Slashdot Mirror
Superflu Being Brewed in the Lab
Genial Generalist writes "Superflu is being brewed in the lab, an article by Michael Le Page, describes some of the ongoing efforts to genetically modify the different strains of flu, specifically CDC modification of bird flu for the purpose of developing new vaccines."
Some say that this sort of research is dangerous because of the risk of the virus escaping or being using in bioterrorism, and others that it's good science.
Refusing to perform research does not preclude others from doing the same for evil purposes.
Tens of millions is quite low number. Many diseases have killed more in the short timespan.
This kind of virus could kill hundreds of millions, which still would be 10% of world population.
I'd stick to Boulder. Vegas didn't end up too well after Mother Abigail's gang got there...
Are the benefits of such a vacine really worth the chance of the virus excaping and causing an epidemic?
I'm not saying it isn't, just a point to ponder.
The 1918 pandemic killed 30-40 million, about half of them otherwise healthy adults (as opposed to most flu's, which affect mostly the young and old).
Given that the world population has more than tripled since then, and given the increases in world travel, a death toll of over 100 million would not be unlikely for a similar flu. I wouldn't be surprised if it went higher (with a similar strain to the 1918 flu).
I heard on NPR a week or two ago, from an author who wrote about the 1918 pandemic, that in one instance a man boarded a trolley. Before the trolley got to the end of the line, the conductor and several passengers were dead.
As far as the benefit outweighing the dangers, I agree. But I don't think the dangers are exaggerated.
Tens of millions is quite low number. Many diseases have killed more in the short timespan.
Name one -- you're either trolling or on crack (or both, I suppose). Even the "Black Death" took about five years to kill about 25 million, and that was over 600 years ago and before the concept of sanitation was regarded as a good thing.
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
Movies are here to entertain, if there are lessons in a movie then we should all check ourselves into a clinic. We shouldn't respect movies since they are corporate. The most we can get from a movie is entertainment, if it does not entertain then we should revolt.
Movies generate a lot of fear of science, from the nuclear boogeyman who manifested as Attack of the 100 foot [animal] in the 50s and 60s, to the recent batch of nano-germ-megaflu series of movies, like 12 Monkeys, Outbreak, the Andromeda Strain, the Stand, etc..
Fact is, noone brews up a killer virus like Mother Nature. There are thousands of strains of the flu, many fatal to a percentage of their victims.. HIV, Ebola, Smallpox, Anthrax, etc.. Lots of nasty shit out there. There's fecal coliforms on your toothbrush! Eww, I saw it on Mythbusters.
Anyways, humanity survives. We survived the plague, we'll survive AIDS, we'll survive whatever Professor Peabody and his mad, mad test tubes come up with.
After all, we don't know enough to cure the common cold, how could we know enough to create the perfect virus?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Please cite references - dont believe everything you read in pulp novels. Then again, don't assume that the USSR had exclusive rights on bio-warfare.
I disagree, making modifications and seeing their effects is a good way to learn about viruses and how they function. The benefit to making deadly viruses is learning how to control and kill them. Would you rather wait for one to pop up naturally outside the lab and have another 1918 flu that kills 20 million people (probably alot more with today's population density).
The quarantine levels within these labs are insane, the odds of 'the stand' happening accidentally are very near 0.
You could sneeze, and millions of little highly infectious AIDS snot-droplets would fly everywhere and stick to everything. AIDS would get the resistance to being outside the body of the FLU, and the FLU would get the incurability and near 100% fatality rate of AIDS. Even the long incubation period from AIDS would be useful to this AIDS/FLU chimera. It would most likely spread to 99% of the human population in a year and be dismissed as a mild flu. But, it would hide out symptomless until the infected got some other form of cold which would make them sneeze and spread it to others. Only in 6 or 10 years would the Immune Deficiency activity kick in. This would make the infected more suceptible to colds, and so more contageous. And we all fall down!! Mooo Haa haa!
Many have killed more
The "regular joe flu" kills far less than 10's of millions in a "short timespan." Only once (NOT "many") has a disease killed "more" in a "short timespan" (keeping "short" relative).
So while the person you were responding to may have conceeded, he shouldn't have. Its not many, its not more. Tens of millions is NOT a low number.
