From NewScientist (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994318):

A scientist funded by the US government has deliberately created an extremely deadly form of mousepox, a relative of the smallpox virus, through genetic engineering.

The new virus kills all mice even if they have been given antiviral drugs as well as a vaccine that would normally protect them.

The work has not stopped there. The cowpox virus, which infects a range of animals including humans, has been genetically altered in a similar way.
the research brings closer the prospect of pox viruses that cause only mild infections in humans being turned into diseases lethal even to people who have been vaccinated.

And vaccines are currently our main defence against smallpox and its relatives, such as the monkeypox that reached the US this year. Some researchers think the latest research is risky and unnecessary.

"I have great concern about doing this in a pox virus that can cross species," said Ian Ramshaw of the Australian National University in Canberra on being told of Buller's work.
While viruses containing mouse IL-4 should not be lethal to humans, recombinant viruses can have unexpected effects, he says. "You'd hope the combination remains mouse-specific."

And just to show how little the bioweapons treaty is worth to these idiots, there was this:
Despite the concerns, work on lethal new pox viruses seems likely to continue in the US. When members of the audience in Geneva questioned the need for such experiments, an American voice in the back boomed out: "Nine-eleven". There were murmurs of agreement.

So when Chilean scientists develop a new strain of anthrax, will shouting "nine-eleven" be a valid defence? How about if Iranian scientists develop nuclear weapons - will "WMD" be a valid defence?
Pah.

Biological weapons have no defensive applications whatsover.
The "nine-eleven" justification is beyond absurd.
It would be like if a friend of mine was killed so I started stealing radioactive waste from a power plant and fiddling around with it in my garage and responded "friend killed" when the police came.

How about if Iranian scientists develop nuclear weapons - will "WMD" be a valid defence?
interesting. you would want the Iranians, who are enemy with the US, to have WMDs just so it would be 'fair' ?

if you're an american, these words would constitute treason...at least idiologically.

it's like the Rosenbergs who sold USSR the nuke secrets in the '50s "just so it would be fair"

so I started stealing radioactive waste from a power plant and fiddling around with it in my garage
if you stole radioactive waste, you'd be charged with theft and endangerment of your neighbourhood. you'd also most likely get cancer.

if your friend was killed you'd buy a gun which is perfectly legal in the US...and makes sense too.

Biological weapons have no defensive applications whatsover.


biological weapons can kill your enemy. that's a defensive application.

Originally posted by otheadp

if you stole radioactive waste, you'd be charged with theft and endangerment of your neighbourhood. you'd also most likely get cancer.

if your friend was killed you'd buy a gun which is perfectly legal in the US...and makes sense too.
This was more or less my point. The fact that something bad was done to you in no way is an excuse for engaging in behavior that does not have the potential to help you or protect you in any way and puts the whole community(and in this case the world) in danger.



Originally posted by otheadp
biological weapons can kill your enemy. that's a defensive application. no. its not. biological weapons can do nothing to stop attacks from enemies, they can only be used offensively against enemies on their own soil. You wouldn't want to spray GM small-pox at terrorists or invading forces in the US. Although using it anywhere puts it in the hands of terrorists as it would be quite easy to culture a sample from a dieing comrade. The fact of its existance has more potential to help terrorists who might get ahold of it and who have no concern for the consequences of using it, then to help the US in any way.

biological weapons can kill your enemy. that's a defensive application.

It comes back to haunt you though... In the form of death!

It's all about MAD. If we have em', and they have em', then neither of us will use em'.

*MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction

The only justification of this research would be development of defenses against the superviruii, which they didn't mention.

Originally posted by Gifted
The only justification of this research would be development of defenses against the superviruii, which they didn't mention. The team at St. Louis University, led by Mark Buller, created the superbug to figure out how to defeat it, a key goal of the government's anti-terrorism plan.

Researchers designed a two-drug cocktail that promises to defeat their exceptionally deadly virus. They hope to publish their work soon in a peer review journal.

``The whole focus was to contribute to the biodefense agenda of the country,'' Buller said.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/health/AP-Engineered-Mousepox.html?hp

"MAD" work well with USSR and USA in nuclear arms, but terrorist with such weapons would not fear there own death and counterattack does not bother them.

biological weapons can kill your enemy. that's a defensive application.

no that’s what they term nicely as “preemptive strike”. So lets see how we would do that with bioweapons against Muslim fundamentalist: we would attack releasing such weapons on countries like Syria and Iran, killing millions of people many of them innocent but also killing off the terrorist and the people then rely on. I can leave the moral and political problems to this preemptive strike for you to imagine.

