Slashdot Mirror


US Preserves Smallpox For Defense

lee1 writes "The US is preserving the last remaining known strains of smallpox in case they are needed to develop bio-warfare 'countermeasures' and as a hedge against possible outbreaks in a population with no natural immunity. 451 specimens are stored in Atlanta at the Centers for Disease Control, and 120 strains at the Russian Vector laboratory in Siberia. Meanwhile, the government has contracted to pay almost $3 billion to procure 14 million smallpox vaccination doses."

248 comments

  1. I think we can put our differences behind us... by LordStormes · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... for science... ... you monster...

    1. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Cara bel, cara mia bella. Mia bambina, a tra che la stima che la stima. A cara mia, addio! Mia bambina cara, perche non passi lontana si lontana de scienza? Cara cara mia bambina. A mia bel. A mia cara. A mia cara. A mia bambina. A cara, cari a mi!

    2. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by JustOK · · Score: 4, Funny

      is that like a cara analogy?

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    3. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      Keeping the specimen does make a sense, but why the vaccine!!! WHY?

    4. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

      Been reading The Stand? It's not as crazy as that. Smallpox is bad, but it won't be the end of the world. They're keeping it so that we have a point to start from if there is an outbreak.

      --
      I8-D
    5. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by sumdumass · · Score: 2

      To protect the workers who will have to create and distribute more doses of the vaccine should an outbreak happen.

      It's somewhat hard to do this or get people to do it, when they will become ill and not able to get the job done in a week or so.

    6. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      Right, i agree, lets spend another 3 billion dollars for the rare Mars-dust-o-virus outbreak (it could happen, you know, going on Mars and catching this deadly virus...)

    7. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's more like an incendiary lemon.

    8. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      And if it was the rare mars-dust-o-virus, I might agree with your sarcasm.

      But here is something I'm not sure if you are considering. One, the virus didn't just magically appear. It came from somewhere, likely evolution or some animal born virus that crossed over to humans. But even if you go with the magical conclusion that it was create by GOD or a god or the devil or aliens, what is to stop that from happening again? Unlike the Mars-dust-o-notevenontheplanet-virus, this one is real and has been observed in the wild. Two, I don't think we have a complete time line concerning the existence of the small pox virues since recorded history. This could mean a number of things. The least interesting would be our records just suck, more interesting would be that it's somehow able to lay dormant then reappear when conditions are right. Either way, it's not something we shouldn't be concerned with at all

    9. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      Do you really think that in the following 5-10 years this virus could cause a pandemic? Because, otherwise, burning all this big amount of money in vaccine is much less productive than for example some lab research, or whatever else, don't you agree?

    10. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Dunno. It would depend on if the people working on this and their families are vaccinated or not within the next ten years.

      Do you know for sure it won't happen? If it payment you are worried about, we will be stuck paying for it anyways because the US constitution says we can't take something of someone's without just compensation. The government is likely just telling them to hand over the crap that's dangerous.

    11. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gotta go to space.

    12. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      Think of it as a life insurance for example. Is your insurance covering a meteorit shower? Or sudden alien invasion? Or god coming and declaring the judgement day? Or with other words, if you wanna your insurance to cover all these events, are you going to pay the price!!!!

    13. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, i agree, lets spend another 3 billion dollars for the rare Mars-dust-o-virus outbreak (it could happen, you know, going on Mars and catching this deadly virus...)

      Yeah, but what if the Martians themselves decided to seed Earth's atmosphere with the Mars-dust-o-virus? I bet they have HUGE stockpiles of it. And once you or a family member got infected, you'd be regretting the fact that nobody spent that $3 billion, I wager!

    14. Re:I think we can put our differences behind us... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess you could if you were running to the sites of meteor showers while they were happening, elected to be the one to great the aliens when they land, or had pretty strong knowledge that judgment day is coming.

      You see, even though these things will be in storage, there will be people who can be exposed to them if something happens. Those people will live in communities and will have families. So yeah, I guess you life insurance scenario fits welll here.

  2. The accent should be put... by geegel · · Score: 2

    ... on the "known" part. It seems like a fairly intelligent move to me. It is indeed a low probability scenario that someone will actually release smallpox as a biological weapon, but still the consequences of such an outlier would be devastating enough to warrant the adoption of such a policy.

    --
    right...
    1. Re:The accent should be put... by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 2

      s/smallpox/arbitrary-contangious-disease/

    2. Re:The accent should be put... by gman003 · · Score: 2

      It doesn't even have to be released as a weapon. Several years ago, a researcher was going through a bunch of American-Civil-War-era documents. Opened one envelope, and a bunch of smallpox scabs fell out. After that long, they weren't very infectious, so he didn't contract anything, but it's plausible that material from the 70s could have survived and remain dangerous. Which is why research into a better vaccine exists - since it's impossible to definitively prove that no smallpox material remains, it's wise to look for a better protection than the current (and rather dangerous) vaccine.

    3. Re:The accent should be put... by Amouth · · Score: 1

      arbitrary-contangious-disease

      no.. the common cold is an "arbitrary-contangious-disease" so is the flu

      smallpox had a death rate of nearly 10% - that is not anywhere near normal for your "arbitrary-contangious-disease"

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    4. Re:The accent should be put... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      War and torture seem fairly intelligent to some folks.

      As much as we like to think the rest of the world is scary, imagine how they feel about us, and how justified they are when they hear things like this.

      We're better than this.

    5. Re:The accent should be put... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Any bioweapons program worth its salt could swap around a few genes and raise the death rate on the common cold. Almost everything has the potential to be more deadly, evolution just weeds out those strains that are too effective at killing off their habitat.

    6. Re:The accent should be put... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A death rate of nearly 10% - is agonisingly painful as it tries to damn near flay your skin of your body - and leaves survivors permanently scarred, often in visible areas.

    7. Re:The accent should be put... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit Batman,
      are you saying, to prevent someone using stored smallpox as a bio-weapon, we have to store smallpox to be able to use it as a bio-weapon?

      Are you interested in becoming the next model citizen and clone prototype of North Korea? As I'm sure they'd admire the level of mind-bending you can come up with, to justify and protect the crimes of those in power.

    8. Re:The accent should be put... by jc42 · · Score: 1

      As much as we like to think the rest of the world is scary, imagine how they feel about us, and how justified they are when they hear things like this. We're better than this.

      Um, no; clearly we're not. If we were, we wouldn't be so calmly accepting that our "leaders" are doing this. We'd be out with our torches and pitchforks, demanding those people be replaced with "better" people than they obviously are.

      The story of the stored smallpox samples is hardly anything new, and it's hardly anything secret. It's not like this was just sprung on us and we have to pause to think it through. The story has been out and around for a couple of decades now. I've read about it at least once a year during those decades. Nobody except very young children has an excuse to not know about it. But we calmly ignore it, and the samples still exist. That tells us a lot about how much "better" we are.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    9. Re:The accent should be put... by Lanteran · · Score: 1

      I've read 30%- reinforcing your point.

      --
      "People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
  3. Duh. by Random2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't see why this is news; it's not like the US is the only place with virus reserves. And, it'd be very difficult to develop a vaccine for a disease without samples to work with (unless we want to try and catch infected people and draw samples before they die, which would just increase the deaths).

    Can't see how anyone besides the ultra-paranoid would see this as a problem, nukes pose a more significant and real threat than these stored samples...

    --
    "Our goal each year should be to increase the number of goals we set for ourselves!"
    1. Re:Duh. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 2, Informative

      The thing is, right after the summary says that the U.S. is preserving the last remaining known strains it says that Russia also has some that it is preserving. So, the U.S. doesn't even have the last known strains, the Russians are also known to have some.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    2. Re:Duh. by magarity · · Score: 1

      Don't see why this is news; it's not like the US is the only place with virus reserves

      No kidding; The US-centric headline doesn't even read the summary. It says right there an inch underneath that Russia is keeping theirs.

    3. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't see how anyone besides the ultra-paranoid would see this as a problem

      In a century or two people will read how the latest smallpox pandemic caused by failing security in one of the storage facilities of former superpowers could have easily been prevented. This and other deadly diseases could have been eradicated long ago if humanity wouldn't have been too afraid .

    4. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The US is "preserving" the Russian strains by not sending Seal Team 6 to destroy them.

    5. Re:Duh. by vlm · · Score: 1

      Can't see how anyone besides the ultra-paranoid would see this as a problem, nukes pose a more significant and real threat than these stored samples...

      Completely wrong.

      Release one nuke, lose one city. Sucks to be that city, but in the grand scheme of things, no big deal. For example, no one really cares that we lost New Orleans unless they have/had friends and family there... On the other hand, release enough SP to infect just one person, we end up with worldwide uncontrollable epidemic, very very bad for every living human being.

      Furthermore the venn diagram of people who are experts at military style guard duty and people who have nukes in the workplace has staggering overlap, virtually 100%. The venn diagram of people who are experts at military style guard duty and bio grad students has mighty little overlap. So the odds of loose cannon nukes is staggeringly lower than loose cannon SP.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    6. Re:Duh. by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      One person infected with small pox would not turn into a worldwide uncontrollable epidemic. We can make vaccines, we can close borders as much as possible (No a big fence is not possible, nor useful against those with access to ladders or shovel), and it just won't spread that fast.

    7. Re:Duh. by vlm · · Score: 1

      We can make vaccines,

      Ahh now we're getting circular. We can make vaccines quicker if we have samples of live virus ready to go/grow.

      It becomes a simple equation of how many more people will die due to delays in vaccine production, vs how much does it cost to keep it locked up, which frankly is probably pretty cheap, and really cheap when divided by X number of lives...

      If a human life was only worth, say, $1000, then I'd say autoclave it and spend the security money on more profitable, traditional government responsibilities like molesting airport travelers or bailing out the management of corrupt banks. But luckily, in most places, for most cultures, life isn't that cheap, so its worthwhile to spend the dough to keep the stuff ready to quickly make vaccines.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    8. Re:Duh. by wagnerrp · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA, that's not at all what is going on here. (Supposedly) All governments of the world have either destroyed their stockpiles, or shipped them to the repositories in the US and Russia. Since that point, the UN has been pushing for the US and Russia to destroy their final (known) stockpiles. The US government has proposed that it hold off doing so for at least another five years (not centuries), during which it will spend another three billion on vaccine research.

    9. Re:Duh. by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      We don't though. You do not know what strain this supposed enemy would use. It is possible they selected it because it is not impacted by a normal smallpox vaccine.

    10. Re:Duh. by Moryath · · Score: 1

      Russia is keeping theirs.

      Who knows what is available in:
      - China
      - North Korea
      - Vietnam
      - Pakistan
      - your tin-pot despotic regime of choice

      That's as good a reason as possible to maintain something to work with should some asshole with "nothing to lose" decide to let it loose on the world. Especially since it's now "eradicated" and other orthopox viruses are not nearly as prevalent as they once were (the first smallpox vaccines were derived not from smallpox itself but from a related human-transmissible disease, cowpox).

    11. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The typical smallpox vaccine consists of several strains that have been crippled, leaving predominantly the shells of the virus, but even if a smalllpox based virus came out that was engineered to circumvent them its going to be a lot easier to fight with existing strains being tested against actively and having the base virus on hand to manipulate independently of the new one.

    12. Re:Duh. by lee1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      the first smallpox vaccines were derived not from smallpox itself but from a related human-transmissible disease, cowpox

      Indeed, that's where the root of vaccinate comes from: latin for "cow".

    13. Re:Duh. by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      For example, no one really cares that we lost New Orleans unless they have/had friends and family there...

      Err...we didn't lose New Orleans...still alive and better than ever I'd say.

      And as for no one caring....well, you might wanna rethink that. If not from a historical/cultural standpoint (the city IS older that the USA itself you know)...from a merely financial standpoint, you don't wanna lose NOLA.

      It is the port city to the world off the MS river...a huge amount of product from the middle of the US has to make its way through NOLA to the world, it is one of the larger port cities in the US.

