MICROBIOLOGY 101 INTERNET TEXT

CHAPTER XV, ADDENDUM: BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS; MALIGNANT BIOLOGY


UPDATED: 03/01/00


TABLE OF CONTENTS


RECENT NEWS ON BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

10/3/98, London Sunday Times:
This comes under the heading of "BIG SURPRISE"
"Israeli warplanes equipped to carry chemical, biological weapons. Israeli F-16 fighters have been equipped to carry chemical and biological weapons manufactured at a secret biological institute in a Tel Aviv suburb.." (wonder what that does for the nearby property values?). "...Israeli air force crews are now trained to fit active chemical or biological weapons to F-16s within minutes of receiving a command to attack."

 

10/13/98, PBS Frontline Special Report: PLAGUE WARS
Visit this site for more information that will frighten the bejebbers out of you

MOTIVATION

I was motivated to write on this subject for the following reasons:

  1. As an Instructor of non-science majors taking Micro 101/102 I feel that it is important to inform students (as citizens) of both the beneficial and harmful uses of biological knowledge.
  2. As a microbiologist I am mindful of the following facts:
    1. That the US, Russia, and many other nations, have engaged, at one time or another, in biological weapons research and that some have stockpiled stores of biological weapons materials. The current fate of these stores is not clear20, 21.
    2. Most living organisms engage in biological warfare against their enemies or competitors (e.g. antibiotics); the toxins of diphtheria and botulism being two examples of such warfare against humans. One might even say biological warfare is "in our genes".
    3. As a Molecular Biologist I am also aware of the potential of this science for creating even more effective and horrific biological weapons.
  1. The recent war with Iraq and the current threat of further US military involvement with Iraq has reportedly raised the prospect of the use of biological weapons both on the battlefield and in terrorists attacks on civilian populations anywhere in the world.
  2. Several recent movies (e.g. Outbreak), books (e.g. The Cobra Event, The Coming Plague, The Hot Zone, Rainbow Six) and news reports (Time Magazine 11/24/97; 12/1/1997) have attracted public attention to the possibility biological weapons being used.
  3. As I am always on the lookout for ways of involving nonscience majors in the world of biology, I felt the relevancy of this issue offered a golden opportunity to stimulate student interest. Students have the chance to earn extra credit by reading recommended books relating to biology and microbiology (for a list see the "Syllabus page" at: http://www.wsu.edu/~hurlbert/pages/101hmpg.html). Currently the most popular books have been "The Hot Zone" & "The Cobra Event", and, without exception, the students who have read either of these books have waxed enthusiastic about. The most common response is one that warms the cockles of every teacher's heart: "I never realized that! Wow, that really makes you think!".

Countries thought likely to be making biological weapons include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, North Korea, Taiwan, Israel, Egypt, Vietnam, Laos, Cuba, Bulgaria, India, South Korea, South Africa, China and Russia. (Russian leaders insist that they have terminated their biological program, but U.S. officials doubt that claim.)20

PREFACE

No tool or piece of knowledge has an innate moral context. Just as a knife, in the hand of a skilled surgeon, may save lives (good) that same knife, in the hands of a murderer, can take life (evil), so can knowledge be used to achieve contrary ends.

Since biological knowledge just is, it remains the responsibility of humans and their societies to determine how information is used. Further, since the perception of good and evil lies in the eye of each individual, moral issues are forever in flux; i.e., consider our past and present views on slavery, women voting and the internment of the Japanese Americans during W.W. II.

Anyone who writes about biological weapons must consider how the information they publish might be used. As an educator, I am strongly bias towards information dispersal. There may truly be circumstances where "ignorance is bliss", but, in my experience, they are rare. Further, the information presented here is freely accessible on the Internet, in libraries and in the press for anyone willing to exert a modest effort.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF HUMANS AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE

It is certain that ancient man used biological (germ) warfare long before recorded history. The use of biological toxins extracted from plants and animals on arrow heads or poison darts to kill game and human enemies certainly predates recorded history. This technology is still used by some South American Indians and Africans to slay game and to down a human enemy or two. It was standard operating procedure to dip arrows in fecal material or decaying meat before attacking an enemy as the role of infection in debilitating an opponent was well understood. Fecal matter usually harbors the gas gangrene bacterium, Clostridium perfringens, and often the tetanus bacillus, Clostridium tetani. The poisoning of an enemies’ water supply by dumping dead bodies or fecal material into wells and other confined water sources is an ancient war strategy; still in use today. In these cases a variety of fecal pathogens could be counted on to take a large toll of an adversary using that water supply.