By 'for defensive purposes' they mean that they are creating engineered viruses so that they can figure out how to defend against them. It has nothing to do with MAD, pre-emptive strikes, or any of the other nonsense that people hear are ranting about. It's hard to created vaccines for bioweapons if you don't have any bioweapons to experiment on.

The team that created the virus has already designed a monoclonal antibody-based treatment that's effective at fighting the virus, which they plan to publish in a medical journal soon. If they were trying to make a super-weapon for the U.S. military do you really think that they would be sharing the vaccine with everyone?

By 'for defensive purposes' they mean that they are creating engineered viruses so that they can figure out how to defend against them. It has nothing to do with MAD, pre-emptive strikes, or any of the other nonsense that people hear are ranting about. It's hard to created vaccines for bioweapons if you don't have any bioweapons to experiment on.

I disagree with that: you can't learn much about how the enemies bioweapons work by making ones of your own. For example if the enemy makes some kind of chimera between rabes and rhinovirus what the hell is this research going to have tought us? It would not have brought us any closer to a vaccine or anti-viral to their weapon.

the defensive capabilities of biological weapons is the deterrance it provides.

it will only deter countries though, not terrorists. they do not fear death. the only thing they fear is that "their people" get hurt.

Originally posted by otheadp
the defensive capabilities of biological weapons is the deterrance it provides.

In which case we could still afford to get rid of a lot, and certainly don't need to be engineering new ones. What we have is more than adequate.

They are not two in the same oth:

Defensive is something that stops a attack that is already happening.

Deterrence is so that attack never starts, it's not very difficult to understand.

Bio weapons are deterrence, but a word of warning; terrorists are going to have a field day in Kazakhstan with all those Soviet super pathogens. Do we want to have nation develop Bio weapons and not being able to protect them?

Originally posted by Neuromancer
I disagree with that: you can't learn much about how the enemies bioweapons work by making ones of your own. For example if the enemy makes some kind of chimera between rabes and rhinovirus what the hell is this research going to have tought us? It would not have brought us any closer to a vaccine or anti-viral to their weapon. This particular technique for increasing the lethality of viruses was first stumbled upon by an Australian research group. Of course we can't know every possible way that an enemy might enhance the lethality of a bioweapon, but we do know about this particular one, and since the enhancement technique is public knowledge it's only reasonable to develop precautions against it.

So the person with the biggest stick prevails.

Gee world I'm so proud of you advanced civilisations.
Dee cee

Originally posted by EI_Sparks
And just to show how little the bioweapons treaty is worth to these idiots, there was this:I like how this has nothing to do with bioweapons, yet you seem to believe that it does.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Originally posted by Stokes Pennwalt
I like how this has nothing to do with bioweapons, yet you seem to believe that it does.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. No kidding. I just love the way sciforumers jump to conclusions. Some biologists at a public university are engineering viruses with the IL-4 gene in order to develop vaccines against them = the United States is making bioweapons.

Really, folks, think about it. Wouldn't the fact that they're publishing information on how to protect people from the virus be a pretty strong indication that they aren't trying to make the new doomsday weapon?

The only biological weapons America is currently producing are citizens. Yes, very dangerous when provoked. Grrr. Argh.

Originally posted by otheadp
the defensive capabilities of biological weapons is the deterrance it provides.
So :
1) The nuclear arsenal of the US is no longer a sufficent deterrant, and
2) A weapon that by it's very nature cannot be reliably aimed at only one group of people is the best replacement?

And how did you come to these conclusions othedap?

Originally posted by Stokes Pennwalt
I like how this has nothing to do with bioweapons, yet you seem to believe that it does.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Yes... and that grenade developed less than three months ago whose patent application specifically stated it was for the "dispersal of chemical and biological agents" wasn't a bioweapon either.

Fact is, this proves that US researchers are focusing on producing new virii. And we're only seeing the "harmless to humans" varieties in publicly published research. We've already seen full biological labs set up by the DoD, "to see if we could do it" in public - and there are strong indicators (like the anthrax scare in the US some months ago) that indicate that other, decidedly not public labs, are carrying out research that the US is banned from carrying out under the terms of the biological weapons treaty it's a signatory to.

i´ve heard that the usOFa don´t allow inspections in their own country ..... could somebody confirm this ?

Originally posted by EI_Sparks
Yes... and that grenade developed less than three months ago whose patent application specifically stated it was for the "dispersal of chemical and biological agents" wasn't a bioweapon either.