      Fully 1/3 of the US seafood comes from this area...you like oil don't you? NOLA and the immediate surrounding areas are the main place foreign oil comes in as well as domestic drilling (and supporting infrastructure and workers in this area)...not to mention the refining of said petroleum coming into this area.

      Aside from the feelings of fellow countrymen should have for one of their sister cities...the financial and geographical importance of New Orleans should not be underestimated.

      And if nothing else...pretty much any part of the US has problems...tornado alley, the MS has flooded much of the midwest at times, NYC seems to be a terrorist target (not to mention they are WAY overdue for a catastrophic hurricane, look it up they have a doomsday scenario like NOLA has), earthquakes out west with a dose of wildfires and mudslides....and yet, no one is talking about how useless those areas are or that we could abandon them for stupidly building in the 'wrong place'.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re:Duh. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Most likely some affluent middle-eastern or asian countries might have some samples as well. It's not like it's a huge issue but any of those countries (US included) can 'lose' or use a sample. If it does happen as is the case with any sort of biological warfare, many will die before you even get to know what the problem is, what the appropriate response is and the logistics of the response not to even talk about finding out who did it, where it started and why.

      I think biological warfare is much more devastating than nuclear warfare however it's (at this point) impossible to target specific areas so most likely it's going to be used only by extremists with a 'higher' calling.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    15. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, keeping this stock (and a stock of vaccines this is needed to create) would allow for

      (1) the application of vaccines in high-risk regions, slowing the initial spread
      (2) time for the government to make more vaccines (vaccines in any reasonable quantity take months to stock up).

      Yes, it increases the risk of exposure, accidental or intentional, but it also allows for a faster/stronger response if there is an outbreak from any source, not just their stock piles.

    16. Re:Duh. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem with biological warfare is that, while it is very devestating, it is impossible to avoid significant risk of blowback on one's own civilian and military population. Even with recent advances in biological science, I think that the ability to reliably target a particular population without significant risks to other populations is still beyond the foreseeable future.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    17. Re:Duh. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Won't spread that fast? All it takes is one infectious person on an international flight to spread it across borders. That's before they close any borders. There are constant reports of less serious outbreaks like measles that infect hundreds of people because someone boarded a flight.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    18. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole point of keeping samples of actual smallpox is to be able to make vaccines should a resistant strain be released. The normal smallpox vaccine is made from live vaccinia virus, and does not require smallpox virus to be around to make.

    19. Re:Duh. by Xest · · Score: 1

      The issue is that Smallpox is a particularly contagious, particularly deadly virus.

      The danger is that of accidental release, either through human error, or natural disaster, or even non-accidental release through malice or terrorism.

      The argument against keeping it is that if we really needed to, we could reproduce it from scratch, like we did the 1918 influenza, because smallpox is fully DNA sequenced and we thus have the technology to bring it back, hence there should really be no need to store live samples. The only argument for keeping it is perhaps that you save time in not having to recreate it but we know how to make vaccines for existing strains anyway, and any engineered recreation of the virus would likely be different enough that existing samples would be no more useful than existing knowledge and of course, far less useful than simply using a sample of the new strain which could be easily acquired on infection and hence that argument really doesn't hold water.

      You mention that nukes pose a bigger threat, yet smallpox has killed an order of magnitude more people than nukes have- I'd recommend actually looking up how bad smallpox actually was, certainly much worse than things like the stupid swine flu epidemic.

      I agree it's likely a non-issue, but I don't think it can be dismissed as something to completely ignore as easily as you have. Realistically no matter how small a threat it is to peoples lives, it's still a threat, and one that can be mitigated with really no side effects due to the fact it can be reproduced if really needed anyway. In other words, the US and Russian government are keeping the risk of accidental release alive, and no matter how small that risk, it's still a risk that in this day and age is utterly unnecessary.

      So it's simply down to whether or not you think it's worth keeping a risk a risk no matter how small unnecessarily for no reason other than what is arguably simply just penis waving.

    20. Re:Duh. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      That's why it's popular with governments that are frightened of foreign aggression. You can scatter it around the place and say 'attack us, and a lot of people will die - probably mostly yours'.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    21. Re:Duh. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Actually so far it has not been. biological agents are not that deadly compared to say a nuclear weapons and chemical weapons. The Chinese tried to use them during WWII and they where not all that effective at all. Small Pox while very nasty it still only kills 30-35% of those that catch it. Nerve toxins and nuclear weapons are actually a lot worse.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    22. Re:Duh. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      We can make vaccines quicker if we have samples of live virus ready to go/grow.

      True in some cases, but not for smallpox. It was actually the first disease for which a vaccination was discovered, and the vaccine was made from cowpox, not smallpox (hence the word 'vaccination', coming from the latin for cow). This discovery came from first observing that people who caught cowpox later appeared to be immune to smallpox. As long as we have samples of cowpox, we can quickly produce a smallpox vaccine, since they share a very similar outer shell, and an immune system that recognises cowpox will also recognise smallpox.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    23. Re:Duh. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      There was that scare a few years back about people manufacturing the small pox virus from scratch in a lab. My understanding was that the samples were being kept for research purposes in Atlanta. But in case of somebody releasing them, you'd need samples with which to create a vaccine, typically, you'd culture those from somebody that's been infected as viruses have a nasty tendency to mutate.

      Keeping these things secured is really tough, so I'd be surprised if the US or anybody else had viable samples that nobody knew about.

    24. Re:Duh. by arivanov · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, You _CANNOT_ recreate smallpox from DNA sequence. Not yet. There is a world of difference between simple viruses which have been assembled in the lab like the polyo virus and a smallpox virus. In fact there is a world of difference between a SmallPox virus and Flu.

      The SmallPox virus is _BIG_. It is so big that it is on the borderline to defy the common assumption that viruses are not visible under microscope. It carries a whole battery of own enzymes which are essential for the initial cycle of the infection. We have not yet learned how to build all these with the correct glycosylation (they have glycosides sticking on them same as your average eucariote protein). We are not in a position to assemble it either. If we were, we could assemble a whole eucariote cell which is not anywhere near the current science level. Same level of complexity more or less.

      In 10 years we may be in a position to build it from sequence. Now - not a chance.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    25. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't see how anyone besides the ultra-paranoid would see this as a problem, nukes pose a more significant and real threat than these stored samples...

      Completely wrong.

      [...]Furthermore the venn diagram of people who are experts at military style guard duty and people who have nukes in the workplace has staggering overlap, virtually 100%. The venn diagram of people who are experts at military style guard duty and bio grad students has mighty little overlap. So the odds of loose cannon nukes is staggeringly lower than loose cannon SP.

      I'm not sure who you think works at Fort Detrick, then...

    26. Re:Duh. by NoBeardPete · · Score: 1

      People have long assumed that vaccinia was cowpox, but modern biotechnology makes it clear that they are two different viruses. Intriguingly, no one knows where vaccinia came from. It's a total mystery.

      --
      Arrr, it be the infamous pirate, No Beard Pete!
    27. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the smallpox vaccine doesn't actually require the smallpox virus. The smallpox vaccine in fact uses the cowpox virus. Once a person recovers from cowpox, which is a lot less lethal, their new found immunity to cowpox also gives them an immunity to smallpox. So no, they don't need the smallpox virus to develop a vaccine.

    28. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make a few vaccinations and than get rid of this shit !!!11!!!1!

      "Can't see how anyone besides the ultra-paranoid would see this as a problem" --> can't see why you're not labeled as a troll, especially as everyone in the world wants to get rid of it (except the 2 countries that still keep it).

    29. Re:Duh. by skegg · · Score: 1

      One person infected with small pox would not turn into a worldwide uncontrollable epidemic ... we can close borders as much as possible ... and it just won't spread that fast

      In other words, it will turn into an uncontrollable epidemic.

      We all got to see how effective the world was at containing (equine | avian | swine) influenza the past decade.

    30. Re:Duh. by Lanteran · · Score: 1

      *knock knock knock* This is disney....

      --
      "People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
    31. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The interesting thing is that the Smallpox virus is not needed to manufacture the vaccine. Vaccinia is used in it's place.

    32. Re:Duh. by Fluffeh · · Score: 1

      You prick! I almost spat water on my screen and keyboard!

      Utter GOLD! It's good to see that sense of humor still around :)

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    33. Re:Duh. by Xest · · Score: 1

      Any idea what people like this are on about then? -

      http://www.cdc.gov/eid/content/17/4/pdfs/681.pdf

      Plenty of people who are experts in the field seem to have a similar view in that Smallpox can likely be created from scratch, and certainly be created as a modification of an existing virus. Are you saying these people with many years experience in the field are all wrong?

      I'm not an expert in the field so can't be certain either way, but I'm a little loathe to believe those who are experts in the field are definitely wrong, and a suggestion that they're so wrong as to be the case that we're 10 years off from such technology and understanding seems a little unlikely to me.

    34. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have been doing this for ages.No news here , next news item. :)

    35. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen vlm around enough to know he probably is defending New Orleans, and wish it got more continuous NATIONAL media attention (besides say Ellen who's from there . so she IS invested). Like you mentioned, every place has problems: I live Alabama, who tornado problem obscured Kentucky's before it, and now the media is on Mississippi River problem. That's not to say none of these events deserved it, but shit, now of days it's one disaster after another and only so many people can be helped. Katrina was (and still "seems") like such a large clusterfuck that it complete changed the dynamics of the gulf area. But, all it gets is yearly NPR "where are they now?" type story. But, with everything going on, that seems to be all the reserves we have left.

    36. Re:Duh. by arivanov · · Score: 1

      The paper you are referring to mentions modifying cowpox to become virulent, not rebuilding smallpox from scratch. In fact that is not mentioned at all and that is for a reason - it cannot be done at present. Anyone who says they can rebuild it better put their money where their mouth is and do it with cawpox which is similarly sequenced. Not that they will be able at the tech level of today.

      Read the paper again - it goes through how many things we do not know about how smallpox works - the proteins which nobody knows how they work, the inhibition of immune system, etc. By the way, the relationship to HIV is also of considerable interest and there is potential benefit to the humanity as a whole if we find how to study it. If being vaccinated against smallpox or having had smallpox actually confers at least some level of HIV resistance... Hmm... That is an interesting thought... To say the least...

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    37. Re:Duh. by Xest · · Score: 1

      Final paragraph, page 2, seems pretty unambiguous:

      "Finally, todayâ(TM)s science is capable, through genetic
      manipulation, of re-creating a highly virulent smallpoxlike virus from a closely related poxvirus or even from scratch."

      What am I missing? Simply the fact it says smallpox like rather than smallpox specifically?

  4. Why do I invision by nsanders · · Score: 0

    the movie Outbreak.

    1. Re:Why do I invision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because you're an idiot

  5. Which part of this is news? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

    Didn't everybody know this 10 years ago?

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    1. Re:Which part of this is news? by magarity · · Score: 2

      Didn't everybody know this 10 years ago?

      Yes, and there's some international group that puts out a recommendation for keep / don't keep every ten years. The US and Russia both ignore the no keep recommendation and it generates a news article. Expect to hear about it again in 2021.

    2. Re:Which part of this is news? by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes but there are groups who wants to remind us that the U.S.A. isn't the model good guy. For some reason it gives these groups a feeling of self importance that they point out these things, they may not be able to feed and cloth the poor, or help improve the environment, or make anyones lives better, but they can do their part by showing that the United States of America isn't the Good Guy but a country out for its own self interest.

