
Was it ‘crazy’ to re-create a virus that killed 50 million people? - givan
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/06/12/good-idea-or-crazy-re-creating-a-bird-flu-virus-that-once-killed-50-million-people
======
JunkDNA
I went and pulled the original article. The characterization of recklessness
is in my opinion unfair here. It's not like these researchers were cooking
this up on their kitchen counters:

"All experiments with 1918-related viruses were performed in biosafety level 3
(BSL3) agriculture containment laboratories. In vitro experiments were
conducted in Class II biological safety cabinets, and transmission experiments
were conducted in HEPA-filtered ferret isolators (Imai et al., 2012). The
research program, procedures, occupational health plan, documentation,
security, and facilities are reviewed annually by the University of Wisconsin-
Madison Responsible Official and at regular intervals by the CDC and the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) as part of the University
of Wisconsin-Madison Select Agent Program. More detailed information on
biosecurity and biosafety is described in the Supplemental Experimental
Procedures."

Also, if you read the discussion, there's this point:

"We found that a 1918-like avian virus exhibited pathogenicity in mice and
ferrets higher than that of an authentic avian virus. Moreover, we
demonstrated that acquisition of only a few amino acid substitutions can
confer respiratory droplet transmission to 1918-like avian influenza viruses
in a ferret model, suggesting that the potential exists for a 1918- like
pandemic virus to emerge at any time from the avian virus gene pool."

The body of the paper goes through all the details of which specific amino
acid changes are needed. This is important information for understanding how
these proteins function. What is it about those few amino acid changes that
confers droplet transmission? Others can now study the individual proteins and
build off this work.

Reference: [http://www.cell.com/cell-host-
microbe/pdf/S1931-3128(14)0016...](http://www.cell.com/cell-host-
microbe/pdf/S1931-3128\(14\)00163-2.pdf)

~~~
phyllostachys
Ferrets are used in scientific study? I didn't know that. As a ferret owner:
:-(

~~~
JunkDNA
From my days in pharma, I remember they are used extensively for testing anti-
nausea medicines because they are some of the few animals that actually
experience the symptoms nausea (many mammals vomit, but nausea is actually
more rare).

~~~
niels_olson
Ferrets, as I recall, are also a good model airway for neonatal intubations.
Pretty sure the animals are sacrificed afterward.

------
opendais
This seems link bait-y to me: "That said they created a life-threatening virus
that is only 3 percent different from the 1918 Spanish flu"

I bet the flu itself changed that much in nature between 1918 and now all on
its own.

For reference 4% difference is between humans and apes.:

[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_...](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/0831_050831_chimp_genes.html)

I'm not saying creating a deadly virus is ethical. Personally, I think it is
under sufficiently tight controls...since these things exist in nature and if
we don't understand them, we risk a repeat of 1918.

~~~
JunkDNA
This page has a nice, succinct definition of how the various kinds of
mutations can contribute to influenza changes. In short, a percentage
difference isn't that informative. It matters greatly _what_ is actually
different:

[http://nieman.harvard.edu/Microsites/NiemanGuideToCoveringPa...](http://nieman.harvard.edu/Microsites/NiemanGuideToCoveringPandemicFlu/TheScience/HowFluVirusesChange.aspx)

~~~
opendais
Cool. Thanks for the link. :)

------
TrainedMonkey
You can be sure that some governments have significant amount of deadly
viruses at their disposal [0]. I've heard anecdotes that Russian facilities
storing black death amongst other bio weapons routinely lose power due to lack
of funding [1].

So stockpiles of stuff are readily available, thus the question transforms
from "Is it ethical to have this stuff?" into "Is it ethical for researchers
to have access to this stuff?". I think that, with appropriate security
measures being taken, it is imperative for researchers to access viruses that
pruned significant portion of human population. If you look at this from
evolutionary standpoint plagues killed everyone with immune system that was
not prepared to deal with that infection, thus shaping the course of evolution
of human species.

TL:DR: To understand where we are evolutionary we need to understand where we
came from. I think deadly viruses that wiped out significant portion of human
population are important part of that evolutionary path. Moreover, even if a
virus escapes, I do not think danger is significant, because infection already
pruned some part of human population with immune system not capable of
handling it.

[0] "[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8267370/We-
must...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8267370/We-must-keep-
smallpox-stocks-US-and-Russia-tells-World-Health-Organisation.html")

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vozrozhdeniya_island](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vozrozhdeniya_island)