Within recorded history, cases of humans using biological warfare against their fellow humans are well documented. During the wars of the middle ages it was common to catapult the bodies of victims of smallpox or bubonic plague (In the 14th century an army besieging Kaffa, a seaport on the Black Sea in the Crimea in Russia, catapulted plague-infected cadavers over the city walls) into besieged towns since it was well known that these two diseases were highly contagious. There are numerous reports of Europeans knowingly trading the American Indians blankets on which men had died of smallpox or measles, two viral diseases that decimated these peoples. The Japanese in the Second World War have admitted to using germ warfare on the Chinese and to experimenting on POWs, but its effectiveness has been impossible to discern. Forms of "indirect biological warfare" have been employed throughout history. In the Middle Ages sieges depended upon starvation and disease to force the inhabitants to surrender. The Nazis forced the Jews in the concentration camps to live under conditions that they knew would lead to the outbreak and spread of virulent diseases among a cold, starving and stressed population. Both sides in the first and second World Wars recognized that the indiscriminate bombing of large civilian populations would have the consequence of inducing disease outbreaks among the weakened and injured survivors. Embargoes that prevent food and medicine from reaching civilian populations can also could be considered to fit in this category. The Allies, at the end of W.W. II, were concerned that diseases within the civilian population of Europe could spread to their troops as they occupied the conquered regions, so one of the first actions taken in the liberated territories was to stop epidemics and establish sanitary conditions.

At the time the U.S. biological weapons program was terminated by President Nixon in 1969 two lethal biological agents, Bacillus anthrax and Francisella tularensis (tularemia), and three incapacitating biological agents, Brucella suis (brucellosis), Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) and Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEE) had been standardized and weaponized. In addition they had also weaponized one lethal toxin, botox, and an incapacitating toxin, staphylococcal enterotoxin B. The U.S. had also stockpiled several other biological agents and toxins. (27)


DEFINITION OF A BIOLOGICAL WEAPON

Biological weapons are defined as:

The difference between the second & third definitions and that of a classical chemical weapon is the manner of their production. A "biological chemical weapon" is produced by cultivating an organism and extracting from it or its spent medium the toxic material. A strict "chemical weapon" is one that is produced in a chemical plant and doesn’t involve growing a living organism. An example of the former would be botulism toxin (botox) and of the latter, the nerve gas sarin. However, with improving technology these definitions will blur as we learn to chemically and genetically manipulate biological toxins so as to improve their efficacy and yield. For example, botox is unstable, but if it could be chemically modified or genetically manipulated, such as mutating its gene or fusing it to another molecule, so as to stabilize it, while maintaining its lethality, it would be a much more effective weapon.


ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES TO THE USE OF BIOWEAPONS (BW) IN WAR:

ADVANTAGES

  1. A single microbial bioweapon can, because it reproduces in the host, theoretically produce the desired detrimental outcome in a target host. That is, a single smallpox virus or plague bacillus, if deposited in the right place in the host, can grow and produce a disease. In practice it usually takes more than a single organism to establish an infection.
  2. Biological toxins are among the most toxic agents known. For example, the quantity of botox in the dot of an ‘i’ is,  when delivered properly, enough to kill ~10 people.
  3. Most bioweapons grade microbes are relatively easy and inexpensive to grow. Their cultivation doesn’t require large factories and can utilize common commercial equipment, such as that used in making cheese. While viral agents are more difficult to cultivate than bacterial agents, both can be cultivated by individuals with limited scientific training. Recent advances in the formulations of tissue culture media make the cultivation of viruses even easier. Just as certain illegal drugs are manufactured in mobile-van labs or marijuana plants are grown in buried semi-trailers, so it is possible to grow most bioweapons under similar, hidden and/or mobile, conditions. In fact those seeking bioweapons labs (e.g. the UN inspectors in Iraq) face the same problems as drug agents in the US searching for drug operations.
  4. Large quantities of biological weapons can, in most cases, be produced in a short period (a few days to a few weeks) at small facilities scattered over a large area.