      This is Data that will surprise only the United State Citizens who are nationalist, and thus will not believe the data anyways. Or people who just Hate the U.S. and just add it to their list of problems. But for the normal person around the world it shouldn't be a surprise at all. Like Every Country in the world it is out for its own self interest, and doesn't want to be attacked and/or taken over by an other country, if there is a threat to that they will want any advantage necessary.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:Which part of this is news? by memyselfandeye · · Score: 1

      I agree with your cynical viewpoint of these news articles, but I wouldn't say it's only in our own interest to keep the virus for national defense. Maybe that's one of the reasons that media latched onto, but it's not the only one. Research being preformed on smallpox is not limited in scope to smallpox vaccines, but virology in general. Keep in mind that smallpox was the first virus to have a vaccine developed. There is a huge body of literature and science behind smallpox, so, for example, watching for behaviors that don't match established 'rules' increased our understanding of all viruses, not just smallpox. It's not like CDC is studying smallpox to make a better smallpox vaccine, vaccinia is already good at that and EVERYONE has plenty of it on hand. And I'm not saying this will lead to a cure for AIDS, nothing is that simple, BUT it might just be one miniscule part of the puzzle that does.

    4. Re:Which part of this is news? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      What a load of crap. The US unilaterally got stopped developing biological weapons. The US is keeping this so it can develop vaccines if needed no other reason. The all the tin foil hated NUT CASES are just too stupid to figure out is that if the US really was going to keep Smallpox virus as a weapon they would simply LIE and tell everyone that they did destroy it. Really are people just so stupid that they can not even understand that it would be more likely that if the US was going to weaponise this they would just LIE? Really that would be the best strategy possible because then they would deniability!

      Not only are the paranoids on Slashdot annoying they are not even good enough at it to be entertaining!

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  6. Science? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Science it is, but leveraging a $3 billion budget for personal gain is all business.

    (You're not in the business of government, are you?)

    1. Re:Science? by LordStormes · · Score: 1

      Nope. Personally, I'd say spend money to have the smallpox vaccine recipe somewhere, but not to stockpile vaccines for a known dead virus. If you're concerned about Al Qaeda using smallpox as a weapon, just immunize everybody that needs it NOW. Anybody older than 35 or so (what, no birthers challenging the President's old enough to serve?) SHOULD already be vaccinated; my brother is 41 and he got the shot but I am 31 and did not.

    2. Re:Science? by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The odds of them using smallpox as a weapon are too low to risk vaccinating everyone. The vaccination program would harm far more people. I don't mean that in a crazy autism way, I mean from bad reactions to the vaccine. Every vaccine has a rate at which these occur and we can compare that to the risks Al Qaeda poses. Since Al Qaeda has so far in the last 50 years killed less people in the USA than farm animals and they show no sign of getting stronger we can probably forgo the vaccinations for now.

    3. Re:Science? by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      Since Al Qaeda has so far in the last 50 years killed less people in the USA than farm animals

      What!? Is this true! Why aren't we doing something to stop these animals! We have to develop some kind of system to protect ourselves. We already have scanners and gropers in place to look for terrorists. How hard will it be to modify these procedures to make sure that we don't have farm animals masquerading as human passengers?

    4. Re:Science? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since Al Qaeda has so far in the last 50 years killed less people in the USA than farm animals

      OT: Well, the retribution for their deeds is ongoing in both of the cases. Except that we don't eat alQaeda members.

    5. Re:Science? by LordStormes · · Score: 1

      What happens at Guantanamo stays at Guantanamo.

  7. So does the UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been rumored for a long time that the UK has stocks at the Porton Down labs. Just to help development of countermeasures, of course.

  8. Re:Evils... by fredmosby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're keeping the samples so they can use them to make vaccines if there is an outbreak.

  9. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or have his head removed forcibly from his shoulders.

  10. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And when we find out that a modified smallpox vaccinates against AIDS, will you still have that opinion?

  11. Re:Evils... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

    How is it evil to hang onto some so that you can make a vaccination should an outbreak occur? Especially when you know that there are other stockpiles of this organism, the summary even says that the Russians have some.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  12. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And anyone who defends the existence of smallpox as a weapon should have his head examined.

    I'd prefer they be drowned in a tub of CancerAIDS.

  13. Re:Evils... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    So the US and Russian Federation toast the stock they have. 5 years later the People's Republic of China or North Korea release a mutated weaponized smallpox that no one else has a vaccine for.

    Thats assuming the US and Russians are the only ones with smallpox in a vial still.

  14. Re:Evils... by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    What should we do with people with poor reading comprehension?

  15. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hanging on to firearms and explosives that can kill millions is about as evil as evil gets.

    To the bottom of the ociean they should all go. Every last one of them. And anyone who defends the existence of guns and bombs as weapons should have his head examined.

    Or locked up. Forever.

    --
    BMO

    Because leaving yourself defenseless means nobody will attack you.

  16. long term security comes to mind by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    over time, complacency will rot security, and over time, creative malintentioned individuals or organizations will exploit that. a smallpox outbreak would be like 10-100 9/11s or 10-100 fukushimas. destruction then seems preferable. you don't even need an actual smallpox virus to make a vaccine

    but you are operating against human psychology: we aren't made to discard such power, even if the power is completely malicious

    it may sound odd, but consider the lord of the rings, when humans had the chance to destroy the one ring, but chose to keep it instead. yes, its fiction, but all potent fiction is rooted in real human psychology, or such fiction wouldn't have any resonance or attraction to us in terms of storytelling ability. and with the lord of the rings we have valuable insight into how our own weaknesses and greed and lust for power hurt us in the long term

    we won't destroy smallpox. and we will be hurt by that decision, many years from now

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:long term security comes to mind by jnaujok · · Score: 1

      or 10-100 fukushimas

      So 100 times zero deaths?

      Or do you think Fukushima *caused* the earthquake and tsunami that was 10 times the size it was designed to withstand? Can we please stop ripping on the reactor that is surviving rather well compared to the design. If you tell me you can lift 100# and I give you a 1000# weight and then complain about how quickly your back snapped, is that fair?

      And we don't need to "unleash the evil" of smallpox. There's a good chance that, somewhere out in a jungle somewhere, is an animal carrying a variant of the smallpox virus (like cowpox) that will have a sudden mutation that allows it to pass to humans. If we don't keep these viruses so we can study them, then when that pandemic hits, you can add a x20 multiplier to the number of people who will die before a vaccine or cure can be developed.

      --
      Life, the Universe, and Everything... in my image.
    2. Re:long term security comes to mind by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Smallpox has a real world chance of being found in the world naturally.

      It has been less than 50 years. therefore the chance of it coming back is possible. The best defense is to keep limited supplies available to make vaccines immediately which will be able to protect people right away as opposed to 6 months later after it has killed a whole bunch of people.

      Vaccines take lots of time. If you want a million doses you have to plan 6-9 months out in advance. That is why some years the annual Flu shot comes up short. they either didn't make enough, or had batches go bad and are coming up short.

      Even a mutated strain can still be slowed down by a vaccine which will give people more of a chance than they would have had otherwise.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    3. Re:long term security comes to mind by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      So 30,000-300,000 deaths or 0-0 deaths.
      Either way those numbers seem damn low, looks like we should probably destroy all cars. That would save more lives than you are talking about.

    4. Re:long term security comes to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best defense is to keep limited supplies available to make vaccines immediately

      That might be true if the vaccine were made from the virus. So try again with a good reason to keep them.

    5. Re:long term security comes to mind by geekoid · · Score: 1

      " but all potent fiction is rooted in real human psychology,"
      but NOT truth. Many incorrect things are rooted in human psychology.

      The desire to assign meaning to arbitrary numbers, for one.

      We have given up power in the past.

      And LotR doesn't really have any insight like that.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:long term security comes to mind by mcmonkey · · Score: 1

      And we don't need to "unleash the evil" of smallpox. There's a good chance that, somewhere out in a jungle somewhere, is an animal carrying a variant of the smallpox virus (like cowpox) that will have a sudden mutation that allows it to pass to humans. If we don't keep these viruses so we can study them, then when that pandemic hits, you can add a x20 multiplier to the number of people who will die before a vaccine or cure can be developed.

      QFT.

      And where does anyone get the idea that smallpox released would lead to some worldwide extinction-type event?

      We've faced smallpox before, before we had vaccines. Yes, it killed many people. No, it did not kill all or even most people.

    7. Re:long term security comes to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Smallpox is candy compared to the weaponized diseases that labs could create if they wanted to. Your fiction is smallsighted, inflating a molehill into a mountain because you never raise your eyes high enough to see real mountains.

    8. Re:long term security comes to mind by Combatso · · Score: 1

      10 - 100 9 / 11 = 81.7272727272727273. definately scary stuff.

    9. Re:long term security comes to mind by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      so insights into human psychology have no meaning to issues that are rooted in human psychology?

      (!?)

      yes, you are correct: many incorrect things are rooted in human psychology. but it is impossible to remove the human psychology from the equation. therefore you need to understand human psychology to understand the problem

      or is your thinking you an magically snap your fingers and remove the human factor from policy decisions? and how the hell does that work?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    10. Re:long term security comes to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Smallpox has a real world chance of being found in the world naturally.

      smallpox's only reservoir is human beings. i don't see how it can be out there hiding in silence, biding its time.

    11. Re:long term security comes to mind by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you know its actually hard to get infectiousness and delivery vector just right. humans are puny in their ability to fine tune that. you need to stop basing your appraisals of human biotech ability on hollywood movies

      however, mother nature is a much better laboratory for this purpose. SARS and swine flu are just a taste of things to come. mother nature abhors imbalance, and whenever a homogenous population gets too large within mother nature (which is what we are), then the other part of mother nature thinks "food that should be exploited". for our purposes, since no large carnivores threaten us, the threat is from the other end of the scale: the diseases that don't care about anything except reproducing, looking at us like a giant pristine smorgasbord, just waiting for exploitation. and, mark my words, some microroganism will crack that magical infectiousness/ delivery vector code someday, catch us unawares, and spread like wildfire. it's just a matter of time and probability. and our population is just too huge and dense to escape this corrective mechanism

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    12. Re:long term security comes to mind by ashtophoenix · · Score: 1

      ... and with the lord of the rings we have valuable insight into how our own weaknesses and greed and lust for power hurt us in the long term...

      Aaaah the ingenious Lord of the Rings argument!!

      --
      Life is about being a Phoenix!
    13. Re:long term security comes to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you don't even need an actual smallpox virus to make a vaccine

      Pray tell, how you plan to make a vaccine without the virus? Killed and attenuated vaccines both require live virus to manufacture. For a subunit vaccine, you can throw coat proteins onto an expression vector and then express them in your choice of host, but due to differences in post-translational modifications the expressed protein won't necessarily look like the viral one (thus granting no immunity against the actual virus). Even then, you'll still need enough viral DNA to transfect into vectors and enough viral protein around to demonstrate comparibiltiy to the wild type viral proteins. For a vaccine to work, you need to have the correct protein epitopes accessible to the cells of your immune system. Making the right protein with the right epitopes is damn near impossible without having access to the actual virus, or at least its DNA.

    14. Re:long term security comes to mind by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Informative

      if you already have a functional vaccine, you can make copies of it. you don't need the original virus to do that. yes, some methods depend upon the original virus to do that, but not all methods

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox#Post-eradication

      In 1986, the World Health Organization first recommended destruction of the virus, and later set the date of destruction to be 30 December 1993. This was postponed to 30 June 1999.[73] Due to resistance from the US and Russia, in 2002 the World Health Assembly agreed to permit the temporary retention of the virus stocks for specific research purposes.[74] Destroying existing stocks would reduce the risk involved with ongoing smallpox research; the stocks are not needed to respond to a smallpox outbreak.[75] Some scientists have argued that the stocks may be useful in developing new vaccines, antiviral drugs, and diagnostic tests,[76] however, a 2010 review by a team of public health experts appointed by the World Health Organization concluded that no essential public health purpose is served by the US and Russia continuing to retain virus stocks.[77] The latter view is frequently supported in the scientific community, particularly among veterans of the WHO Smallpox Eradication Program.[78]

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    15. Re:long term security comes to mind by CopterHawk · · Score: 1

      how do you make a vaccine without a virus? Excuse my ignorance, please explain

    16. Re:long term security comes to mind by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      You might want to read up on how it came to be, then.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    17. Re:long term security comes to mind by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      do you need a socket to manufacture a plug? do you need a screwdriver to manufacture a screw? same principle: we already have the vaccine, so we can copy it, without the original virus the vaccine is meant for needed

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2166584&cid=36169256

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    18. Re:long term security comes to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you already have a functional vaccine, you can make copies of it. you don't need the original virus to do that. yes, some methods depend upon the original virus to do that, but not all methods

      Making copies of it is more difficult than you're implying. Attenuated and Killed virus vaccines both require manufacturing large quantities of live virus; you obviously need the virus to do that.
       