~~~
didgeoridoo
I think the problem with Spanish flu is the fact that it selectively blows
away populations with strong, healthy immune systems — i.e. the sorts of
people who tend NOT to be "pruned" over the decades by infection.

~~~
erkkie
Yes, it's purported to be a positive feedback loop in the immune system known
as Cytokine storm
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm#Role_in_pandemic...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytokine_storm#Role_in_pandemic_deaths)).

------
RBerenguel
"...is only 3 percent different from the 1918 Spanish flu, which likely killed
more people than the Black Death."

Well, Spanish flu killed, tops, 5% of world population, whereas Black Death is
likely to have killed at least 20% of the world population. I think this is
more significant than 100 million vs ~90 million.

~~~
amckenna
I think the comparison was to draw attention to just how deadly the Spanish
Flu was. In history class we were taught about the Black Death as this huge
and earth shattering pandemic, yet we hear nothing about the Spanish Flu. A
lot of people don't realize just how deadly it was.

------
smoyer
Given what he's done I certainly hope he's not crazy. A better question is
whether creating deadly viruses is ethical.

EDIT: I should also note that I'm not judging whether what he's done is
ethical (it's discussed at great length in the article) but if I had to take
sides, I'm leaning towards being in favor of his work ... most research will
have some degree of risk and in this case, I'm certain we'd rather not see
another flu pandemic in the wild.

~~~
hga
That's a very hard to answer question.

The risk is obvious, and e.g. a pandemic strain which followed the Ford swine
flu mess is thought to have originated from a Soviet bioweapons lab.

But there's great risk in our not understanding just what the _bleep_ made the
1918 flu pandemic so lethal for such unusual age groups.

Either could result in 10s of millions needlessly dying.

~~~
MagicWishMonkey
And another pandemic will happen sooner or later, regardless. It would be nice
if we had the foresight to plan ahead and maybe figure out a way to minimize
loss of life before it's too late.

------
jsz0
It would be crazy not to. We understand the potential for influenza to mutate
rapidly and since there's no reason to believe the Spanish Flu was anything
other than the result of this natural storm of mutations so we can conclude
sooner or later influenza will hit the mutation jackpot again. We have to do
everything possible to prepare for this in advance because once it hits there
is precious little time left to save people. By most accounts the vast
majority of deaths from the Spanish Flu occurred over a shockingly short
period of about 12 weeks. Maybe modern public health standards can slow the
next mutation down but I think we have to assume the worst is possible. If we
don't do this research now there simply won't be time for any miracles to
happen in 12 weeks.

------
ianstallings
No crazier than people working on nuclear power. The field itself should be
studied. But we should probably keep a close eye on it because of the possible
danger to society. AFAIK the controls in place to contain deadly disease is
pretty advanced and they take a lot of precautions.

------
alexeisadeski3
I thought that the "Spanish Flu" evolved from horses, not birds.

------
mantrax5
There are 7 billion of us, so we can take a hit of 50 million. Gimme a shot.

------
gremlinsinc
I've got a brilliant business idea.... Devise a highly deadly, highly
contagious virus in a lab and the antivirus, unleash said virus... Let it run
a month or so, then oh we just found the cure but it's gonna be expensive....

------
rwallace
There is no security precaution adequate for something like this.

Yes, of course naturally occurring viruses are a major ongoing threat and we
need to keep studying that threat to find better ways to counter it. But there
are plenty of things we can do in that regard that don't involve _actually
creating lethal viruses_.

I think we have far too many regulations on medical research. I think the
current tangle of regulations costs many lives and should be dialed way down.
But a free society depends on people voluntarily refraining from behaving like
assholes. If we want a free society, we have to avoid behaving as though
everything legal must be okay.