DISADVANTAGES

  1. Difficulty of protecting the workers at all stages of production, transportation, loading of delivery systems and final delivery: Untrained and inexperienced personnel, ignorant of routine precautions necessary to prevent contamination with the agents, are accident prone. Immunization of these personnel will not be effective in all cases.
  2. Difficulty in maintaining quality control and sufficient containment during growth and harvesting of agents: Primitive conditions increase chances for the accidental release of the bioweapons into the surrounding environment (as happened in Russia with anthrax). Consider how much radiation has escaped from Hanford atomic weapons production plant during its history. Both examples represented state-of-the-art production facilities.
  3. Effective delivery problems: Most biological materials, including spores, are destroyed by exposure to UV light and drying. Agents released in the air may disperse in unexpected ways due to the vulgarities of wind patterns. Dispersal patterns may be ineffectual. Rain may wash the agents out of the air before they reach their target.
  4. Poor storage survival: Many biological weapons must be stored under special conditions to maintain efficacy. Further, they are often difficult to maintain in a weapons-delivery state (e.g. loaded and ready to be fired in a rocket). This means that the warheads must be taken from storage and attached to the rocket engine, during which time they are exposed to attack.
  5. Difficult to control once released: One’s own troops may be infected under the chaos of a war. In theory it may be possible to protect your own population against a BW you plan to use by vaccination or the prophylactic administration of antibiotics, but the chance that your enemy will discover what you’re doing is high.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PERFECT BIOLOGICAL WEAPON

The perfect biological organism or biologically derived bioactive substance (BDBS) for use as a weapon should have the following characteristics:

  1. Highly infectious; requiring only a few organisms to cause the desired effect (e.g. smallpox) or highly effective; requiring a small quantity of material to cause the desired effect (e.g. botox).
  2. Efficiently dispersible, usually in the air; contagious or effective on contact.
  3. Readily grown and produced in large quantities.
  4. Stable in storage; preferably in a ready-to-deliver state.
  5. Resistant enough to environmental conditions so as to remain infectious or operational long enough to affect the majority of the target, but not so persistent as to affect the occupying army.
  6. Resistant to treatment; e.g. antibiotics, antibodies, pharmaceutical drugs etc.

TARGETS OF BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

Biological weapons may target living organisms or an environment seen as affecting the outcome of a struggle for control. These include humans, both soldiers and noncombatants, commercial crops and animals, the water supply, the soil, the air, or any combination of these. The object being, in each case, to weaken, terrify or punish the enemy to a degree which induces them to comply with the attacker’s demands.


THE APPEAL OF BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

"A biological weapon can be more effective, pound for pound, than the hydrogen bomb."23

Biological (and chemical) weapons are apply called the "Poor Man’s Weapons of Mass Destruction". The modern weapons of war like the atom bomb, supersonic airplanes, atomic submarines and aircraft carriers all are horrendously expensive, technologically complex and require a large and sophisticated industrial capacity as well as a host of highly skilled scientists and engineers to produce and maintain. In contrast biological (and chemical) weapons production is relatively cheap, uses readily available commercial equipment and materials and can be managed by modestly trained scientists and technicians. A production facility for producing anthrax in weapon quantities could probably be set up in a small house, apartment or RV for <$100,000 and could be run by perhaps less than a dozen technicians with only the equivalent of a BS degree, operating under the direction of a single Ph.D. The basic knowledge for the growth of the majority of biological-weapons-grade microbes is freely available and the equipment and chemicals are obtainable from dozens of suppliers around the world.

As the genomes of more pathogens are sequenced and more is learned about the mechanisms of pathogenicity (e.g. pathogenic islands), this information can be combined with simple molecular biology techniques (e.g. cloning, chimera formation   transgenic organisms) like those taught in some high school biology labs, to produce enhanced pathogens or BDBS materials. For example, the insertion of pathogenic genes into a number of common non-pathogenic bacteria has been shown to confer them with the ability to behave as a pathogen. So far there have been no reports of these chimeras escaping from the lab and producing any diseases, but it would be unwise to ignore this potential.


BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS LIST: PROVEN AND POTENTIAL ONES

Biological weapon are characterized by the following: Their target system; The nature of the biological weapon; and Whether it is a natural product or one that has been produced by genetic engineering. The following categorization is unofficial and of my own invention as I am unaware of any consensus in this matter. Defining the target systems and the nature of a particular BW is not difficult, but deciding if it is a "natural biological product" or one constructed by genetic engineering is becoming more difficult as our knowledge and skills improve in these technologies. For the purposes of this discussion I define a "Natural BW" as one obtained from wild type strains or from selected mutants randomly induced spontaneously or by classical mutagenic procedures (e.g. exposure to UV or X-ray irradiation, chemical mutagenesis etc.). Therefore a "genetically engineered BW" is defined as one constructed by the nonrandom modification of a gene.

BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS CATEGORIES:

I. TARGETED HOSTS:

  1. Humans
  2. Commercial Animals
  3. Commercial Plants
  4. Environmental Systems

II. BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS CATEGORIES; KNOWN AND POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS:

DESIGNATIONS:

A. BACTERIAL

NATURAL COMMERCIAL ANIMAL BACTERIAL PATHOGENS:

NATURAL COMMERCIAL PLANT BACTERIAL PATHOGENS:

B. VIRUSES

NATURAL HUMAN VIRAL PATHOGENS:

All of these viruses can produce natural epidemics, but in many cases man is a secondary host and transmission from person to person from such viruses is, at the moment, usually poor (with some important exceptions like the Variola virus). However, a chance mutation or a genetically engineered mutation could change this picture.

"But the idea that the last smallpox virus sits in a few small freezers is absolutely not true. At least 10 countries have quietly kept it." Richard Preston, author of the Hot Zone and The Cobra Event, in Genetic Engineering News March 1, 1998, pg. 6

The Variola virus, the agent of smallpox, is considered to be naturally extinct. Supposedly only two well-guarded stocks of the smallpox virus remain in the world, in a Russian and an American lab. However, there are reports that Russia stockpiled Variola virus as a BW and the fate of these supplies is uncertain in many people’s minds. Further, other nations (e.g. China) were suspected of producing stocks of this virus and the status of these programs is not public knowledge. Since routine smallpox vaccination is no longer carried out, the bulk of the world’s population is susceptible to this highly communicable pathogen.

NATURAL COMMERCIAL ANIMAL VIRAL PATHOGENS:

NATURAL COMMERCIAL PLANT VIRILE PATHOGENS:

C. EUKARYOTIC BW PATHOGENS

NATURAL PLANT FUNGAL PATHOGENS:

III. NATURAL BIOLOGICALLY DERIVED BIOACTIVE SUBSTANCES (BDBS):

A. TOXINS

*These organisms are ubiquitous, but, as they have been acquired in the past as part of biological weapons programs, they are worthy of special caution.

Genetically-modified BWs

"...I have not confirmed this (that brain pox exists), but a company called M.P.O. Vektor, from Koltsovo, Siberia, has made a recombinant of smallpox and Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus...My source claims it causes a smallpox-like illness, but with brain symptoms". Richard Preston  in Genetic Engineering News March 1, 1998, pg. 6:

The Associated Press reported (2/14/98) that the Bacteriology Division of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) reported that Russia had developed an new form of anthrax that may be able to elude the vaccine that American troops receive. A spokesman stated "This is coming in as anthrax, but it's got other bullets in it--different bullets". This may become the first genetically modified microorganisms (or BDBS) to be officially listed as a biological weapon. However, this is no surprise as it is a virtual certainty that most of the BW-grade microbes have been mutated and strains selected, using conventional procedures, for characteristics that enhance their effectiveness. It is also likely that other genetically engineered strains have (or are in the process of being) been produced, but because such information is highly classified it is unlikely that the public will be made aware of their existence prior to actual use. As it is possible to place multiple virulence/toxic capacities within a single organism or to fuse two toxic proteins together so that both would be functional as a BDBS BW (e.g. botox and ricin) these types of BWs can be expected to appear on the scene sooner rather than later. It is now reasonable to assume that the gene for any BDBS can be cloned and expressed in BW quantities in some species. Consider, for example, that the genes that code for the venom of various spiders, jellyfish, the blue-octopus, and the toxins of Pfiesteria piscicida can all be cloned and thus represent potential BWs.