      You're correct in saying that you can try and replicate subunit vaccines without the use of the virus, but that's a very over-simplified view of things. Post-translational modification of proteins occurs in most every production host strain out there. In many cases, those modifications are required to accurately reproduce the epitopes for the immune system to recognize. The problem is that there are a ton of factors (many not well understood) that can affect the way those modifications take place. Lot variations in media composition (especially when organically sourced components are needed such as yeast extract, tryptone, or soytone; all very common media ingredients), pH, dissolved gas levels, timing, trace additives like surfactants, seeding density, the purification process, column composition etc... can all dramatically affect how the end product protein looks; and how it looks directly affects how your immune system sees it, and thus how effective the vaccine is.
       
        Simply put, the fact that we have a working vaccine does not mean we can consistently replicate it, or that it can even be produced on a scale large enough to combat a serious outbreak. Having said that, I will admit that the chances are pretty good that we would be able to replicate it (assuming of course, that what we have is a subunit vaccine and not one of the ones that requires live virus to produce), but would I wager the fate of nations on that bet? probably not.

    19. Re:long term security comes to mind by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      so what you are saying is i should trust the word of an anonymous coward on a comment board over the word of WHO infectious disease experts

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    20. Re:long term security comes to mind by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > it may sound odd, but consider the lord of the rings,

      The book or the movie?...

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    21. Re:long term security comes to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so what you are saying is i should trust the word of an anonymous coward on a comment board over the word of WHO infectious disease experts

      Obviously not. I would claim some credentials as well (I'd like to think that my posts at least demonstrate that I'm familiar with the field of manufacturing biologics), but since I'm posting AC (due to being at work) any claims I make could, and probably ought to be dismissed as unsubstantiated tripe. I could also provide stories and data to back up my claims about process affecting product, but I'm currently under an NDA, and am unwilling to risk the consequences of breaking it. So yeah, I'd trust the WHO and CDC far more than I'd trust some AC on the internet. Still, I wouldn't let it be blind trust. I'd make sure their batch records and methodologies for producing the vaccine were audited and independently validated. Once that was consistently demonstrated, I'd support the destruction of the stocks as well. For the time being, they're a necessary fail-safe.

    22. Re:long term security comes to mind by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I feel like being pedantic (I overall agree with you though).
      The earth's population is what? 6.5 billion? so if just a fraction over 325,000,000 people would have died had we kept the virus, then the human race would go extinct by not keeping it (by your numbers). given the low number of people currently vaccinated and the nominal 10 to 30% fatality rate bandied about for smallpox (we'll use 10% because that is the definition of decimation), 650,000,000 should be expected to die anyway...
      soooooo...
      you've said the human race will go extinct without the US keeping the stockpile.
      bollocks.

      Now, I think that the probability of such event happening (random mutation + human contact with vector while contagious + human contraction + human immune response ineffective at killing infection before + human to human contact) is exceptionally low, and we've already had our turn this generation with SIV -> HIV. Just like with HIV there will be those that are naturally immune, unlike HIV xxxPOX spreads like wildfire. I think it's a wash as to keeping or destroying the strains.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    23. Re:long term security comes to mind by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      hey, it's better than the twinkie defense. At least the LotR argument makes sense.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    24. Re:long term security comes to mind by wallsg · · Score: 1

      a smallpox outbreak would be like 10-100 9/11s or 10-100 fukushimas.

      It will be 9/11 times 2,356.

    25. Re:long term security comes to mind by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      cool story bro

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  17. Re:Evils... by yurtinus · · Score: 1

    ...an outbreak that would start from where exactly? This logic seems a bit circular.

    --
    +1 Disagree
  18. Re:Evils... by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

    The problem is that if you throw all your samples into the autoclave you're now unable to develop a vaccine before an outbreak occurs. If an outbreak occurred people would be dying in the streets before you would even have enough samples incubated to start vaccine development and who knows how far it would spread before your vaccine is in full production. As is, with samples in secure locations you can develop a vaccine preemptively and start vaccinating people the minute you are aware of the outbreak. This isn't like MAD where we keep nukes to blow up the other guy if he uses his, keeping live samples of the virus actually allows us to defend against it's use. (Not to mention the small but real possibility of a natural outbreak).

  19. Re:Evils... by bmo · · Score: 0

    You really believe that they are being held on to for vaccines and not weaponization?

    One word.

    Naive.

    --
    BMO

  20. Re:Evils... by Tsingi · · Score: 1

    And when we find out that a modified smallpox vaccinates against AIDS, will you still have that opinion?

    That's an argument against everything. i.e. it's useless.

  21. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you not just collect samples when an outbreak occurs...and if an outbreak occurs, would it not be a different strain anyways? Also...is it not possible to store information about the disease and use that later rather than keeping the actual disease? Keeping a disease that has been eradicated doesn't seem to have any non military benefit that I can see...

  22. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not to mention, you don't need a smallpox sample to make smallpox vaccine.

    What happens when some natural disaster hits Atlanta or Siberia and the stuff leaks? We spent a hundred years making smallpox extinct, let's finish the damn job.

  23. Isn't the smallpox virus an endangered species? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sure sounds to me like the virus is a species about to become extinct and it needs to be added to the endangered species list asap. Where are all the left wing environmental nuts when you need them?

  24. Re:Evils... by afidel · · Score: 2

    Uh, from a terrorist digging up a victim of the outbreak, or some other nations bio-weapons lab synthesizing it, or from it developing again from cowpox? Just because these are the only *known* samples doesn't mean they are the only samples in existence.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  25. or.... by GweeDo · · Score: 1

    It is to kill all the humans for when the aliens come back!

  26. Re:Evils... by guybrush3pwood · · Score: 1

    Oh really? Then we are A-OK!!

    --
    Perhaps I'm trolling, perhaps I'm not.
  27. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From the samples that we know the Russians are keeping? From samples that someone we don't know is keeping?

  28. Known stocks aren't so big a problem, IMHO: by Hartree · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is not those with declared stocks. The problem is that someone who isn't declaring it has some stored. Theyd be much more likely to do something untoward with it. And, if they do, then how would destroying small known stocks be anything but symbolism?

    We're really early in the game of understanding the genetic basis of disease virulence. It's hard to say what may be useful in the way of organisms to be used in that kind of research.

    Some emergent virus that uses some of smallpox's tricks may show up and we'd regret not having it available to study to better understand the new one.

    1. Re:Known stocks aren't so big a problem, IMHO: by vlm · · Score: 1

      Theyd be much more likely to do something untoward with it. And, if they do, then how would destroying small known stocks be anything but symbolism?

      Rather than symbolism, wouldn't it be the trigger? "Good, the other guys don't have stocks anymore, that means no more MAD, so we can now open our test tubes!"

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  29. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Smallpox vaccine is not made from smallpox virus, it's made from cowpox virus.

  30. This could be a non issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if we were still vaccinated against small pox like nearly everyone else in the world.

    1. Re:This could be a non issue... by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      'nearly everone else in the world' isn't true either, and getting less true every day. The only people to run an active smallpox vaccination program today is the US Military.

      People who were vaccinated as teens are are at least in their 50s now, and scientists are doubtful that significant portions will retain sufficient immune response without a booster.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  31. Re:Evils... by afidel · · Score: 1

    They already have the weaponized strains and their vaccines, these are the wild strains they are talking about, only a really naive person would believe that they would talk publicly about the weaponized versions =)

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  32. Re:Evils... by bmo · · Score: 1

    >The problem is that if you throw all your samples into the autoclave you're now unable to develop a vaccine before an outbreak occurs

    You're assuming that $FOE has the same strain as you do. Because if this was /really/ about eradicating smallpox and making vaccines, laboratories around the world would have all the same strains and share with each other.

    No, the only reason to really keep these around is for offensive purposes.

    >you can develop a vaccine preemptively and start vaccinating people the minute you are aware of the outbreak.

    Think for a second. You can't preemptively create a vaccine because you don't know what strain $FOE has used until he's used it. And weaponized smallpox is not the same as smallpox from the 18'th century or Ghana or wherever.

    --
    BMO

  33. Re:Evils... by the+linux+geek · · Score: 1

    The obvious answer would be the Russians, who have historically demonstrated a somewhat cavalier attitude towards biological warfare.

  34. Re:Evils... by alistairg · · Score: 1

    Smallpox vaccines are not made from smallpox virus. They are made from a virus called vaccinia. Stocks of smallpox are not needed to make vaccines.

  35. Re:Evils... by compro01 · · Score: 1

    Or assuming there are no non-lab specimens. I do not consider it out of the range of possibility that someone excavating, say, a WW1 battlefield, could find the preserved corpse of someone who was infected with smallpox (We got samples of the Spanish flu virus that way) and thus put the virus back in the wild.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  36. Re:Science? THREE BILLION?? by Lorens · · Score: 1

    I *have* RTFA, and I don't see where the sentence "Meanwhile, the government has contracted to pay almost $3 billion to procure 14 million smallpox vaccination doses." comes from. How much time do you need to produce the vaccine from the virus? Is it some kind of future pledge? Because otherwise maybe three big ones is a bit much for a hypothetical threat. Can an active virus be derived from the vaccine? If so you'd have to watch the vaccine as well as the virus.

  37. For the Walking Dead by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    We need to stockpile these viruses in order to stop the spread of the imminent Zombie Outbreak. Just don't hit the self-destruct button at the CDC until all Zombies have been eliminated!

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  38. Re:Evils... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you know for a fact that there exists no other sources of smallpox in the world? Do you know that no country/organization other than the US/Russia has smallpox samples? Do you know that there are no remote, indigenous population that still carries smallpox? Smallpox has been eradicated from the developed world and most of the under-developed world, but no one can be sure it is completely gone.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  39. Re:Evils... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    No but stockpiles are needed to do research on smallpox genetics.

  40. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The bloody virus was sequenced many times and can be reconstructed if the need be.

  41. Re:Evils... by bmo · · Score: 1

    Someone mod this up informative if true.

    Wait, it is.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccinia

    --
    BMO

  42. Re:Evils... by vlm · · Score: 2

    ...an outbreak that would start from where exactly? This logic seems a bit circular.

    Not circular if you assume it'll be accidentally released by the other guys.

    Also the general public naively thinks only two known storage means only two storage sites exist... How exactly do you know the French don't have one? Or some dude working on it in NYC in 1960 died in '61, and they're just now getting around to defrosting and replacing his research freezer? I've often wondered what happens if some dude who died on a glacier 1000 years ago gets defrosted, and someone downstream drinks the water... On a regular basis cemeteries are dug up and moved, and before a certain era they are stuffed full of plague victims, thats just how it is... And how long can a single SP virus be preserved? Nobody really knows, although some smart people have some good guesses...

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  43. Re:Evils... by RDW · · Score: 3, Informative

    "...an outbreak that would start from where exactly?"

    Maybe from here:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2404051.stm

    or here:

    http://www.livescience.com/2403-climate-threat-thawing-tundra-releases-infected-corpses.html

    or even here:

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2003-12-26-smallpox-in-envelope_x.htm

    Can we assume that the declared US and Russian stocks are the last viable samples anywhere on the planet..?

  44. Re:Evils... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    No but I'm not naive in thinking someone else won't weaponize their samples. Remember the key word in the report is "known samples". I am not naive enough to think North Korea would announce they had samples and that they haven't already weaponized them.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  45. Defense. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

    He said, sneeringly.

