorities are doing everything possible to ensure samples of a killer influenza virus sent to more than 4,000 laboratories worldwide are destroyed before anyone becomes infected, a top U.S. disease expert says..

snip-
On September 10, the College of American Pathologists sent samples of the virus that caused the "Asian flu" pandemic of 1957 to laboratories in 18 countries, including the United States and Canada.

snip-
Dr. Jared Schwartz, a spokesman for the College of American Pathologists, which distributed the virus, acknowledged its distribution was a mistake.

He said records indicate the vendor knew it was sending a flu virus but apparently did not realize it was the deadly strain.

In addition to the United States and Canada, the other countries that got the panels are Bermuda, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Singapore and Taiwan. It also went to Hong Kong.

FULL ARTICLE HERE:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/04/13/flu.recall/

[cyberpj]

92. Additional thought: We should begin to consider the idea that the 1% have no intention of sharing:

The 1% have NO INTENTION of sharing the Earth's dwindling resources (especially water) with the rest of us:

[jeff47]

99. There's a problem when people don't get enough science. They start creating conspiracies.

1) One of the features of influenza is that it is very, very sloppy at packaging. When it's time to make new flu viruses, it'll grab all sorts of random DNA from the host cell. That is why the flu is different every year - The new strain added a bunch of random stuff. The next year, it still has the 'old' random stuff and gets new random stuff.

So first, the people in that article vastly understate the probability of this virus coming together naturally.

Second, the reason you know it wasn't a biowarfare attack is it didn't kill many people. There were 14,286 confirmed worldwide deaths from H1N1. Something actually designed as a weapon is going to kill far more than 0.00002% of the population.

Additionally, you aren't going to send up an ineffective trial balloon on this sort of thing. First, it makes you much more likely to get caught. Second, it makes the population aware of the threat, so they change behavior to make it harder for your 'real' virus to work. For example, in the wake of H1N1 sanitizers became ubiquitous and a lot more people were washing their hands regularly.

2) Yeah, they sequenced the 1918 flu. If you are going to research how to fight the flu, you have to know what you're fighting. Would you prefer a similar flu arise naturally and scientists start figuring out how to fight it after it's killing people?

3) So...when someone sends out the wrong product, you expect them to respond with, "Oh well. I guess we need to be a tad more careful next time."? If Amazon sends you the wrong stuff, they ask you to send it back. That company is the Amazon of flu.

[cyberpj]

103. So you're saying these guys didn't "get enough science" ? I respect your input but reject the label

of conspiracy theorist.

There's way too much we have discovered of our own government of late to discount the possibility of this whole thing being related to creation of a weapon. Especially as it began under the Bush/Cheney regime.

So I'll be keeping my tin foil hat on, thanks.:tinfoilhat:

Again, "not enough science"?
snip-
...The government and military researchers who reconstructed the virus say their work has already provided invaluable insight into its unique genetic make-up and helps explain its lethality. But other researchers warned yesterday the that virus could escape from the laboratory. "This will raise clear questions among some as to whether they have really created a biological weapon," said Professor Ronald Atlas at the centre for deterrence of biowarfare and bioterrorism at the University of Louisville in Kentucky.

Publication of the work and the filing of the virus's genetic make-up to an online database followed an emergency meeting last week by the US National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, which concluded that the benefits of publishing the work outweighed the risks. Many scientists remained sceptical. "Once the genetic sequence is publicly available, there's a theoretical risk that any molecular biologist with sufficient knowledge could recreate this virus," said Dr John Wood, a virologist at the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control in Potters Bar.

[jeff47]

110. One can have "doctor" or "professor" in front of their name and still be completely wrong

Appeal to authority doesn't change that H1N1 only killed about 15k people out of 7 trillion. Bioweapons are far more effective than that.

There are two options:
- This is a massive conspiracy of incredibly clever people who are then utter morons when it comes time to carry out their plan.
- This is a random mutation of a virus known to randomly mutate A LOT.

Hrmmmmm....Yeah, I can really see how wearing the tin-foil makes sense here. :sarcasm:

[cyberpj]

104. p.s. -And it's not as if the U.S. military would take control of a scientific discovery for it's own

purposes at war, is it? :sarcasm:

[Taverner]

90. Sharing it is irrelevant: Why the hell did they INVENT this???

[Codeine]

93. Researching what makes the flu contagious is good science. nt

[Marrah_G]

95. Why the hell would they even publish that they created it.........

It's like the preview to a bad sci-fi movie.

[deucemagnet]

106. It's part of the peer-review process.

Like many above have stated, we need to understand what makes this virus virulent in order to combat it. Publication in peer-reviewed journals is part of the process. I'll admit that publication of the results presents somewhat of an ethical dilemma, but as Mrs. P stated above, it would take a lot of specialized skills and resources in order to replicate these results. Not something a hobbyist or terrorist cell would be capable of.

This topic was posted in GD before, and I posted my opinion here before it was shuffled off to the Sept 11 forum.

Another thing that folks in this thread have not considered is the tremendous damage that not publishing these results will do to the laboratory that produced them. In the sciences, you live or die by your publication record. The NIH funding cutoff is currently the 7th percentile. That sucks. Not publishing the results is like flushing grant money down the toilet, along with the chances of getting more grant money from those results. That alone could ruin a lab.

[backtoblue]

108. interesting article

As the swine flu spreads and media attempts to build us into a frenzy of panic and worry, more and more people that I consider pretty bright, are questioning this virus. First of all, this swine flu virus is an unlikely combination of 2 different strains of swine flu virus, a strain of bird flu virus and combined with a human strand. What is most remarkable about this, OUTSIDE of the fact that having those 4 different viruses in the same host is next to a miracle, and OUTSIDE of the fact that this particular virus has NEVER been seen in PIGS let alone humans before, but that each of these four different strains hail from different corners of the world!

This is rather astonishing to realize, because for this to have been a natural combination of viral fragments, it means an infected bird from North America would have had to infect pigs in Europe, then be re-infected by those same pigs with an unlikely cross-species mutation that allowed the bird to carry it again, then that bird would have had to fly to Asia and infected pigs there, and those Asian pigs then mutated the virus once again (while preserving the European swine and bird flu elements) to become human transmittable, and then a human would have had to catch that virus from the Asian pigs — in Mexico! — and spread it to others. (This isn't the only explanation of how it could have happened, but it is one scenario that gives you an idea of the complexity of such a thing happening).
snip
http://www.swineflu-information.com/commentary/is-swine-flu-a-manufactured-virus