Slashdot Mirror
DNA Sequence Withheld From New Botulism Paper
New submitter rex.clts writes "In the IT security world, it is common practice to withhold specifics when announcing a newly discovered software vulnerability. The exact details regarding a buffer overflow or race condition are typically kept secret until a patch is available, to slow the proliferation of exploits against the hole. For the first time, this practice has been extended to medical publishing. A new form of Botulism has been identified, but its DNA sequence (the genetic code that makes up the toxin) has been withheld, until an antidote has been found. It seems that censorship in the name of "security" is spreading (with DHS involved this comes as no surprise.) Is this the right move?"
When has with holding information 'ever' been the right move?
Considering that there is no antidote for regular botulism, my guess is that this "censorship" is doomed to failure.
Unlike software patches, which may take days or weeks, it looks like it could be years for this. While I'm not a big supporter of giving ammunition to terrorists (just for example), I doubt very much this secrecy will get very far. It usually doesn't. So it looks like a false sense of security ("security theater") to me.
Good call! Wouldn't want those highly advanced scientists at al-Qaeda to reproduce it at the gene level or anything.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
"When has with holding information 'ever' been the right move?"
Says the anonymous coward.
How small is your penis and what are your email and password?
So a quick edit.
See, isn't that much more hysterical? Now you need to learn HOW TO USE THE CAP LOCK KEY.
Why is Snark Required?
It's a national security threat. There are antitoxins to regular botulism. This is something else. Maybe readers will like to see a few million dead? Probably. Readers who think all info should be free are fools.
I see your point, although it is unfair to say that those against censorship on principle will necessarily "like to see a few million dead".
I'm not decided either way on this one, but wanted pointed out that it does work both ways. Withholding this information will also make it less likely for anyone to develop an effective antidote.
Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
Awesome! Now we're only half a step until completely uninformed CHAIN MAIL BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T SEND THIS TO ALL YOUR CONTACTS IN THE NEXT 27 SECONDS YOU ARE A MURDERER AND HAVE SURRENDERED YOUR SOUL TO THE DEVIL!!11!11! THINK OF THE MILLIONS OF DEAD BABIES!
What antitoxins are there? Because they seem to be withheld as well. The only "cure" I personally know to heal people and animals that ingested the bacteria is to keep feeding them sugar water with added salts so you can flush the bacteria out of their digestive tract without dehydrating them. They need constant care and attention and possibly artificial respiration and such for days or weeks, until the poison wears off and they get control of their muscles again.
There are plenty of other toxins and bacteria that are known, easily obtainable and at least as big a threat as Botulism. One more won't really matter on a grand scale of things. If you want people to suffer horrible diseases you already have plenty to choose from. By not allowing a new sports car to get on the road "because it's fast and it could kill people if they had a collision with it" you're not suddenly making the streets any safer than they are. Withholding this information won't make people immune to all other harm, or add a significant new threat to the world. I'm all for keeping dangerous knowledge a secret, but this is ridiculous.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
How is this different than a software vulnerability and security through obscurity, etc.?
I think to begin with, most software vulnerabilities aren't exploited to cause immediate death of (most likely) innocents. There's also no 'fix' for this (e.g. no software update to everybody's genome, but maybe a vaccine can be developed).
Similar to some other horrible chem/bio/nuke weapon formulas, yes, it should be properly redacted.
yeah since the regular botox is so hard to get.... ....
if the new strand stays active in air, powder laying around for longer then I guess it's a problem.
otherwise it just sounds like they're keeping the toy for themselves.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Yes because terrorists are going to go through all the trouble to use yet another one of a million different biological/chemical attacks they already don't use instead of simple and cheap explosives.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Don't theese Scientists beleeve in the Evilution!? The moral thing to do heer is to releese this super-dooper-botulism thing, let it infeckt everyone everywhyer, and the natoorlly immoon survivors will EVILOVE into teh NEXT EVILUTION of hoomans. Com on it's so ovbious, peeps!!
Well... normal C. botulinum is BSL-2, but it's plausible that this is BSL-3 or even 4 since no vaccine is available yet. If it is BSL-4, even just temporarily, then there are only a handful of labs in the world that can actually work on it. and about 30% of them are in the US, so the information can be shared without much security risk and still be well-analysed. I would guess they'd be making the sequences available upon request to anyone they deemed trustworthy.