    Last time this was used for "defense", I believe it was infused into blankets at the siege of Fort Pitt.

    250 years go by, but the leopard does not change his spots so readily...

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:Defense. by HornWumpus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Smallpox can't live more then 48 hours on blankets.

      That story is an often repeated myth but is virologically impossible.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Defense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People typically use blankets when they sleep, and tend to sleep every day. Seems to me that 48 hours is more than adequate, given quick delivery...

    3. Re:Defense. by QRDeNameland · · Score: 1

      Smallpox can't live more then 48 hours on blankets.

      That story is an often repeated myth but is virologically impossible.

      First of all, if you read the GPs wiki link, it would seem that the spread of smallpox via infected blankets is unlikely, but not impossible. (Even by your own claim, a 48 hour infection window hardly makes this impossible.)

      But more importantly, even if it were impossible, as the article states, "while it is certain that these British soldiers attempted to intentionally infect Indians with smallpox, it is uncertain whether or not their attempt was successful." Being that there was clearly the intent to infect these people, I find it difficult to qualify the claim as a "myth."

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    4. Re:Defense. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You would need a live smallpox patent in the town they were distributing the blankets in. The fastest travel at the time and place was horseback.

      Which is in fact what happened. A live smallpox patent spread the virus.

      Blanket conspiracies were just the 9/11 conspiracies of the day. Now they just fit in too well with the 'white people bad' narrative to give up on them.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re:Defense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides, the US didn't exist 250 years ago.

    6. Re:Defense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the plan was stupid and impossible to pull through, ok. Why would that mean it was a myth? The history of warfare (well, of humanity) is chock full of idiotic plans that were executed with no success at all.

    7. Re:Defense. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I hate patents!

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    8. Re:Defense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that was the British army, acting on the orders of a British general, who attempted this... when can we expect your admission of error & subsequent apology?

      Field Marshal Amherst went on to become the first governor general of Canada, as well. Seems to me that we should be more concerned about the biowarfare designs of Britain and Canada, shouldn't we?

    9. Re:Defense. by Bengie · · Score: 2

      I had a history book in college that was ~6months old at the time, several revisions in and had numerous awards. It had a section dedicated entirely to talking about how the Europeans purposefully spread smallpox and wiped out entire villages. It was covered under a chapter like "The Beginning of Biological Warfare". My teacher with a PHD in history also talked about it as fact. Well, neither the book nor my teacher specifically said blankets were used, but they both said smallpox was spread and it devastated villages and was done on purpose many times.

      I've had several other history books in school say the same thing.

      How is this a myth? I thought it was common knowledge being that historians and history books proclaim it as fact.

    10. Re:Defense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens after 48 hours? My understanding is a virus is static and thus can exist indefinitely as long as environmental conditions are correct, such as high temperatures or excessive ionizing radiation.

    11. Re:Defense. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Regarding occurrences prior to 1776, I think the distinction of an "us and them" per Colonials is a matter for some dispute...

      Amherst is little different than George Washington, in the details of his personal history during the French-Indian wars.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    12. Re:Defense. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      That is why those devils the British don't have it!
      Man the level of shear paranoia is just to the point of disgusting. Please run away to a place where none can find you and you are free of from evil cell towers, wifi, Aluminum in your deodorant and Autism causing vacines.
      First it is at the CDC and not at the Military bio warfare center. The US has long given up biological weapons because they frankly suck from a military point of view. They take too long to act, and hard to control, and are not very easy to deploy. Plus they are just too nasty. Nuclear weapons are so much easier to stockpile and deal with.
      Man the crazies are all over this from summary with the 'countermeasures' crap. Yes they are keeping it around so they can cure it and make vaccines you bunch of fruit loops!
      Man this is just making me ticked off.
      How is Slashdot like box of Granola? It is full of nuts and flakes!
       

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    13. Re:Defense. by Sentrion · · Score: 1

      So, as long as enough PhDs agree, then we can trust them if they say 911 was an inside job or Obama's birth certificate was a fake? I thought the purpose of a college education was to learn how to think critically and independently, not just to blindly accept the "common knowledge" touted by the authorities. The "authorities" do not have to be Catholic priests to be guilty of suppressing the advancement of human knowledge.

      Maybe you should conduct a little independent research of your own to verify if there is actually sufficient evidence to support the theory that Europeans intentionally spread smallpox to indigenous peoples. Considering that as recently as 100 years ago American cities like Chicago were drinking the same water that their waste pumped in to I doubt that earlier Europeans were sophisticated enough to "intentionally" spread much disease (though there is evidence that they did try). Most of the villages wiped out by European diseases were probably first visited by missionaries who came with the altruistic goal of "helping".

    14. Re:Defense. by datapharmer · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what your definition of myth is, but mine involves something being fictional. This story definitely happened: White people gave native people blankets that they intentionally infected with smallpox. Native people got sick with smallpox. Was it from the blankets? Maybe, maybe not. Who care? It is irrelevant. The point is it was an act of biological warfare.

      --
      Get a web developer
    15. Re:Defense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely you meant patience?

    16. Re:Defense. by superdude72 · · Score: 1

      By the time American colonists started moving westward from the East Coast in large numbers, most Native American tribes had already been exposed to European diseases and technology for more than 200 years. Most of the damage from disease followed the Spanish conquest of South American and Mexico in the 16th and 17th centuries and spread northward through trade.

    17. Re:Defense. by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      Viruses are different. While any motive power, they may nonetheless be quite suseptable to chemical reaction. Free oxygen, dehydration, wrong pH, wrong Osmotic potential, or a bit of UV, will wreck havoc on the structures of some viruses .Viruses don't tend to evolve a resilience beyond what is needed to be transmited by their normal vector. Some like the tobbaco-mosiac virus are quite hardy, but can be inactivated with something as simple as dried milk. Milk proteins bind to the receptor site so the virus will never be able to mate up with it's intended target.

    18. Re:Defense. by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      But in fact white people did use blankets to TRY to spread smallpox, not knowing if it was effective or not. So, they're confirmed assholes.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    19. Re:Defense. by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      the Germ theory of Disease was validated in the late 19th century (according to some quick googling) - and the cited timespan for infection is, according to this thread, 48 hours on a blanket. Additionally, Smallpox is NOT a subtle disease, has no known asymptomatic carrier state, and is pretty debilitating (even the vaccine I got back while I was in the military had me feeling pretty shitty for about a week) - it's not the sort of disease you decide to hike out into the woods on a missionary trip while you're contagious.

      All of these factors make the story of early Americans intentionally infecting the natives with small pox plausible enough that I won't contradict an expert in the field of history on the subject.

      And yes, when enough PhD's agree on something within their field of expertise, I will usually accept that as fact without question. I haven't the time or inclination to verify if the tides are really caused by the orbit of the moon in relation to the earth, or if Henry VIII really had all his wives killed, or which languages share a common root, and how far back they go. I'm willing to accept the word of educated professionals in the fields of astronomy, history, and linguistics, and you are too.

  46. Re:Evils... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

    Human bodies rot a lot faster than that. How many plague corpses could possibly still be around? If you do not bother with the American burial method, preserve the body and seal it in a metal tube, humans rot as fast as any other mammal our size. You would probably be lucky to find teeth from a plague victim.

  47. Re:Evils... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    Heck, we could uncover it moving a graveyard anywhere in the world, or exhuming a body for some reason.

  48. sounds like population control to me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so 14 million.... that's enough to start a new country, you think? give it to everyone, save 14 million, everybody else dies.... population control complete! now we all get to start over as farmers. well, what's left of us. I'm probably going to be one of those that die. Nobody needs a DBA in that future.

    1. Re:sounds like population control to me! by eclectro · · Score: 1

      so 14 million.... that's enough to start a new country, you think? give it to everyone, save 14 million, everybody else dies....

      No. What would probably happen is that those who came in contact with infected individuals would be given the vaccine in an effort to stave off a larger epidemic.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    2. Re:sounds like population control to me! by Americano · · Score: 1

      With smallpox vaccine, if you're given the vaccine before symptoms manifest, then the vaccine has a preventive function as well.

      So, some of the 14 million doses of vaccine would be given to first responders and the population around an outbreak to contain it and prevent it from spreading.

  49. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...an outbreak that would start from where exactly? This logic seems a bit circular.

    Where do you think it came from to begin with?

  50. Evil by hoggoth · · Score: 1

    I understand the need for defending your country etc.
    But really, how can anybody involved in this actually think they are not doing evil?

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  51. Re:Evils... by intx13 · · Score: 2

    So the US and Russian Federation toast the stock they have. 5 years later the People's Republic of China or North Korea release a mutated weaponized smallpox that no one else has a vaccine for.

    Does having a tiny bit of old smallpox in a vial somewhere give you a significant advantage in making large quantities of vaccine for new mutated smallpox?

    According to TFS the US is ordering 14 million smallpox vaccine doses and I don't think they're relying on the current smallpox vials to make them. It seems to me that we could kill off smallpox but still be ready to produce vaccines if a new strain broke out.

    Frankly, I think the odds and resulting damage of some nation hiding weaponized smallpox all these years and intentionally releasing it are overshadowed by the odds and damage of the US accidentally releasing or losing the stored vials. Autoclave the thing and call it a day.

  52. The issue isn't smallpox. by CodeShark · · Score: 1

    Mankind has yet to invent event one "antiviral" that stops an infection from progressing, in say the way that antibiotics can stop a bacterial infection in it's tracks. Meaning that vaccines/inoculation are the only way to stop them -- via prevention, not cure. SO until a cure exists for even ONE virus, the world's most dangerous viruses need to have vaccines for them available.

    The point for keeping the viruses is that because mankind can't re-synthesize an active virus to test against, there needs to be a stock against which the vaccines can be tested. The point to having a particular number of vaccinations available is that in the event that an outbreak were discovered, a much lower threshold of containment can be accomplished by inoculations in a circular shape around the outbreak(s) so that responders and other possible people exposed can be protected.

    Change the name of the virus to "Ebola" for which they can still basically only theorize the still don't know the original transmission vector. Or "hantavirus" in the US, [if it were spreadable other than by rodent / flea type infestation]. Assume 25 years has gone by and now that there's no ebola samples or hantavirus samples to test against, and then a vector hits a major population center at the time of the World Cup in soccer, or the Olympics, etc.

    Change the topic back to smallpox... Do you still want them to destroy the few remaining smallpox VIRUS stocks they need to test new vaccines and drugs against?

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
    1. Re:The issue isn't smallpox. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      O RLY?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_antiviral_drugs

  53. Re:Evils... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Smallpox has taught us a great deal about diseases and how to cure them, including novel methods that have lead to cures for other diseases. The study of it has barely scratched the surface.

    Destroying it and taking your closed-minded, narrow approach is like throwing out "OtherOS" on the PS3 because it can be used to facility game piracy. That's the only possible use for it, right?

    Just checking.

  54. Yeah right by elsurexiste · · Score: 1

    The US is preserving /* the last remaining known */ strains of smallpox in case they are needed to develop bio-warfare 'countermeasures'

    Same as Anthrax, it wasn't for weapons. Even though a U.S. scientist used it and caused mayhem, is just an unfortunate episode.

    There's no way it's going to be used on weapons or for terrorism, or end in the wrong hands altogether. Nope, there isn't.

    </sarcasm>

    --
    I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
  55. RE: Stocks of smallpox are not needed by CodeShark · · Score: 1

    See my other post on this. And yes you are correct that smallpox virus is not required to MAKE the vaccines.

    Try this thought on for size though. Do you really want to test a smallpox vaccine on anything other than the deadly cousin of the vaccine's organizm, aka the REAL smallpox virus?

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
  56. Smallpox exists outside the lab ... by perpenso · · Score: 2

    Hanging on to a microorganism that can kill millions is about as evil as evil gets. To the autoclave they should all go. Every last one of them. And anyone who defends the existence of smallpox as a weapon should have his head examined.