THE ETHNIC BOMB

In the fall of 1998 there was a report that the White SA government had ordered a program to develop a genetic engineered biologicial weapon that would specifically kill blacks. Recently a rumor surfaced (in the English press) that Israel was working on a Biological Weapon that would specifically harm Arabs carrying certain genes. Two questions come to mind:

"Biological weapons are green weapons, they’re biodegradable."23

The answer to the first question is theoretically YES. It is possible to conceive of genetically engineering a virus or toxin-synthesizing gene in a bacterium which is "activated or induced or regulated" by the product of a gene or by binding to a specific receptor that determines an "ethnic" characteristic; e.g. pigment formation for skin or eye color or some other characteristic that is a single-gene characteristic (e.g. ear lob attachment, hitchhiker's thumb etc.). Another general approach that would theoretically work is being actively pursued as a means of treating cancer; i.e., find a unique antigen on a cancer cell; make an antibody against it; attach a cell toxin to the antibody and inject (see Genetic Engineering News 1/1/99, pg 7). It would likely be a very tricky business to be certain that the activation was as specific as desired (that it wouldn't come back and bite the distributor on the fanny), which would probably mean human testing; which takes us right back to the darkest events of WWII discussed above.

The answer to the second question is that unfortunately people have already thought of it. Frank Herbert (the author of Dune) even wrote a SF novel based on this possibility. Such a weapon might be viewed in the same perspective as the "Neutron Bomb" which was discussed with great enthusiasm in some quarters (and maybe even built) in the days of the Cold War. This bomb was touted as having the dubious benefit of neatly killing all life forms in a given area without destroying the infrastructure (e.g. buildings, roads etc.). So the users of this horror could have come in after a few weeks, cleaned up the unsightly skeletons (or to be efficient, turned them into phosphate fertilizer) and moved into to a virtually undamaged area. Presumably an ethnic biological weapon would achieve roughly the same ends. Consider this however, once such a Pandora's Box is opened it could be applied to all sorts of things like cleasing the earth of left-handers, brown eyed people, the Irish etc. After all in ~2003-4 the entire human genome sequence will be on the Internet for any nut case to play with, so watch out folks it could be a very bumpy ride.


Pfiesteria piscicida: The Cell from Hell
USAMRIID is reported to have shown an interest in the toxins produced by this microbe. Pfiesteria toxins cause a variety of symptoms including disorientation, memory loss, loss of ability to concentrate, loss of motor coordination and impairment of a variety of other mental functions. These toxins have been demonstrated to be effective both airborne and on contact. "From
And the Waters Turn to Blood: The Ultimate Biological Threat" by Rodney Barker, 1997"

Below are given the designations to be used to label genetically modified microorganisms, as they become available.

G1. Genetically modified microorganisms or genetic elements that contain nucleic acid sequences associated with pathogenicity and are derived from organisms in the core list.

G2. Genetically modified microorganisms or genetic elements that contain nucleic acid sequences coding for any of the toxins in the core list, or their subunits.

WG1. Genetically modified microorganisms or genetic elements that contain nucleic acid sequences associated with pathogenicity and are derived from organisms in the warning list.

WG2. Genetically modified microorganisms or genetic elements that contain nucleic acid sequences coding for any of the toxins in the warning list, or their subunits.

AG1. Genetically modified microorganisms or genetic elements that contain nucleic acid sequences associated with pathogenicity and are derived from organisms in the list.

PG1. Genetically modified microorganisms or genetic elements that contain nucleic acid sequences associated with pathogenicity derived from the plant pathogens identified on the export control list.

PWG1 Genetically modified microorganisms or genetic elements that contain nucleic acid sequences associated with pathogenicity derived from the plant pathogens identified on the awareness raising list.

OTHER BW CATEGORIES

There are no parasitic microbes (e.g. protozoan) listed above as BWs, but that doesn’t mean they couldn’t be employed for such a purpose. For example, a variety of protozoa species are candidates for BWs. These include the parasites Cryptosporidium, Entamoeba histolytica, and Giardia lamblia, all of which are common water borne pathogens capable of producing large natural epidemics. All have resting forms that render then resistant to environmental stress and to common water purification treatments. All that is required is to find a way of mass cultivating them in the laboratory. These parasites would also qualify as "Environmental Systems" BW as they could pollute a region’s water and food supply.