If it's only BSL-3, there are something like two thousand such labs in the US alone, and it's definitely a bottleneck, but I doubt most of those groups would actually care. It's not like revealing the details of a remote execution vulnerability in OpenSSH causes every software developer in the world to offer a hand to fix it!
(Also, points for the Excession sig. A lot of people disfavour it over the others, but it's probably my favourite Culture book.)
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
War criminals should use your defense at their trials. "But your honor, we get a few million dead every year from starvation and other diseases. What's the difference if I round up a million for execution by firing squad?"
This space intentionally left blank
Yup. Here is the Slashdot article Science Panel Recommends Censoring Bird Flu Papers. There could be a lot more instances, like, say, biological agents developed for warfare.
The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
It's a national security threat. There are antitoxins to regular botulism.
This guy is right, by keeping the DNA Sequence out of the paper it prevent ye-random-crazy from having a go at synthesizing some. On the other hand, it doesn't stop research into cures, because any legitimate researchers can just email or phone the guy.
For those of you who haven't been in academia; part of your job is knowing who the leading guys in your field are. This new stuff is nasty, so it makes sense to secure it behind a 'have I heard of this guy' and 'what has he done lately' check, if only to make sure you don't have an accidental outbreak.
Nope, wrong. If any suitably qualified lab wants to do research on it, all they have to do is call up the authors and ask. If they're actually capable of doing the research they'll get all the withheld information the next day.
So much ignorance here! Here's a working scientist's opinion:
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/10/16/holding_back_experimental_details_with_reason.php
And Derek Lowe is about as libertarian as scientists get.
I don't think he's suggesting that shooting civilians is acceptable behavior. He's just pointing out (staying with your metaphor) that withholding the specs for a new bullet won't make much difference in the annual death toll caused by gunshot wounds.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Never mind. I didn't see the AC trolling and thought you were replying to the point above. Fair point in context :)
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
The cocaine trade makes more and more sophisticated submarines and not all terrorists are stupid. Twisted, demented, ridiculous? Of course. And it only takes one or two. They have engineers that work for them, why not a chemist or a biologist or...?
We are entering an age of easily printed weapons (including biological), and have been in an age of free information. Until we enter the age of non-insanity we're always going to have to weigh security issues. Is this not the very definition of a potential WMD? Someday soon, if not already, it's going to be easier to make and deploy a virus than it is to make a long range missile with a nuclear payload, that is accurate. More of a threat perhaps than nukes if it's weighed on the damage caused / ease of implementation scale (where harder rating # is larger than an easier one, includes cost, ease of access to knowledge,etc).
-Ultimate Stickman Game Developer Infinite World Puzzler
It's a national security threat. There are antitoxins to regular botulism. This is something else. Maybe readers will like to see a few million dead? Probably. Readers who think all info should be free are fools.
So, why publish it at all? Seems like the real problem is with the academic system that seems to believe that only published research is useful. Published research that doesn't actually publish anything isn't actually useful for anything but bragging...
care to give us the lowdown on why it's something else?
easier to spread? easier to manufacture?(considering botox is popular as cowdung that can't be hard to manufacture).
more effective than sarin? does this stuff just grow everywhere when let loose?
if you could spread enough of regular botulism, I wouldn't see that people were going to be prepared with antitoxins on the ready.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Also, according to Wikipedia...
"killing thirteen people, severely injuring fifty and causing temporary vision problems for nearly a thousand others"
Sure, it's ineffective if the be-all and end-all is to kill people. Over a 1000 people affected, to varying levels, and some still psychologically affected today, is far from ineffective. A bunch of people with guns could probably get a higher body count, and would certainly generate a lot of distress. It's just silly though to consider the Tokyo attack as being ineffective.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Ever since the potential damage of releasing information outweighed the potential utility of releasing said information it has been right and proper to keep information under wraps.
Now how about this case?
As the article states, botulism toxin is the most potent toxin we know (as in smallest lethal dose), and what researchers found was a new variant of it to which there is no antidote as of yet.