Fact is, this proves that US researchers are focusing on producing new virii. And we're only seeing the "harmless to humans" varieties in publicly published research. We've already seen full biological labs set up by the DoD, "to see if we could do it" in public - and there are strong indicators (like the anthrax scare in the US some months ago) that indicate that other, decidedly not public labs, are carrying out research that the US is banned from carrying out under the terms of the biological weapons treaty it's a signatory to. 1. A group of Australian researchers figured out and publicized a way to make viruses much deadlier.

2. Since the Australian technique is now public knowledge, a group of US researchers makes some of the deadly new viruses in an effort to figure out how to protect people from them.

This has nothings to do with biological weapons, except to the extent that the scientists are St. Louis University are working to protect people from biological weapons. Your claim that this has anything to do with the military making new bioweapons is obviously absurd because of the fact that the researchers are publishing information on how to protect people from it.

By the way, I like how your arguments as to why the US must be making new bioweapons are moving further and further away from the article that you originally misinterpreted and freaked out about.

Originally posted by Nasor
By the way, I like how your arguments as to why the US must be making new bioweapons are moving further and further away from the article that you originally misinterpreted and freaked out about. Really. Next thing you know, it's going to be OMG CDC FLU VACCINES BEING CRAETD WAHGT ABOUT TEH CHILDREN@!1

I certainly hope we are developing new super virii, and with a fervor. Do you know why? Because each time we come up with one, we also have a vaccine and treatment for it - and other virii that resemble it. When the next outbreak of a disease occurs, we're better prepared. It's a way of science preempting nature.

The benefits of this are not limited to the military. The CDC and the US Army's biological defense command work closely, sharing research, and for good reason. I wonder how many lives have been saved around the world from the jaws of disease thanks to research fostered by the US DoD.

For this hogwash to be a biological weapon, you'd need liters of emulsion loaded onboard a Mark 6 aerosol bomb for dispersal over a target. Until then it's completely benign. Pretending otherwise is uninformed kneejerk alarmism at its finest.

I agree entirely...we are just testing them for peaceful purposes....same reason Saddam had biological weapons...same reason we have nuclear weapons....same reason we are making and testing more...same reason Saddam wanted nuclear weapons...no one ever uses these weapons...just keeping people productively employed in peaceful pursuits...

We are such saints...we wouldn't use our weapons on anyone....that is the reason we spend more money on our military than the rest of the world combined...at least this bunch running the country currently are saints...

Originally posted by Jagger
I agree entirely...we are just testing them for peaceful purposes....same reason Saddam had biological weapons...same reason we have nuclear weapons....same reason we are making and testing more...same reason Saddam wanted nuclear weapons...no one ever uses these weapons...just keeping people productively employed in peaceful pursuits...

We are such saints...we wouldn't use our weapons on anyone....that is the reason we spend more money on our military than the rest of the world combined...at least this bunch running the country currently are saints... I think it's been pretty well demonstrated that the research in question has nothing to do with the US military making bioweapons. Do you have any kind of reasoned response here, or is sarcasm the only thing you can come up with? Surely you realize that your post doesn't constitute a rational argument.

Surely you realize that your post doesn't constitute a rational argument

you can´t see his point ???
well ....... you must be blind or fucking ignorant :D

This particular technique for increasing the lethality of viruses was first stumbled upon by an Australian research group. Of course we can't know every possible way that an enemy might enhance the lethality of a bioweapon, but we do know about this particular one, and since the enhancement technique is public knowledge it's only reasonable to develop precautions against it.

You mind telling me what kind of precautions could we develop? A vaccine would be useless against enemy design bioweapon and antiviral aren’t made easy and can also be design around.

Originally posted by Neuromancer
You mind telling me what kind of precautions could we develop? A vaccine would be useless against enemy design bioweapon and antiviral aren’t made easy and can also be design around. The viruses are made more deadly by causing them to manufacture IL-4, a protein that disrupts the immune system's response to the virus. The researchers have developed a combination of drugs that neutralizes IL-4, making the virus much less lethal. Figuring out how to fight viruses with the IL-4 gene is the entire point of this research.

The vaccine would be very useful. Say we used our designer bioweapons on China or Iran. We wouldn't be able to invade those countries because our troops would also be infected by those bioweapons-unless we had a vaccine.

Actually in ways, bioweapons potentially are much worse than nuclear weapons. You can't contain the spread of contaminated individuals if the infection is designed to spread. Remember the smallpox scares during the runup to the Iraqi invasion?