THE TOP BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS20

With an abundance of potential biological weapons to chose from, what are the top choices and why? This is a difficult question to answer because of the extreme secrecy surrounding biological warfare. Based on what is known, combined with some reasonable assumptions, the following are prime suspects in this rogue’s gallery of biological horrors:

botox is relatively stable and can be stored in crystalline form, but the weapon-ready forms are classified. It can be absorbed through the mucous membranes so aerosol dispersal, addition to a municipal water or food supplies are likely ways of introducing botox into a population. It is tasteless and odorless and, depending on the dosage, and may take from 2 to 14 days before the symptoms appear. The symptoms include double vision, difficulty in swallowing and speaking, muscle weakness, vomiting and eventually respiratory failure. The protein is a neurotoxin and once the symptoms appear the damage is irreversible (after ~48 hours). There are several botox immunologically unique strains. The only treatment involves passive antibody shots against all the botox strains; the assumption being that a mixture of botox strains would be applied. Immunization of a large population is not considered feasible.

The advantages of botox is that since its symptoms are delayed, the damage is done (walking dead) before victims realize what has occurred. The amount of antiserum required to treat 100,000s of exposed people is not available, plus the fact that many people would be beyond saving even if given the antitoxin.

The known disadvantages are that botox is unstable in the air if exposed to sunlight and dry conditions and is destroyed by brief boiling, thus effective exposure is limited by a small window of lighting and humidity conditions. Even though botox is highly toxic it would still take a large quantity to reach a lethal concentration in a large city's water supply. Further, contaminating a food supply would be difficult, although individual food processing plants are a likely target for terrorists. The centralization of huge food-processing plants that provide food for outlets around the country offers terrorists a tempting opportunity to commit mass murder.

A realistic view of the botox situation is that many of the problems of dispersal were likely solved by the >3,000 US scientists that reportedly worked on biological warfare during W.W. II & the cold war. It is also reasonable to assume that the botox can be fused by common molecular biology technology with other proteins that stabilize it for dispersal without decreasing its lethality or it can be mixed with other protective agents (e.g. trehalose, viral-glass) or that it can be encapsulated in protective material (timed release) that dissolves once it is in the digestive system. It should also be possible to clone the botox gene into common bacteria that inhabit the human gut (e.g. E. coli), which would establish themselves there long enough to produce a quantity of botox sufficient to disable the victim before their immune system responded; a natural condition seen in young babies who ingest the spores in foods like honey. For a chilling description of how this might be done visit the Cal Poly site.

The Iraqis own up to producing ~5,000 gallons of C. botulinum, but the yield of botox was not reported. Other nations like Iran, Syria, North Korea and Libya are suspected of being in the biological weapons production business. Further, it is unclear what has happened to the massive Soviet Union’s biological weapons’ production facilities and their BW-arsenal since the breakup of the Soviet Union.

In the December issue of Vaccine, Russian reserarcher reported that they had genetically engineered a novel anthrax organism. It is suggested by some, that the current vaccine administered to U.S. troops would be ineffective against this genetically engineered strain.

Since there is a delay between exposure and the development of the clinical disease, as well as difficulty in differentiating cancer origins between accidental and intentional exposure, even recognizing that a target population had been "attacked" would be laborious; this would be a case of a "stealth BW attack". The Iraqis reportedly produced ~600 gallons of concentrated aflatoxin which was loaded in bombs and missiles.

Little has been reported about its delivery, its survival once dispersed etc., but a working assumption is that it would behave similar to anthrax in those respects. Since C. perfringens produces a host of toxic proteins, it is likely that super "hot" strains have been isolated for use as BW, and  perhaps the toxin genes have been cloned for use as BDBS.

Treatment involves antibiotics and exposure of the patient to pure oxygen which inhibits the growth of the bacillus. However, as this latter treatment involves individual pressure chamber, it is not a reasonable treatment for an infected population.

The delivery issues of ricin are probably similar to those for botox and are clouded in the same cloak of secrecy. It is reasonable to assume that relatively effective dispersal methods are available for delivering this toxin to a population and further, that since the components of ricin are being genetically manipulated for a variety reasons, that one of these uses might involve Black Biology.

In theory it is possible to immunize against the ricin protein, but I know of no source of an appropriate vaccine, although it should not be difficult to produce one; the problem is preparing it in quantity ahead of time (like the flu vaccine every year) and inoculating the target population far enough in advance. I know of no effective treatment once the ricin has produced clinical symptoms (similar to the botulism toxin story).