If you really want to be scared, read this TRUE account of a near outbreak of The Ebola Virus in Reston Virgina. This book is called The Hot Zone by Richard Preston. When you realize how easily viruses ar spread in hospitals, and labs you should be terrified. Superbugs/Superflus/SARS these are the real dangers to mankinds future.
Save a Life. Donate Blood. Please.
And maybe vaccines are "10 to 20 years" more advanced by then? To make a really devastating disease you'd have to engineer something ingenious -- like an airborne AIDS. That's not your standard high-school science project, even 20 years from now. Also, most viruses have the disadvantage of having a low incubation time, which means that epidemics can be spotted early and quarrentine meassures can be done fast. Technology can cause death, but it can bring protection as well.
Don't be a Prophet of Doom. It sucks:)
There are two factors that I don't believe you are keeping in mind.
The first is total population size. The bubonic plague killed approximately 25 million people of the 75 million people living in Europe at the time.
The population of Europe right now, according to these people is nearly 10 times that. Its true that the more recent consensus may count some countries not counted in the 75 million count, but still it will suffice for our purposes.
Another factor is population density, which is much greater in this day and age. Its true that we now have sanitation, but keep in mind that we have more people living in cities as well.
So you need to keep a few things in mind.
It's only a matter of time, perhaps 10 or 20 years, until a grad student or third world scientist will be able to easily engineer his own deadly plague virus
How do we prepare for this or prevent this?
The same way we should be preparing for any major world disaster: self-sufficient off-world colonies.
Or, how about creating viruses in legitimate labs right now so that the legitimate grad students and third world scientists (out-sourcing, you know?) will have enough knowledge later to develop vaccines? Now there's a thought.
Don't blame me, I voted for Durga.
theorhetically speaking, whouldn't it be more profitable to lord the release of the virus over people? to simply put it out there allows for other virus hunters to get samples and create a vaccine. However, if you threaten to release it unless you get money, there ya go. And then you can also charge for the vaccine, once you actually do release it. Cuz thats just smart. Yeah.
I'm a little tea pot.
Read Ken Alibek's autobiography. It details the time he spent as the director of the USSR's bio-weapons program. One incident detailed therein is the accidental release of weaponized anthrax spores from a weapons plant in Siberia.
It more or less annihilated a town downwind of the plant.
Anthrax isn't contagious from person to person and thankfully these people didn't do much traveling.
Want a virus that got out of the lab and is wracking up casualties in the 10s of millions? Try AIDS. Of course, the "lab" is the African Rain Forest, and its killing them slowly, but killing nonetheless. Natural selection encourages viruses to avoid killing the host. Imagine what mankind could do with a tool that powerful and a will that malevolent.
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
Here's what's really going to happen:
- A few very troubling virii are created.
- DARPA obtains access to some or all of these strains, by a mix of buying data, and hiring in scientists who developed them.
- Some of the original scientists really think they're being noble by having created this, and work on a vaccine.
- Other scientists believe they're being noble by "enhancing the defense capabilities of America" by helping DARPA develop deliverable, targeted strains of the deadly virus.
- Eventually, someone somewhere blows it, and the virus gets out - probably used to attack someone.
That's reality - this scenario has already gone through all its steps with Anthrax. Why is it helpful to develop this thing again?That's because geek IQ is not a desirable trait for continuation of the species, as popular a thought as that may be here.
Wow, you're scary. That's twice as evil. After they pay the ransom, release the virus anyway and then charge for the vaccine!
...
Malaria = bacterium (plasmodium faciparum sp.
IIRC that's a protozoan, not a bacterium.
But it's not a virus either, so your point stands.
The best biological weapons are the ones that act fast and have cures. You want your own troops to be immune while the disease incapacitates the enemy.
The best biological weapons are non-lethal. They make the enemy so sick they can't fight, while your healthy troops move in and sieze power, set up friendly governments, etc. After the New Boss(tm) is firmly in place, everyone gets well (except for a few infants, elderly and immunocompromised folk -- casualties of war) and there's no bad press. War without massive casualties, without destruction of property/infrastructure, but with the same result, i.e. friendly government installed.
Yeah, the conspiracy theorists' favorite diseases (HIV, Ebola, CJD) are lousy choices for germ warfare agents. They're too slow and too lethal, and they don't have cures.
Influenza is actually a very good choice for a biological warfare agent. It acts fast, it's rapidly and easily transmitted, there are vaccines available, and it's usually non-lethal.