Now think some designer bioweapon with only one side with the vaccine or cure. Bioweapons are a neocon wetdream. So we will spend ourselves into bankruptcy, if necessary, to have the biggest baddest bioweapons in the world.

Of course, they can be doomsday weapons as well. What if they design something which doesn't have a cure, without a treatment without a vaccine...a deadly doomsday vaccine?

We are the leaders of the free world...we must set the example and the direction of mankind...right?

Jagger don't be so cynical. I'm sure NK Iran and all those other places will be given full and open access to the vaccine.
Won't they?
Dee Cee

Originally posted by Jagger
The vaccine would be very useful. Say we used our designer bioweapons on China or Iran. We wouldn't be able to invade those countries because our troops would also be infected by those bioweapons-unless we had a vaccine.Good lord, have you even been reading this thread? I've said it many times before, but I'll repeat myself yet again for your benefit. The researchers are publishing information on how to make the vaccine. Your absurd little scenario makes no sense because the Chinese (or whoever) will have the same ability to produce the vaccine as we do, since the researchers are publishing everything.

Originally posted by DeeCee
Jagger don't be so cynical. I'm sure NK Iran and all those other places will be given full and open access to the vaccine.
Won't they?
Dee Cee Yes, assuming that they subscribe to American medical journals.

Originally posted by Jagger
I agree entirely...we are just testing them for peaceful purposes....same reason Saddam had biological weapons...same reason we have nuclear weapons....same reason we are making and testing more...same reason Saddam wanted nuclear weapons...no one ever uses these weapons...just keeping people productively employed in peaceful pursuits...

We are such saints...we wouldn't use our weapons on anyone....that is the reason we spend more money on our military than the rest of the world combined...at least this bunch running the country currently are saints...
I'm sorry, my adding machine ran out of ink as I was tallying up the targets of your campus rhetoric.

Good lord, have you even been reading this thread? I've said it many times before, but I'll repeat myself yet again for your benefit. The researchers are publishing information on how to make the vaccine. Your absurd little scenario makes no sense because the Chinese (or whoever) will have the same ability to produce the vaccine as we do, since the researchers are publishing everything.

Of course we are... The media is reporting everything the defense establishment is up to... The US certainly wouldn't label any military programs top secret and not tell a word to anyone about it, would they? Anyone remember the Stealth bomber or the Manhattan project?

There use to be a designation of atomal top secret. You needed this designation to have access to certain information related to atomic weapons beyond the normal top secret classification. There are various layers of secret classification requiring higher and higher designations to allow access. My guess is today the government probably has a biotech top secret designation as well.

Originally posted by Jagger
Of course we are... The media is reporting everything the defense establishment is up to... The US certainly wouldn't label any military programs top secret and not tell a word to anyone about it, would they? Anyone remember the Stealth bomber or the Manhattan project?Of course it's possible (in the sense that anything is possible) that the government has some sort of secret bioweapons research program, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the St. Louis team or their IL-4 work.

Originally posted by Jagger
There use to be a designation of atomal top secret. You needed this designation to have access to certain information related to atomic weapons beyond the normal top secret classification. There are various layers of secret classification requiring higher and higher designations to allow access. My guess is today the government probably has a biotech top secret designation as well. Actually it's called Restricted Data, and that applies to anything related to nuclear weapons - including radiation monitoring equipment, even. RD can be Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret. It's generally classified Secret when it pertains to weapon status and Confidential when it pertains to maintenance and such. The only RD that's classified TS is weapon design and strategic deployments, like SSBN patrol lanes.

Top Secret is the highest classification for the United States. There is plain old TS, then there are endorsements - like the Restricted Data, for one. SPECAT, SCI, and YANKEE are three other main ones. Each pertains to a specific type of data just like RD does.

Originally posted by Nasor
The viruses are made more deadly by causing them to manufacture IL-4, a protein that disrupts the immune system's response to the virus. The researchers have developed a combination of drugs that neutralizes IL-4, making the virus much less lethal. Figuring out how to fight viruses with the IL-4 gene is the entire point of this research.

fair enough.

Yes, assuming that they subscribe to American medical journals.
Could the equipment required to manufacture the vaccine be considered 'duel use' or can the biotech companies sell it to anybody?

Just askin'
Dee Cee

Originally posted by DeeCee
Could the equipment required to manufacture the vaccine be considered 'duel use' or can the biotech companies sell it to anybody?I really have no idea.

THey used already public knowledge to improve a disease that kills MICE. Everyone must love rodents even more than I do.
Oh... and unlike nukes, biological weapons are the gift that keep giving and giving and giving.