ZKEA
World Outbreak Update
The Australian ExperimentIt was a classic purely scientific experiment. Australian researchers were interested in, of all things, mouse contraceptives. To this end they modified a mousepox virus to contain the gene for interleukin-4 (IL-4) as well as the mouse egg shell protein (ZP3). The egg shell protein was there to encourage a contraceptive response against the mouse's own eggs. The IL-4 gene was there to increase the immune response against ZP3 protein, so as to make the contraceptive response more effective. The mousepox itself was a relatively benign virus, of little threat to the health of the mice themselves.The results were, to put it mildly, unexpected. When the genetically engineered mousepox was put into mice the mice simply died. The supposedly benign mousepox virus was discovered to have become a killer. And not only a killer, but a super-killer: 100% of the mice died. The scientists thought they might learn something useful about mouse contraception, but instead they had learned how to create a universally fatal virus. And this killer virus had been created via a very simple genetic manipulation, accessible to every country with a few PhD microbiologists. Imagine their surprise. After much debate, the results were published 18 months after the experiment. And the results were easily replicated and verified in independent labs. The result was widespread terror within the defense and medical community. If this technique could be used on a mouse virus, why not a human one? Smallpox and mousepox are very closely related. Would smallpox+IL-4 create a superpox? This is very likely. As one scientist said, "if some idiot put IL-4 into smallpox, they'd increase the lethality quite dramatically ... I wouldn't want to be the one to do this experiment." He won't need to. Others have volunteered; no doubt this question is being answered right now in clandestine labs around the globe. The technology is easily accessible, the technique is published. All it takes now is intent and a modest lab. And, if this particular technique doesn't work, perhaps another one will do the trick ... This mousepox experiment is hardly unique. Other techniques are being pioneered and other biological products are being produced, which are at least as troubling. For example, a number of firms are working on modifying the common cold virus so that it can combat cancer. These modifications take a variety of forms. In some the virus is modified so that it can only attach to cells that have a deficient defense of some sort, of a a type seen only in cancer cells. One such defense is the p53 gene, which is preferentially inactive in certain cancerous cells. Another such defense, called the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor protein (pRB) pathway, is known to be defective in nearly all human cancers. Once a targetable difference is determined, the virus is engineered such that it can only attack cells with that particular defect or expression. Once in the cancer cell the cold virus is further modified to increase its lethality. For instance, in some implementations the cold virus is given genes that, when expressed in the target cancer cell, make it more susceptible to anti-cancer drugs. Another interesting recent medical approach involves chimeric viruses. These are basically combinations of multiple organisms, thus ideally presenting the strengths of both. One such chimera - a combination of the common cold and polio - has shown great promise in brain cancer (curing it, not causing it). In aggregate, these viral therapies appear to be a very promising avenue in anti-cancer research. Why is this a problem? Aren't new anti-cancer techiques a good thing? No doubt about it. However, the problem is not in these particular implementations, but the overall technology itself. For example, applying these same techniques, why couldn't the common cold virus be engineered to more effectively attack non cancerous cells? The common cold virus is exactly that - common. If it could be made generally lethal as well, then it would make for an absolutely devastating weapon. Why not a chimera of the common cold and HIV? One might argue that mankind would never develop such a virus, given it would be in no one's interest. Well, World War 1 was in no one's interest too, and yet it happened anyway. The historical record is not particularly comforting on this point. All these experiments and products clearly illustrate the paradox we face: basic scientific research, one of mankind's purest and most noble endeavors, increasingly reveals the seeds of our own destruction.
|
| Recommended Books |
|
The Complete Guide To Biological Weapons
by U.S. Department of Defense |
|
The Coming Plague
by Laurie Garret |
|
The Demon In The Freezer
by Richard Preston |
|
The Collapse Of Public Health
by Laurie Garret |
|
The Menace of Emerging Infections
by Madeline Drexler |
|
The Hot Zone
by Richard Preston |
|
BioHazard
by Ken Alibek |
|
Plague Wars
by Tom Mangold |
|
The Biology of Doom
by Ed Regis |
|
Living Terrors: Survive The Bioterrorist Catastrophe
by Michael Osterholm |
|
Scourge: The Once and Future Threat of Smallpox
by Jonathan Tucker |
|
Virus X: Tracking The New Killer Plagues
by Frank Ryan |
|
Virus Hunter
by C.J. Peters |
|
Ebola: Through The Eyes of The People
by William Close |
|
The Cobra Event
by Richard Preston |
|
Germs: America's Secret War
by Judith Miller |
|
Man & Microbes: Plagues Throughout History
by Arno Karlen |