Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Breeding 50% lethal flu no one is immune to in cut-rate labs not designed for handling biowar viruses... what could go wrong? (that a little censorship can't fix?)

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 20, 2011, 9:03 p.m. EST by mserfas (652) from Ashland, PA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement



I can't believe this. Apparently two groups of researchers have actually managed to help the avian flu evolve to spread easily among mammals - presumably including humans. And still they're not working with it in the highest-security laboratories used for smallpox and the like, but in cut-rate "enhanced BSL-3" facilities. Now they have these results and an advisory board is running around asking journals not to publish them.

  • The first problem I have with this is that when you breed super-lethal viruses and keep the information learned a secret, that's not bio-defense - that's bio-warfare. What would we think if China did something like this? Now that we're setting this precedent, and China being a proud and scientifically powerful nation, I don't doubt we'll find out.

  • The even bigger problem with this is that viruses get loose from facilities like this. SARS under study got loose from the Institute of Virology in Beijing in September 2003 ... twice, in two separate incidents. ( http://lists.envirolink.org/pipermail/ar-news/Week-of-Mon-20040426/024288.html ) It got loose from the National University of Singapore in April 2004. And it escaped the lab in Taiwan. ( http://www.annals.edu.sg/pdf/35VolNo5200606/V35N5p354.pdf ) Now the SARS outbreak was mostly in Asia, so we didn't really have that much of a chance to see if the U.S. labs are safer. What do you think?

  • The other problem - if there's time for it to matter - is that the information about this strain has already been pretty widely disseminated (see the Nature article above), and now the government has called attention to it by trying to censor it. We all know how the Streisand Effect works. I would expect some high level al Qaida official right now to be giving one of his underlings about three months to get somebody hired, maybe as a grad student, maybe an undergrad assistant, somewhere on the fringes of the research, and come back with the goods.

The sorry truth is that right now, avian flu has jumped to human to human transmissibility. Right now, we need to be gearing up to fight it with mass immunization as if we already had the reports that it has escaped and is spreading through the population. If the government talks itself into pretending that keeping data semi-secret among large groups of people is a defense - just like it did before the diplomatic cables leak - we can assume that many millions of people are going to die.

And in the future, we should not fund research if we're not willing to see the results posted for all to see. Choosing not to invent this stuff in the first place is the one choice we really have that might keep it secret for a time.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by gnomunny (5805) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Ah, Plan B! If World War III can be successfully averted, an 'accidental' release or outright theft of a batch of mutated H1N1 will keep the NWO's depopulation agenda pretty much right on schedule.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2770) 1 year ago

How about Plan C -- in spite of the best effort and cooperation of worldwide health authorities and governments, Mother Nature mutated flu strains to produce a moderately deadly and moderate-to-highly-contagious-in-humans strain that broke out into a pandemic? Not a pretty scenario even if Mother Nature were to win again.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13421) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

certainly no worse than conservative repelicans, where, in this information age, we may inoculate against the flu but against conservative lies there seems neither end nor prophylaxis . . .

the fukers are far worse than even venereal disease

[-] 1 points by freakzilla3 (-75) 1 year ago

But are they worse than Hen Flu? Cause that stuff is like, really bad.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2770) 1 year ago

From the article, 17 people killed out of 83 cases of infection gives a death rate of 20%, vastly higher than the H1N1 pandemic that struck in 2009-2010.

If H7N9 had surmounted the person-to-person transmission barrier effectively and disease control measures were not exerted well, the consequences could be very dire indeed.

Scientists apparently have not nailed down where H7N9's predominant source of origin or its predominant mode of transmission yet so we should 'stay tuned' and start getting prepared.

Fast-and-nearly-certain-kill infections (such as Ebola) fizzle out quickly for lack of 'fuel'. Highly contagious and yet without high kill rate viral infections (such as the common cold) may not kill many people. The middling varieties of viruses and infectious agents are often the worst.

[-] 1 points by freakzilla3 (-75) 1 year ago

If it's Mother Hen flu, game over.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2770) 1 year ago

"China’s agricultural authorities were insisting the H7N9 virus was still confined to live poultry markets. As proof of this, the news agency said that 47,801 samples had been collected from 1,000 poultry markets, habitats and farms from across China.

From these samples, 39 tested positive for H7N9, the agricultural authorities said. But this number of birds that tested positive from such a large sample was actually quite low, Mr. Hartl said. "

H7N9 does not seem like a hen flu -- 0.08% of the samples from live poultry markets, habitats and farms tested positive. If it were a hen flu, the rate of infection would likely be much higher than that. We can take some comfort if we trust China’s agricultural authorities. We may be at the early onset of H7N9 infections so the numbers are low but they have increased in the last few weeks.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2770) 1 year ago

This may well be yet another example of blatant lies: Texas Fertilizer Plant Explosion

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13421) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

If they falsified safety reports, and circumvented safety procedures, then yes.

In that case, someone will be able to say to the owners and operators of the facility:

  • you have only your self to blame
[-] 2 points by grapes (2770) 1 year ago

The CNN article cited a complaint in 2006 regarding leaked ammonia and the worst case (in the emergency planning report to the EPA) was supposedly a 10-minute release of ammonia gas and no one would be injured or killed.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13421) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I've seen that - it is early yet. We've seen a bit of confusion surrounding these other recent events, some of which might even be . . . . useful . . . . so I would wait a bit before concluding absolutely that the company did falsify any reports,

  • certainly if they did, and someone very . . . adroit . . . took notice, it becomes a safe place to engage in mayhem.

It may be that a series of falsified reports created the possibility of a chain of events with a single inevitable conclusion.

Once such a possibility exists, all that is required is the identification of the key domino - and then a small push,

  • or even a whisper of breath
[-] 1 points by grapes (2770) 1 year ago

Your are right. We must reserve judgment until the ensuing investigations have been completed. I was just formulating hypotheses and circumstantial evidence. The Truth trumps everything else as always.