    The problem is that the disease still exists outside of labs. Some victims were far enough north that they were buried in permafrost regions. Note that this fact has been the inspiration for numerous movies and tv shows. Also note that those concerned about global warming are also concerned about smallpox.

    "The search for variola viruses surviving even longer was pursued in 1991 near Novosibirsk, Russia (9). "Bioweapons experts" searched for the variola virus in 19th-century smallpox victims mummified in the permafrost above the Arctic Circle. In the event of unusual thawing and flooding, the concern was that these corpses might become exposed and release infectious virus into the environment. In the 19th century, this region of Russia (Sakha Republic) was "ravaged by smallpox strains of extraordinary lethality" (9). Isolating and comparing them with preserved modern strains might identify genes contributing to virulence. To date, no live variola viruses have been isolated from Sakha. But the threat now is that "a sophisticated terrorist team might go smallpox hunting on the permafrost" (9)"
    http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol11no05/04-0616.htm

    There has even been discussions regarding investigations of crypts in Europe:

    "In the absence of reliable survival data some experts have advised the routine vaccination of archaeologists who might handle well preserved corpses"
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1008009/pdf/brjindmed00145-0079.pdf

  57. For Defense? Bullshit. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    These are being kept in the event that *a* Government may need to "create" a way of culling the population in the future.

    This is why big pharma is allowed to continue to "treat" major killers such as cancer and HIV/AIDS rather than cure, to ensure deaths, even if a cure already exists.

    This is why big tobacco is allowed to use deadly pesticides on their crops, to ensure deaths.

    This is also why alcohol is allowed to be legal, to ensure deaths, while marijuana will likely never be fully legalized, due to its inability to cause death.

    If you think I'm being paranoid here, it doesn't take a genius to realize that resource management is a real problem for every Government in the world, and we are rapidly outgrowing our natural resources. Ensuring deaths continue to happen, however twisted that sounds, IS a viable option that they are exercising every day.

  58. Re:Evils... by geekoid · · Score: 1

    You're a twit who doesn't understand biological warfare OR vaccines.

    First off, small pox would be a horrid biological weapon for an industrialize nation to use. We have better weapons and they can be control a hell of a lot more effectively. Small pox would be unpredictable in where the put break would occur.

    Also, Small Pox came about through natural means the first time and i can do it again.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  59. Re:smallpox in my pants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have smallpox in my pants.

    No problem. No humans will be exposed to what is inside your pants.

  60. Re:Evils... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    --buzz-- Nope. The samples are the test base for the vaccine, AKA if the vaccine doesn't prevent the smallpox virus from going HOT AKA infecting the host, then it's not a viable vaccine. Ya gots to have the real thing to test against.

  61. Smallpox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.archetypeltd.co.nz/Smallpox.htm#edward_jenner

    How can it possibly come back if it's been 'eradicated'?

    There is no such thing as 'vaccination', and this $3 billion is an outrageous theft of the taxpayers' money.

  62. Re:Evils... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    Human bodies rot a lot faster than that. How many plague corpses could possibly still be around? If you do not bother with the American burial method, preserve the body and seal it in a metal tube, humans rot as fast as any other mammal our size. You would probably be lucky to find teeth from a plague victim.

    Interestingly, they have recovered Yersina pestis DNA from buried 16th century plague victims. It would be at least theoretically possible to get smallpox DNA out of buried victims. Not easy, but within the technical reach of a moderately adept molecular biology lab. Of which there are many, many examples scattered about the planet.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  63. Re:Science? THREE BILLION?? by lee1 · · Score: 5, Informative
    The editors changed my linkage. The details for the part about the $3 billion can be found here:
    http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/nw_20110516_8175.php

    (I'm so advanced that I combined information from two sources to produce my summary.)

  64. warfare you say? by newtype+hack · · Score: 1

    On a totally unrelated note, the government has also been breeding bees in remote locations in corn fields. This definitely is not related to their interest in smallpox.

  65. Re:Evils... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    If there were no other samples on the planet and it doesn't every break out again, is it right to exterminate a species?

  66. Re:Evils... by kimvette · · Score: 1

    They are the last known strains. That does not mean they don't exist in nature, or might not be uncovered in an archeological dig, or by a SCUBA diver or snorkeler finding some in a jar in a shipwrek, and an absolutely miniscule chance that there are viable viruses. Those are unlikely scenarios depicted in dramas on TV, but it isn't completely impossible that it could exist. Why not keep the one weapon we have against smallpox infection so cultures can be made to continue producing vaccines?

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  67. Why is this news? by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 1

    This isn't news.

    I was vaccinated against smallpox in the Marine Corps. We knew there that the government kept smallpox. Next, they're going to tell us that the government keeps anthrax on file too!

  68. This is the way the world works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it is possible, even remotely possible, for another country to use smallpox as a weapon then it would be unwise for any country which could protect against that weapon to fail to do so.
    1) It is possible for another country to use smallpox as a weapon
    2) The US can protect itself against this weapon by keeping samples of the virus alive and by stocking the antivirus drugs
    3) It would be unwise for the US not to follow this course.
    No malice or suspicion need be applied towards the US or any other country for this logic to hold. Nothing to see here.

  69. Re:Science? THREE BILLION?? by memyselfandeye · · Score: 1

    It came from the news, and is a combination of your exact thoughts. The jist is Big Pharma Company X was awarded $500 million for one million vaccines, with options for an extra 12 million vaccines valued at $1.5 billion. I'm not sure, but last time I check this wouldn't even cover the New York City metropolitan area.

    Here is the actual source which I found via this blog.

    You can not reverse engineer smallpox from the vaccinia vaccine (smallpox vaccine). The virus is related to small pox, and in vaccination is a live virus, so care must still be taken. It's probable that vaccinia shares a common ancestor as cowpox, the original smallpox vaccine dating back to the 18th century, possibly as a pox like virus originally found in horses.

    For my part, I'll try to stay away from outbreak areas if the worst should happen. Other than that, I'll not lose any sleep over it.

  70. sorry by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    forgot the parentheses

    (10-1009)/11 = - 90.81818181818181818182

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:sorry by Combatso · · Score: 1

      its worse than I thought.

  71. There's no need to keep smallpox samples around by structural_biologist · · Score: 1

    With new gene synthesis technologies (such as the ones used by Craig Venter to create his "synthetic" bacteria), one could fairly easily resurrect smallpox from DNA chemically synthesized in the lab along with some engineered cell lines. This was demonstrated with poliovirus nearly a decade ago (Cello, Paul, and Wimmer 2002 Chemical Synthesis of Poliovirus cDNA: Generation of Infectious Virus in the Absence of Natural Template Science 297: 1016. doi:10.1126/science.1072266). So, even eliminating every remaining sample of smallpox on Earth would not guarantee that the virus could not one day be resurrected as a bio-weapon.

    1. Re:There's no need to keep smallpox samples around by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      True, but that gives even LESS reason to keep it around. In particular, given the fact that you do not need the original virus for the vaccine. The only reason to keep the samples I can see is the fear that one might be a step behind in possible future weaponization. And, frankly, people reasoning like that are working on a Mengele level.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  72. We are paranoid by marnues · · Score: 1

    We are legion

  73. Endangered Species by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 1

    Virulent pathogens have got rights, too!

  74. Re:Evils... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

    From evolution if you buy into that sciency stuff. Yep, that's right Evolution created Small pox to begin with- bit God or the Devil in order to punish something.

    Small pox rears it's head in different times of the historical record and I cannot find any timeline tracking it's movement from one part of the world to another to nothing because of the vaccine.

    So something either causes something else to mutate, it can be carried by animals or insects and isn't actually non-existant, or something else that causes it to appear, disappear then reappear.

  75. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1
    Then why can't I build my own machine gun, or go and buy several tons of explosives. These are likely to cause death to the owner or user but are illegal.

    I distrust government probably more than most but even I find this to be a strech:

    These are being kept in the event that *a* Government may need to "create" a way of culling the population in the future.

    This is why big pharma is allowed to continue to "treat" major killers such as cancer and HIV/AIDS rather than cure, to ensure deaths, even if a cure already exists.

    This is why big tobacco is allowed to use deadly pesticides on their crops, to ensure deaths.

    This is also why alcohol is allowed to be legal, to ensure deaths, while marijuana will likely never be fully legalized, due to its inability to cause death.

    If you think I'm being paranoid here, it doesn't take a genius to realize that resource management is a real problem for every Government in the world, and we are rapidly outgrowing our natural resources. Ensuring deaths continue to happen, however twisted that sounds, IS a viable option that they are exercising every day.

    --
    Time to offend someone
  76. Re:Evils... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

    It might be a different strain, but it might also be easier to mutate a strain into it then to culture fresh sampled to be experimented on until a new vaccine is created assuming we don't forget how to make it for that specific problem.

    One of the problems with collecting the virus when there is an epidemic is that your workers possess a serious risk of becoming infected too. So you need to set up some serious protections and pray for the best. It would go a lot quicker already having the strain in a workable culture that could be called up in a controlled environment as soon as the strain is identified. I think it just makes more sense to keep it.

  77. Smallpox Genome is Public, Its a Permanent Threat by crunchygranola · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since the smallpox genome was decoded and published in 2006, it is impossible to rid the world of the threat of smallpox.

    The Vaccinia virus used in smallpox vaccinations is 95% similar to smallpox (see http://www.nap.edu/html/variola_virus/ch1.html). This means that the base difference is 10,000 bases. This is only modestly more than the 7500 bases assembled to synthetically recreate polio, which was also accomplished in 2006. You can order custom gene sequences of 1000 base pairs today at a cost of $1.30 per base pair.

    A gene assembly lab, a sample of Vaccinia and a hundred thousand dollars can recreate smallpox today.

    There is no other option but continue smallpox research for defensive purposes.

    --
    Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  78. The US keeps anthrax too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but that is held very securely and could never be released into the wild.

  79. $3,000,000,000 by CopterHawk · · Score: 1

    Keeping the samples around in case they are needed to produce vacines seems like a reasonal policy to me. But 3 billion dollars seems like an awful lot of money to spend preparing for an unlikely scenario, one of perhaps thousands of unlikely scenarios.

    1. Re:$3,000,000,000 by memyselfandeye · · Score: 1

      To be fair, as I posted above, it's actually options on $2.5 billion in reserve for 12 million vaccinations. I doubt they will 'exercised.' We are spending *only* $500 million on a million vaccines. Seems kind of expensive to me at $500 a pop. The award of this contract is currently under protest, so we'll see what happens.

  80. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Yes you are a complete paranoid nut job and really should seek professional help.
    It is simple as that. We need a new moderation level. "Seek help now"

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  81. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

    Might as well add automobiles to that list, as they tend to be the cause of more deaths.

  82. Read "The demon in the freezer"... by bratloaf · · Score: 1

    Read "The demon in the freezer" - written with input from Ken Alibek - former Soviet bio-weapons honcho. Scary, non-fiction stuff - from TEN years ago. Just think what they have accomplished since. This is the reason for keeping it around. It's the new MAD....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Demon_in_the_Freezer

    http://www.amazon.com/Demon-Freezer-True-Story/dp/0375508562

    Got it in the bargain bin one day, about 6 or 7 years ago...

  83. smallpox is unique to homo sapiens by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    unlike SIV/ HIV or influenza which loves making species jumps, there are no natural smallpox reservoirs out there except us, other human beings. so it is genuinely dead in the wild

    yes, there are related cousins to smallpox, like cowpox, but these diseases need to evolve into something like smallpox over an extended period of time, they won't simply spontaneously recreate smallpox in the wild

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  84. Re:Evils... by Americano · · Score: 1

    No, it actually isn't a useless argument in this case.

    When there's some indication that the smallpox vaccine actually does increase resistance to HIV infection, the argument is a fairly interesting one to bring up.