With the DNA sequence published, anyone with a simple bacteriological lab can produce it. There is a substantial risk that e.g. Al Quaeda (or worse, some home grown terrorist or some disgruntled Harris & Klebold combo or another McVeigh) gets their hands on it and will dump it somewhere in the drinking water supply of a large US city.
What's the risk of suppressing the information? Well, first that it becomes a habit, second that we might delay finding an antidote because we keep the sequence under wraps.
I personally believe that the risk of disclosure is a little too large to allow this particular sequence to be published, and outweighs the risk of suppressing it. So I'm convinced it's better to allow this information to be suppressed than to disallow it to be suppressed.
Let's be thankful that we still have someone able and willing to screen this sort of information and delay or suppress its publication.
If it is BSL-4, even just temporarily, then there are only a handful of labs in the world that can actually work on it. and about 30% of them are in the US
I am not a biologist, so these version numbers are meaningless to me... But that still reads like 70% unused research capacity.
I would guess they'd be making the sequences available upon request to anyone they deemed trustworthy.
I would hope so, but I am not sure who gets to decide trustworthiness.
(Also, points for the Excession sig. A lot of people disfavour it over the others, but it's probably my favourite Culture book.)
Me too, obviously, although it probably shouldn't be the first Culture book to read. RIP, Iain.
Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
Its DNA sequence has been withheld, until an antidote has been found. [...] Is this the right move?
We arrive at the same question as with security and open source software: if the DNA sequence is withheld, doesn't that reduce the probability of an antidote being discovered?
...on whether there is legitimate cause to believe that a specific group or individual is planning on weaponising this shit...
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
Maybe they don't want the gene sequence patented by some outside party which could make tests and vaccines harder to access. Prior art wasn't worth shit before, and it's not worth half a shit under the new explicit first-to-file system.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
You are totally correct. Terrorists are quite happy to use WMD when they can.
Sarin attack in Tokyo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway
Anthrax attacks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks
Oh, I'm sorry, was your post some pitiful attempt at sarcasm that went horribly wrong?
When I first embarked on my undergrad degree in biotech back in 2000, it took a fair amount of work to identify and replicate or insert a sequence of bases into a given segment of DNA. Now it can easily be done in a morning (OK, an afternoon if you're a late riser). Sooner or later the information will become available, but common sense would say that allowing a bit of time to prepare defenses isn't a bad idea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heptavalent_botulism_antitoxin
http://www.infantbotulism.org/general/babybig.php
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21918119
http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2006/02/antitoxin-infant-botulism-slashes-hospital-stays
The lab that discovered the new strain of botulism is a test center for infant poop. The drugs are terribly expensive so when a baby is suspected of having infant botulism, the hospital sends a sample that gets tested. If it's tested positive, the baby is given the antitoxin.
Seriously, use a web search. Not that hard.
Effectiveness depends on the goals. If the goal was to kill many more then I would agree they were unsuccessful. If the goal were to trigger a revolution I would then say it was indeed ineffective. As things stand, the goal don't seem terribly clear.
Assuming the plan was to overthrow the government, body count isn't necessarily the determining factor. 1000 people crippled for life could be more effective than 10 deaths.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
BSL stands for Biosafety Level. What the OP was pointing out is, that especially at level 4 (Ebola type critters) there are very few facilities with that sort of capability and they ain't cheap. Even with Level 3 facilities, the numbers are small. I would wager a guess that any interested researcher who has access to a level 4 lab and many people with access to level 3 labs already have a copy of the sequence. They probably read the preprint.
If they haven't seen the data and are interested, they could have a conversation with the researchers. And likely a visit from DHS unless they're well known. All this does is prevent some random nasty from trying to engineer the toxin. Very unlikely, as there are significant hurdles to doing so. But the downsides are so great that it's worth the extra caution.
The only problem here, as has been pointed out, is whether or not this sets up a 'slippery slope' and the system tries to routinely prevent dissemination of this kind of data. Given the tendency towards paranoia and control (or control and paranoia), this is definitely a concern. I'm happy that these incidents are getting some press so it's on the radar. The system has been pretty much self policing so far and these concerns go way back to the 1950's.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Here I was, all ready to synthesize botulism from its DNA sequences in my basement. What am I going to do with the million-dollar lab I bought on credit?
