Sunday, January 22, 2012

Biosafety Level 4


It is said to be the ultimate containment system for deadly and highly contagious agents; a biosafety level 4 laboratory (the one at Fort Detrick, MD is pictured above) is where scientists experiment on and store the most deadly infectious agents of disease that they want to examine. Both Russia and the United States, for example, store the active small pox virus in such facilities. Bioweapons are often born in biosafety level 4 labs, but these represent capacities that are as much a threat to humanity as full-on nuclear weapons. At the National Institute Health’s Fort Detrick facility, scientists “conduct groundbreaking research in these rooms, trying to determine how lethal infectious diseases kill their hosts.

“Hemorrhagic fevers like Marburg and Ebola, which are caused by viruses, are among the world's most horrific afflictions. For about seven days after infection, patients suffer from flu-like symptoms, but as the virus multiplies, blood starts to seep from the skin, mouth, eyes and ears. Internal organs hemorrhage into bloody, shapeless masses. Some of these fevers kill up to 90 percent of those who contract them, and they can be passed along by close contact with bodily fluids, maybe even by a sneeze.”
Popular Mechanics, April 27, 2009

The latest experiments have been with the ever-mutating bird flu virus, more particularly mutated strains of the real world H5N1 variation, which “[t]hus far the virus has infected close to 600 humans and killed more than half of them, a fatality rate that far exceeds the 2 percent rate in the 1918 influenza pandemic that killed as many as 100 million people.” New York Times Editorial, January 7th. But this time, in addition to U.S. experiments, scientists in the Netherlands have managed to create the deadliest and most contagious version of the virus imaginable.

So horrific that the NIH has officially requested that these experiments be contained and that publications of methodology and results be severely limited for fear of encouraging others to continue developing a mega-strain of virus that could challenge the very existence of mankind on earth. “The U.S. government has asked scientists to censor portions of experiments that detail how the H5N1 bird flu can be mutated into a strain that could be highly infectious to humans.

“Government officials are alarmed at the prospect that the information could be used by terrorists to create a biological weapon. They have asked for details of the experiments to be deleted from scientific manuscripts before their publication… ‘While the public health benefits of such research can be important, certain information obtained through such studies has the potential to be misused for harmful purposes,’ the NIH said… ‘These manuscripts... concluded that the H5N1 virus has greater potential than previously believed to gain a dangerous capacity to be transmitted among mammals, including perhaps humans.’” BioPrepWatch.com, December 22nd.

The main research has been conducted at the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam: “Working with ferrets, the animal that is most like humans in responding to influenza, the researchers found that a mere five genetic mutations allowed the virus to spread through the air from one ferret to another while maintaining its lethality. A separate study at the University of Wisconsin, about which little is known publicly, produced a virus that is thought to be less virulent.” NY Times.

How much will actually be published? “The two journals reviewing the papers seem inclined to follow the advisory board’s recommendations that the research be published in a redacted form, provided there is some way for researchers who need the information to gain access to the full details. The Erasmus team believes that more than 100 laboratories and perhaps 1,000 scientists around the world need to know the precise mutations to look for. That would spread the information far too widely. It should suffice to have a few of the most sophisticated laboratories do the analyses.

Defenders of the research in Rotterdam claim it will provide two major benefits for protecting global health. First, they say the findings could prove helpful in monitoring virus samples from infected birds and animals. If genetic analysis found a virus somewhere that was only one or two mutations away from going airborne, public health officials would then know to bear down aggressively in that area to limit human contact with infected poultry and ramp up supplies of vaccines and medicines…

A second postulated benefit is that the engineered virus can be used to test whether existing antiviral drugs and vaccines would be effective against it and, if they come up short, design new drugs and vaccines that can neutralize it. But genetic changes that affect transmissibility do not necessarily change the properties that make a virus susceptible to drugs or to the antibodies produced by a vaccine, so that approach may not yield much useful new information.” NY Times. It seems as if life could easily imitate a recent motion picture, Contagion, and the risks of any replication or release of this particular virus – shown in the real world to be exceptionally infectious in lesser strains – are perhaps sufficient for us to let this one go, shut down the program and destroy every remnant of this virus as soon as possible. Western scientists have agreed to suspend these experiments for 60 days pending reconsideration of the risks… one country, however, remains willing to continue: China.

I’m Peter Dekom, and this is one “inspired by true events” situation that I believe we can do without.

1 comment:

JMV said...

USA has always loved to frighten itself ! This can thus explain and justify barbaric reactions and behaviors which in turn become a normal feature of life. Showing or telling that things can be worse is a good trick to retain power and justify violence.
However real worries can also exist, and mentioning them is necessary, if not a duty. If some mad scientists are menacing any living species (even more so human) they should be stopped.
But who ,in this materialistic world, is still capable to set a frontier. Where does one set the border line between what is acceptable and what is not ?
It seems one has lost the sense of morals or ethics which once told us what was right and what was wrong. The cult of immediate material benefit is not the only one to blame for this loss of balance, but also (and mainly) the inability to recreate new values and ethical attitudes which are compatible with the 21st century expectations and a 3rd millenary lifestyle.