  85. Death is a cheap bastard by Borland · · Score: 1

    Actually let us consider the Lord of the Rings and fiction in general. They also involve both the psychology of the reader and writer. I remember reading a short story by Terry Brooks in the Shanarra universe and remembering why I dislike it. For his stories with magic or technology, it matters not which, is only useful when used to oppose a great evil and then it's best never used again because, y'know, moderation is impossible in life. For all the books he's written that world has not improved much -- that might be an equally valuable lesson to observe.

    The problem with paranoia either real, or written into fiction, is that quite often the methods of mass killing aren't that new or exotic. Death, like electricity, usually chooses the path of least resistance. And that doesn't usually involve an expensive version of a known virus when ordinary bullets will do. And if that's thinking too small then bombs, and then bigger bombs with chemical or nuclear payloads (more hardy then biological vectors and nominally controllable). Anyway the point is that the smallpox stockpile story comes up like a weed, and the paranoid theories follow. It's possible that we're going to all die via Stephen King's super-flu (pox?), but it's highly unlikely unless you can stop by the 7-11 and purchase a strain.

  86. The machines... by scottuss · · Score: 1

    are waiting. When we're all gone, they'll have their world and we'll be forced to bury underground in a city we'll call... I dunno... something beginning with Z.

  87. Preserve your used socks for defense... by itranspire · · Score: 1

    Some people preserve their used socks for that purpose ...

  88. Re:Smallpox Genome is Public, Its a Permanent Thre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Since the smallpox genome was decoded and published in 2006, it is impossible to rid the world of the threat of smallpox.

    Yes, but it was copyrighted, so we are safe for life + 70 years.

  89. It's Evolution, Baby. by tarlss · · Score: 1

    Smallpox was naturally derived from cowpox. Cowpox is found in animals such as cows, rats and cats. It could very well develop again. Why wouldn't it be a smart idea to keep a hold of small pox just in case? Viruses are highly mutative, we gain a lot of knowledge from holding onto smallpox. There's three scenarios here:

    1. Smallpox is delivered as a weapon, either from hidden stockpiles or reverse engineered from cowpox : We use our stockpiles to make vaccine
    2. Smallpox is found again in nature, as a natural derivative of cowpox : We use our stockpiles to make vaccine
    3. Some other derivative of cowpox shows up due to naturally mutating viruses: We use our stockpiles to compare the two strains, find out why it mutated the way it did, and develop a vaccine.

    1 and 3 are likely to happen, as a result of human nature, and good old fashioned nature respectively. In an ideal world, it's conceivable all humans choose to disband biological weapons or something. But it's not realistic to think cowpox won't continue to exist and evolve as viruses do.

  90. Not to mention.... by DG · · Score: 1

    Smallpox makes a poor biological weapon.

    While smallpox is undeniably nasty, it is nowhere near lethal enough to make a decent weapon, and the vaccine is well understood and readily manufactured.

    The counter-example of what happened to the Native Americans upon contact with European explorers is an unfortunate - and inevitable - side effect arising out of the fact that smallpox was unknown in the New World and so none of the Native American population had evolved defenses against it like Europeans had.

    Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1491:_New_Revelations_of_the_Americas_Before_Columbus for more detail.

    But now that the human bloodlines are so well mixed, no culture should have that genetic susceptibility to smallpox, so the opportunity for devastating and lethal smallpox plagues should be pretty much gone.

    Notwithstanding, smallpox was a nasty disease and an outbreak would be serious stuff, but not "weapons grade" serious stuff. A "weapons grade" biological agent needs to be very lethal and very contagious, but over a very short time frame. Ideally, you'd want the agent to go through its contagious stage and end in death in a couple of hours or so. If death takes longer than that, then the target can still fight when sick, and if the contagious phase is prolonged, you greatly increase the possibility of "blowback" where you infect your own troops or civilians.

    The worst case is a highly lethal disease that is highly contagious but takes weeks to present - that's a "The Stand" scenario. And nobody wants that.

    As it happens, the agents that were weaponized by the US were abandoned, in no small part because they were insufficiently (which is to say, not very) lethal. They also had very low rates of infection meaning that the logistical requirements for a successful strike were infeasible.

    Never mind the scary and evil aspects of germ warfare; as a practical weapon, it just doesn't work. High explosives are far cheaper and work far better.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  91. Terrorist country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USA is the number one terrorist country in the world.

    1. Nuclear bombs to civil cities.
    2. Korea
    3. Agent Orange in Vietnam
    4. Million deaths in Iraq
    5. Afganistan and Pakistan.
    6. Now they are preparing to release smallpox back for us

    Great nation!

  92. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    Yes you are a complete paranoid nut job and really should seek professional help. It is simple as that. We need a new moderation level. "Seek help now"

    Perhaps "ignorance" should be added to the moderation levels too. Do your own research before attempting to belittle. The numbers speak for themselves, and so do the regulatory agencies that do NOT oversee certain businesses for "unknown" reasons.

  93. So to you by publiclurker · · Score: 1

    critical thinking means believing whatever you think and ignoring all evidence to the contrary. you didn't happen to have family members involved in this did you? the type of denial you espouse is normally reserved for people trying to hide their own greed or shameful actions.

  94. Re:Smallpox Genome is Public, Its a Permanent Thre by structural_biologist · · Score: 1

    You actually wouldn't need to even start with Vaccinia virus. In 2008, scientists at the J Craig Venter Institute synthesized and assembled the genome of an entire bacterium from scratch (Gibson et al. 2008. Complete Chemical Synthesis, Assembly, and Cloning of a Mycoplasma genitalium Genome. Science 319: 1215 - 1220. doi:10.1126/science.1151721) . The bacterial genome they synthesized was 580,000 base pairs compared to the 186,000 base pair size of the smallpox genome. Of course, commercial gene synthesis companies would never sell anyone any sequence resembling a smallpox sequence, but given enough resources, a government or even some well funded group could conceivably resurrect smallpox without needing a sample of the virus.

  95. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by cdrudge · · Score: 1

    This is why big pharma is allowed to continue to "treat" major killers such as cancer and HIV/AIDS rather than cure, to ensure deaths, even if a cure already exists.

    It couldn't be because they haven't found a cure for cancer or HIV/AIDS but they have found some treatments that help treat a number of the symptoms, lessening their effect, could it?

    They haven't found a cure for my migraines, but taking a couple of ibuprofen pills helps. OMG it's a government conspiracy!!1! They want my headaches to kill me since there is no cure!

  96. Re:Smallpox Genome is Public, Its a Permanent Thre by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

    You actually wouldn't need to even start with Vaccinia virus. In 2008, scientists at the J Craig Venter Institute synthesized and assembled the genome of an entire bacterium from scratch (Gibson et al. 2008. Complete Chemical Synthesis, Assembly, and Cloning of a Mycoplasma genitalium Genome. Science 319: 1215 - 1220. doi:10.1126/science.1151721) . The bacterial genome they synthesized was 580,000 base pairs compared to the 186,000 base pair size of the smallpox genome. Of course, commercial gene synthesis companies would never sell anyone any sequence resembling a smallpox sequence, but given enough resources, a government or even some well funded group could conceivably resurrect smallpox without needing a sample of the virus.

    True. The Vaccinia path is the shortest though - not only because of the small number of base pairs that need to be cutout/spliced in but because pox virus replication also requires some specialized enzymes that Vaccinia provides for free. And one must ponder how short a sequence one would need to order before it is recognized as being a subcomponent of small pox.

    Eventually gene synthesis is going to percolate down to the level of undergraduate bio lab courses, and won't stop there either.

    --
    Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
  97. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work Black Core 9. We where just waiting for you to reply so we could track your location. We have a full em scan on you now and are monitoring all you communications. If you stop posting such foolishness now you may have a nice long quite life. Otherwise... Well people get sick all the time. Do you know how many people just drop dead from the flu.
    Of course I am just kidding since no one would be silly enough to post this on Slashdot... Or wouldn't they?

  98. Re:Evils... by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

    We have the whole genome on file. Why exactly are you defending keeping stocks that rationally can serve only one purpose - possible weaponization? We don't need em for research, we don't need em for vaccination. They are kept by people closely associated by the military. The sick fuckers don't want to lose the possibility to use it as a weapon, however remote that seems at the current situation. That's Mengele-grade shit going on there.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  99. Re: Stocks of smallpox are not needed by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

    We know how to make the vaccine for more than a century. It was the first vaccine ever made, actually, with technology every third world doctor can reproduce by now. We do not need the virus stocks to test it. Keeping them is just holding open the door for possible weaponization.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  100. Re:Evils... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    The CDC is closely associated to the US military?

  101. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    This is why big pharma is allowed to continue to "treat" major killers such as cancer and HIV/AIDS rather than cure, to ensure deaths, even if a cure already exists.

    It couldn't be because they haven't found a cure for cancer or HIV/AIDS but they have found some treatments that help treat a number of the symptoms, lessening their effect, could it?

    They haven't found a cure for my migraines, but taking a couple of ibuprofen pills helps. OMG it's a government conspiracy!!1! They want my headaches to kill me since there is no cure!

    What doesn't kill you physically kills you financially. Death comes in many forms, physical only being the last one you'll experience.

    It is far too profitable to treat diseases than cure them. How many different drugs have come to market to try and "treat" migraines or various forms of cancer, at ever-increasing costs to the tune of trillions of dollars in profit, and what happens to those revenue streams once a cure is found? My sig speaks volumes here.

    And much like any other plan to effect impact, you go for the masses, of which migraines would not cause enough of an impact due to the numbers. Cancer on the other hand, is a rather convenient blanket to shove all sorts of causes under, while keeping a cure under lock and key.

    Don't worry. I'm not offended if you disagree. I'm sure when it was proposed the world was round and not flat, he was called batshit crazy too.

    Problem is...he was right.

  102. Re:Evils... by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

    Government institutions are independent of each other and the CDC wouldn't be instrumentalized in a second for warfare purposes if some sick fuck would deem it necessary?

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  103. Re:Evils... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    Well, since the DoD has it's own level 4 biohazard facility where it runs all of its...whatever it does...at Fort Detrick Maryland with the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), I doubt the CDC's civilians would just be turned into Doctor Mengeles instantly.

    Katrina, and the Iraqi Occupation have shown that the US government doesn't do well at civilian-military cooperation on the fly.

    As for calling it all "Mengele-grade shit going on there" - you should read up on what Mengele did - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mengele

  104. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

    This is why big tobacco is allowed to use deadly pesticides on their crops, to ensure deaths.

    No, Big Tobacco's allowed to use deadly pesticides on their crops because this conversation took place at least once:

    Government: Hey! You can't put that stuff on your crops! It's deadly! We don't want people ingesting that!

    Tobacco Growers: You realize these crops are just going to end up in cigarettes, right?

    Government: Ohhhh.... Carry on then!

    --
    Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
  105. $200+ per shot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $3^9 for 14^6 doses, do the math.
    Somebody is making a killing even before the main event.

  106. Detectors by Mia'cova · · Score: 1

    I have no idea if this kind of thing exists today or is under development. But I certainly wouldn't mind seeing airborne disease detectors in high-traffic areas, especially transportation hubs like airports. Having another unique disease to study/detect could have some value while developing tests, vaccines, cures, etc.

  107. In Soviet Russia by $0.02 · · Score: 1

    You don't kill smallpox

    --
    If enithin kan gow rong it whil. (Murfey)
  108. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by shermo · · Score: 1

    No, death is death. "the act of dying; the end of life; the total and permanent cessation of all the vital functions of an organism."

    Misusing words doesn't add anything to your argument, although it is popular these days. See: "Rape".

    --
    Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
  109. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by the+biologist · · Score: 1

    These are being kept in the event that *a* Government may need to "create" a way of culling the population in the future.

    This is why big pharma is allowed to continue to "treat" major killers such as cancer and HIV/AIDS rather than cure, to ensure deaths, even if a cure already exists.

    We cure cancer every day and do so reliably. The problem is that every single cancer is a unique disease that may need a unique cure. There are millions of cancers which need cured... and we do so for about half of them. All of those breast cancers you hear about? They're independent diseases which happen to look and work similar to each other.