The argument wasn't that he was a hypocrite. That was just for bonus points. The argument was that he did not share private information because that information is very private. Hence, not all things should be shared.
Simon's Law: People who call opposing arguments logical fallacies are incapable of correctly identifying logical fallacies.
Censorship never is.
Neither are knee jerk reactions to complex issues.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Bioweapons come in two flavors, contagious and non-contagious. Non-contagious ones, such as anthrax, are similar in effect to chemical weapons. One shot, temporary damage, cleanup may be time consuming and expensive but is possible. They're cheap and easy to produce (if you can brew beer you can grow anthrax), but have a very limited shelf life and are more difficult to deploy effectively than chemical weapons.
Contagious ones are pretty much useless as a weapon as before long your own side ends up as affected as the enemy. Human-constructed organisms also tend to be unstable and mutate, making a vaccine of dubious value. This is why Fort Dugway gave up on Ken Alibek's 'black pox' and the like.
The primary danger in bioweaponry is the trust fund kid who thinks that PETA's agenda isn't radical enough. They tend to be stupid and outspoken though, and have generally terrible management skills. Hopefully this will be enough to keep us safe, because Fatherland Security won't.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
I am not a biologist, so these version numbers are meaningless to me... But that still reads like 70% unused research capacity.
Where is it stated that the sequence would only be released to trusted institutes in the US? This also assumes that all research institutes would want to do research on this topic. It would seem to me that every institute working on the same thing would be a lot of duplication.
I would hope so, but I am not sure who gets to decide trustworthiness.
Any decision is better than "we trust everyone in the world".
Ah, but the dictator who has been ejected from his homeland doesn't have the ability to buy 100 votes in Congress like the food speculators that drove up the worldwide price of rice and starved millions, or the currency speculators who crashed the Asian economies and condemned tens of millions to live by scrounging garbage piles. Besides, dictators generally kill some people who actually matter, not just the poor. Speculators only kill what the PTB refer to as "useless eaters".
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
BSL = Bio-Safety Level. The higher the BSL number the nastier the organisms you tend to be working with. E. coli, BSL-1, ebola, BSL-4.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
Biological agents are more difficult to disperse adequately than chemical agents, although since many of them are easier to produce they might be able to go with 'quantity over quality'.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
By publishing at all, they've basically told the world - good guys and bad guys - "If you want to find the DNA of a supertoxin, research in this area."
If well-funded bad guys want the DNA code for this, they will get it on their own within a few years if not a lot sooner.
In the meantime, the clock is ticking and the researchers working on an antidote know it.
The moral equivalent in software security would be for security researchers to quickly publish enough details that a well-funded adversary could find and exploit the hole within a matter of months, while giving the publisher and White Hat security vendors enough details to improve their products before the bad guys find and use the exploit.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
There is nothing complicated about it , your comment is nothing more than an ignorant dismissal.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
BSL-3 labs will attract DHS-type attention when they don't follow the rules carefully. Botulinum of any kind is a "select agent": http://www.selectagents.gov/Select%20Agents%20and%20Toxins%20List.html
On the other hand, there are a lot of "loopholes" (maybe not the best term). I've been surprised to see how simple it was to get samples out of BSL-4 and into an unregulated environment, even while following all the rules to the letter.
Missing critical information? Can't reproduce results? Toss it the fuck away. This will teach them to not be in bed with the government.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
If someone figured out how to make a 1 kiloton explosive device by combining parts from an old toaster with those of a microwave oven, I wouldn't want that information "out there," either. Every 1000th house, or so, would become the center of another Hiroshima.
Tokyo attack was effective, it drew attention to group and their demands. that's what most terrorism has as goal.
Vlad `the impailer` Tepish needs no organisms to terrorize the Muslim invaders.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
yes, I know you don't need lots of it.
but for some reasons nobody has been using it. it was quoted in the army chem warfare training class though if I remember correctly. is it fast decaying and this new version doesn't? is it feasible to use through distribution through water supply? iirc the old regular one isn't for some reason or another, so it's being crazily effective in killing not being that big of a problem because it's also hard to distribute.
thing with sarin is that it's shit easy to make in large quantities, hence it having been used.
what I'm trying to get an answer for is how/why this version is so much worse? (I assume the dna is for the producing bacteria).
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.