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."
Wasn't there a movie about this very topic not too long ago?...hmm...I believe it was dubbed Mission Impossible 2.
Point being, haven't we learned any lessons from the movies?!
Create super virus - (and hopefully the corresponding vaccine).
Sell super virus to terrorists - (and act like it got stolen).
Keep vaccine to sell to public when 'Outbreak' occurs (another good movie).
I hope someone can understand the devastation that could arise should this truly happen!
But, if 'Outbreak' does occur or 'Mission Impossible 2' then I'm getting out of the city and heading to the hills!
This make anyone else think of Stephen King's The Stand ?
That said, I think the dangers of this are exaggerated. No doubt it would be a catastrophe if it were to escape the lab, but life is a lot more resilient than it is usually given credit for. Creating "a virus that could kill tens of millions if it got out of the lab" is a catchy line in an article (or a cheesy plot for a movie), but there is absolutely no basis for it. I think any benefit that comes from this sort of research far outweighs the hypothetical dangers.
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
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.
Isn't that a bit superfluous?
Oh snap, oooooh snap! Score one for the big I!
Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
The tendency of the human race to both improve it's awareness of the world while at the same time endangering itself has been the cause of grief and happiness.
This though, seems to be of little benefit to anyone, unless it guarantees a cure for the common cold!
sorry but the USSR plan was nukes and a "virus cocktail". They would hit major cites with nukes and lay waste there, however the fields that made crops had to be saved (we ship most of the grain they live on to them). They planned to release biological weapons on the great plains, not just a little problem stuff but things like anthraz and small pox or malaria and eboloa. By mixing the virus it becomes harder to trace what antibody the hospital needs, and the next year they can vacinate some people against what was spread in the area to allow farming to resume, 2 winters later the dieases would have died.
I'm told you are what you eat, does that mean I can be you by tomorrow with some A1?
1. Create ubervirus
2. Create vaccine for said ubervirus
3. ????
4. Profit!
sorry about that...
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.
I've read that human evolution has stopped, because modern medicine has eliminated most of the diseases that cause death prior to being mature enough to reproduce.
If one of these superviruses was released, could it be viewed as a way of pushing along evolution, since only those strong enough and with the genetics to survive the virus would live to reproduce?
Good Idea: Studying naturally occuring flu viruses to learn how to prevent future pandemic outbreaks.
Bad Idea: Deliberately creating new versions of the flu, to learn how to prevent future outbreaks.
The frightening thought is that they aren't using the highest grade of quarantine level. I suppose though, when it does get out, they'll know how they made it, and theoretically, also how to fight it. At least until it mutates naturally.
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!!!!
Avian flu, however, would likely kill the egg--Dead Eggs Produce No Antibodies, i.e. no vaccine. Luckily, it's more difficult for avian flu to make the species jump to humans in a virulent form, but the WHO, CDC, and other groups are scared to death some bird flu is going to figure this out soon and we'll be helpless in front of it. It's 1918 all over again.
Don't get to cranky about these folks looking at ways to culture flu virii in something other than chickens--they're looking for answers.
blarg.
My grandfather came down with the 1918 flu with his entire Army unit just before they shipped out to France. 2/3 of the unit died. These were young men at the peak of physical condition, but living in very close quarters. Most died literally overnight. He was hospitalized for a month, and fortunately, missed the war. And by the way, it was called "Spanish Flu". Most of the /. crowd is too damn young to remember the major pandemics of the 20th century (Spanish Flu, Polio, TB). Viruses can and will kill a hell of a lot of people in a hurry. Any nice theory to the opposite is obviously developed by people who failed to sudy or remember history. So far we've been damn lucky in the last 30 years. While I'm sure our luck will run out some time, deliberately coming up with an agent that will ENSURE megadeaths is the height of arrogance and stupidity.
IANAS, but if I recall correctly, the problem with biological agents like virii are that it's very difficult to create a highly contagious, high-mortality virus. Virii need a living host to reproduce, mutate, and pass on their modified genes to the descendants. Airborne virii need to be extremely hardy to survive outside their ideal breeding conditions (read: human host). And a virus that is so virulent it kills its host almost immediately won't live for very many more generations -- it's an unsuccessful mutation.
That being said, it's still possible to balance all the factors so you have a fairly lethal virus, relatively contagious, that mutates quickly and successfully. It's just not as likely to end up as a Captain Tripps, or even an Ebola.
Toxins, on the other hand, are better for short-term, near-instantaneous death, and are more likely to be "controllable" through judicious application. Again, there are contraindications such as method of application, weather, &tc. that would warrant not using them.
The various death merchants will keep experimenting anyway, but it's nice to know that we're far more likely to be wiped out as a species by a giant asteroid than from a little critter built in a lab.