    You claim there are cures for HIV/AIDS. How many people were treated with this miracle before the government types put it under lock and key? (Zero) With nobody cured with the treatment, you can't claim there to be a cure!

    There is one person on the planet who is described as having been cured of HIV/AIDS. He did it by recieving an immune system transplant from a compatible donor who happened to have a pronounced genetic resistance to the virus. Everyone who cares knows how this works, because the method was freely given to everybody on the planet, and why it won't work for most people. (Go study immunology if you want to figure out the second part.)

    You obviously have abso-fucking-lutely no clue how complicated and difficult these problems are. Why do you think we have people who spend their entire lives studying these damned things in order to make the advances we have? Why don't we get rid of biologists and doctors and just refer to some random jackass on the street?

  110. Re:Smallpox Genome is Public, Its a Permanent Thre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the smallpox genome was decoded and published in 2006, it is impossible to rid the world of the threat of smallpox.

    The Vaccinia virus used in smallpox vaccinations is 95% similar to
    smallpox (see http://www.nap.edu/html/variola_virus/ch1.html). This
    means that the base difference is 10,000 bases. This is only modestly
    more than the 7500 bases assembled to synthetically recreate polio, which was also accomplished in 2006. You can order custom gene sequences of 1000 base pairs today at a cost of $1.30 per base pair.

    A gene assembly lab, a sample of Vaccinia and a hundred thousand dollars can recreate smallpox today.

    There is no other option but continue smallpox research for defensive purposes.

    Modded to "+5 Terrifiying"

  111. Geneva Protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So much for our government being above other countries that refuse to follow the Geneva Protocol and use biological warfare. I guess the U.S. government no longer wants to be considered the good guys.

  112. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    No, death is death. "the act of dying; the end of life; the total and permanent cessation of all the vital functions of an organism."

    Misusing words doesn't add anything to your argument, although it is popular these days. See: "Rape".

    The cause and subsequent perpetuation of death is the issue here. And yes, financial death often leads to actual death. See: "Suicide".

    Falling under the illusion of ignorance that death is somehow always natural and could never be purposely caused by any Government is also popular these days, as I find myself in the minority with my opinions. That's OK though, you go ahead and desperately search for what will likely ultimately kill you and try and prove me wrong in the end. Ref. "Causes of cancer".

  113. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    This is why big tobacco is allowed to use deadly pesticides on their crops, to ensure deaths.

    No, Big Tobacco's allowed to use deadly pesticides on their crops because this conversation took place at least once:

    Government: Hey! You can't put that stuff on your crops! It's deadly! We don't want people ingesting that!

    Tobacco Growers: You realize these crops are just going to end up in cigarettes, right?

    Government: Ohhhh.... Carry on then!

    Nicotine is a drug. It is probably one of the most powerful and addictive drugs on the planet. The kind of power that corrupts people and manipulates regulatory policy.

    Ever wonder why the FDA was never chosen to regulate the tobacco industry, and instead was lumped in with alcohol and...firearms?

    I don't.

  114. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by geekmux · · Score: 1

    We cure cancer every day and do so reliably. The problem is that every single cancer is a unique disease that may need a unique cure. There are millions of cancers which need cured... and we do so for about half of them. All of those breast cancers you hear about? They're independent diseases which happen to look and work similar to each other.

    I am aware of the fact that cancer forming cells exist and are created naturally in the body, as well as the process of apoptosis, or the natural eradication of such. It has been said that the average human technically contracts cancer several times in their lifetime, usually with their immune system being strong enough to combat it early in life. The question still remains. What has been the root cause of all of these cancers over the last 100 years? I find it ridiculous that people cannot fathom the concept that some of these cancers, like other genetically engineered diseases (Smallpox soup with a dash of Ebola anyone?) were possibly purposefully mutated and/or perpetuated by design.

    We read not long ago that the tap water of over 30 US cities contained hexavalent chromium, a probable carcinogen. While we may argue that this got into the water stream naturally(which it can), the real question is what exactly will be the EPAs final "safe" levels, and who ultimately controls the EPA? Water is what sustains life, not money, or a nice car, or cheap gas. Textbook definition of a target-rich environment.

    And do you cure cancer, or do you eradicate it by force? I know we have made many advances with cancer, but chemotherapy and surgery are still the primary forms of treatment, and are not true cures. Perpetuating remission treatments is very expensive and ensures revenue streams while ultimately still leaving deaths door slightly ajar.

    You claim there are cures for HIV/AIDS. How many people were treated with this miracle before the government types put it under lock and key? (Zero) With nobody cured with the treatment, you can't claim there to be a cure!

    This argument can easily go both ways. You cannot prove that there is not, while it is fairly easy for anyone to prove that greed and corruption have warped entire nations. Again, perpetuating treatments is far more profitable than finding or releasing a cure, which feeds both the revenue issue(greed) as well as the resource management issue(deaths). I sincerely appreciate the work that is done by the entire scientific and medical community, but it is still difficult to prove me wrong.

  115. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, the numbers don't speak for themselves. You have to speak for them.

    There are so many things wrong with your conspiracy theory. From "governments have a lot of trouble thinking far enough ahead to maintain smallpox reserves for many decades as part of a master plan to undercut their own power base" to "it's not actually easy to cure cancer; you can't just decide to do it" to "the world is not a Batman comic".

  116. Center for Disease Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like the Russian name better: "Vector laboratory"

    Less orwellian IMO

  117. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Great post but I fear it was a wasted effort.
    Logic and knowledge can not overcome crazy.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  118. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by the+biologist · · Score: 1

    For the original parent, no... but for any other witnesses, yes, maybe. Besides, sometimes I just can't ignore the crazy any more and have to respond.

  119. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by the+biologist · · Score: 1

    I am aware of the fact that cancer forming cells exist and are created naturally in the body, as well as the process of apoptosis, or the natural eradication of such. It has been said that the average human technically contracts cancer several times in their lifetime, usually with their immune system being strong enough to combat it early in life. The question still remains. What has been the root cause of all of these cancers over the last 100 years? I find it ridiculous that people cannot fathom the concept that some of these cancers, like other genetically engineered diseases (Smallpox soup with a dash of Ebola anyone?) were possibly purposefully mutated and/or perpetuated by design.

    Root cause? We get cancer in the same way that iron rusts. It is inevitable as a consequence of the chemistry of how we are alive. There is no need for an intelligent agent to intervene to give us any of those cancers. Yes it is possible (and easily fathomable), but there is no evidence for it and thus the null hypothesis (that there is no such agent) is what we logically have to go with.

    We read not long ago that the tap water of over 30 US cities contained hexavalent chromium, a probable carcinogen. While we may argue that this got into the water stream naturally(which it can), the real question is what exactly will be the EPAs final "safe" levels, and who ultimately controls the EPA? Water is what sustains life, not money, or a nice car, or cheap gas. Textbook definition of a target-rich environment.

    Nobody with any sense claims that something which happened naturally must be 'ok'. If your argument held any weight with reality, the EPA would never ever reduce 'safe levels' upon further research... and would likely increase the 'safe levels'. What will be the final 'safe level' is not something which can be known. All we can know is that an arbitrary level does or does not cause a level of injury we think is acceptable. At some level, the injury caused by hexavalent chromium (or other things) decreases to equal to the injury caused by water. (Even pure H2O causes cancer at a low rate, by the radiation it emits from the spontaneous decay of oxygen.)

    And do you cure cancer, or do you eradicate it by force? I know we have made many advances with cancer, but chemotherapy and surgery are still the primary forms of treatment, and are not true cures. Perpetuating remission treatments is very expensive and ensures revenue streams while ultimately still leaving deaths door slightly ajar.

    How is an eradication by force not a cure? (If I have cancer in my kidney and I discard my kidney, I no longer have cancer. I'm cured!) What do you mean by a 'true cure'? Death's door is always wide open, no matter what we may do. Are you approaching this from a religious perspective?

    This argument can easily go both ways. You cannot prove that there is not, while it is fairly easy for anyone to prove that greed and corruption have warped entire nations. Again, perpetuating treatments is far more profitable than finding or releasing a cure, which feeds both the revenue issue(greed) as well as the resource management issue(deaths). I sincerely appreciate the work that is done by the entire scientific and medical community, but it is still difficult to prove me wrong.

    Actually the argument can't easily go both ways. There is no way to prove something does not exist/happen/etc that we just haven't seen yet. (This is rather a basic logical result and why we don't study the giant invisible squid living in the sun...) However, if there was a cure, then there would be those who were cured... and those people would be very loud about it.

    Even if the govt was operating as you claim... It wouldn't do so by encouraging death. Death is a horribly expensive process, as all the training/knowledge/etc contained in the person is lost. The

  120. Re:Evils... by jc42 · · Score: 1

    They're keeping the samples so they can use them to make vaccines if there is an outbreak.

    This claim is only effective with people who haven't read any of the textbook histories of smallpox. Actually, smallpox vaccines have never been made from smallpox virus. They've been made from closely-related viruses that usually cause only a mild, temporary disease. The most common is the vaccinia (cowpox) virus.

    Before the 18th century, there were occasional attempts to immunize people against smallpox by infecting them with a small sample of smallpox from a victim of the disease. But this was fairly dangerous, since the result was very often a full-blown case of smallpox. When it was discovered that cowpox did the job a lot better, people stopped trying to use the smallpox virus.

    People also try to argue that we need smallpox samples for testing vaccines if smallpox reappears. But we actually don't;samples of the current virus are much better for testing. After all, we won't want to know whether a vaccine immunized against the historical disease; we'll want to know how effective it is against the current strain of the disease.

    The arguments that we "need" the smallpox samples for such reason are basically PR from people who don't want to mention their actual motive. The samples give us nothing useful in fighting a new outbreak of a similar disease. Knowing whether the new disease is the same as the preserved samples is perhaps of interest to historians (and a few researchers), but it's not particularly useful in fighting the new disease. Our techniques of the past couple of centuries have been much more effective against smallpox than any of the earlier attempts at prevention or treatment. The newer techniques haven't actually used the smallpox virus itself; they've used related viruses (for the vaccines) and current patients (for testing).

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  121. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    True as I said I really found your post informative. I am a more did well in Physics and Chemistry but never really enjoyed biology. Could just be a personality thing. I don't like taking apart anything I can not put back together and make work. Of course on a good note the Vaccine & Gene Therapy Institute is rumored to have a Vaccine for AIDS near ready to test. While I do think that big Pharma corps are greedy I don't think they are evil. If nothing else a researcher at one would love to get a Nobel for a cure for Cancer, AIDs, Diabetes, and or Strokes. (Yea I know it would be more of a good preventative or treatment for Stroke".
    If you are a professorial biologist all I can say is good work so far.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  122. Re:For Defense? Bullshit. by the+biologist · · Score: 1

    Biology was not always my thing... but complexity always drew my interest and it was a natural progression to get there. A proper understanding of biology requires a decent grasp of chemistry and physics too. (though, many get away without it) ;-) Strangely enough, there is a region of the USA referred to as the 'Stroke Belt'... so figuring out what is going wrong there and preventing it would actually be a really helpful thing... but you're right, it wouldn't be a 'cure'.

  123. Re: antiviral drugs by CodeShark · · Score: 1

    K a minor correction, same article... "Unlike most antibiotics, antiviral drugs do not destroy their target pathogen; instead they inhibit their development"

    to which I add <a href="http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6445&page=79"> quotes</a> about what the review of many scientists say on the subject:

    Genomic sequencing and limited study of variola surface proteins derived from geographically dispersed specimens is an essential foundation for important future work. Such research could be carried out now, and could require a delay in the destruction of known stocks, but would not necessitate their indefinite retention....

    1. The most compelling reason for long-term retention of live variola virus stocks is their essential role in the identification and development of antiviral agents for use in anticipation of a large outbreak of smallpox. It must be emphasized that if the search for antiviral agents with activity against live variola virus were to be continued, additional public resources would be needed.

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...