Fusarium oxysporum: The potential use of genetic engineering in the production of biological weapons is illustrated by the on-going studies on the possible of the use of the mold Fusarium oxysporum as a candidate for drug plant eradication. (28) This fungus, which has devastated commercial crops (e.g. bananas & muskmelon), is being investigated for its potential to destroy coca and cannabis plants, from which cocaine and marijuana are derived. Preliminary studies indicate that host specificity is narrow and species "jumping" is rare; i.e., targets can be carefully selected without posing danger to other commercial crops. However, its use in the U.S. could devastate the economies of several regions of the U.S.

Obviously, the same technology could be applied by terrorists to assail the commercial crops of perceived enemy states. Natural outbreaks of plant epidemics have repeatedly demonstrated, that the potato, corn, wheat and soybean mono-culturing techniques used to cultivate these crops offer optimal conditions for the spread of plant pathogens. Not only could rogue nations do this, it is possible (as depicted in James Bond movie, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service) that a criminal organization, such as a drug cartel, with its vast cash and organizational resources, could engage in such activities as retaliation for its economic loses. It is even possible that terrorists/criminals might hold a nation(s) up for ransom with the threat of using such a weapon. 

Assuming that the research is successful and target-specific F. oxysporum strains are developed, they would then be employed, to destroy coca and cannabis crops. The mold pathogen’s spores could be disseminated by conventional aerial crop-spraying techniques, by ground personnel or by small, self-propelled robots dropped into an area and guided by satellite to the targets (see below; Delivery of BW). Since it is known that environmental conditions, such as temperature, humidity, cloud cover etc. effect the efficacy of fungal diseases, release could be coordinated with satellite weather data. Bands of robots, equipped with analytical tools, could roam the countryside seeking out targeted crops on which they release their biological agent; i.e., chemical sensors that pick up the emanations from target plants would follow the gradient of the identifying substances to its source—much as insects do.

Once the fungal genes involved in target specificity are known (through gene mapping and sequencing) and their manipulation becomes routine, new fungi strains could be developed rapidly to counter resistant cultivars constructed by the drug cartels. It is possible that a biological-arms race could occur with victims developing resistant plant cultivars and drug-agencies countering with new-strains of the pathogen capable of attacking the new plant varieties—ad infinitum.


DELIVERY OF BW

Currently, because of the recent confrontations with Iraq with their suspected missile capability, the world is concerned about rockets being used to deliver BWs. However, considering the crude nature of the SCUD missiles, they are probably more useful in a publicity capacity than as a credible military threat. The SCUD missiles have a range of between 400 and 500 miles. They lack a sophisticated guidance system, so their chances of hitting a target are limited. Further, the warhead must explode at the proper height to create an aerosol capable of dispersing effective quantities of BW agent over a wide area, but it appears they lack this capacity as they apparently only explode on contact. The explosion would likely destroy much of the BW. Any BW material that survives the explosion would be dependant on low level air currents to disperse it. If the wind was not blowing, most of the MW material would settle near the site of impact, severely limiting its efficacy. Finally, it is clearly understood that if the Israelis are the target of such a SCUD attack, Iraq would suffer nuclear retaliation almost certainly designed to forever eliminate an Iraqi threat.

Recent novel drying technologies being used to preserve vaccines in a temperature resistant form can likely be used to preserve biological weapons and to make their delivery more efficacious. This rechology involves drying the reagents in high concentrations of the sugar trehalose, or its analogs (sugar glass). Vaccines prepared in this way can be stored at 60oC for up to 12 weeks without loss of activity. Genetic Engineering News Feb. 15, 1998, pg. 6

BWs lend themselves to the far greater danger as terrorist's weapons attack on a large population area such as New York, Washington or London etc. For example. a light plane equipped with crop spraying equipment (see the movies Goldfinger & North by Northwest) could spray BWs downwind from the target of an evening without attracting much notice, particularly since the plume of the aerosol probably couldn't even be seen (i.e., just a student pilot practicing turns). Alternatively, a motor vehicle as small as a car could cruise the streets of a city while emitting a fine spray of BW-aerosol through a fake tailpipe or other small vent; after all car or truck trailing a plume "smoke or steam" is a common sight isn't it. The only equipment needed would be a hand-pumped sprayer like those used to spray insecticide on one's garden. The Japanese terrorists used small exploding devices to disperse sarin in the subway. Although, their devices proved to be inefficient, their choice of a subway was malignantly inspired; a subway, particularly crowded with people at rush hour, insures the maximum exposure in the smallest area. Further, the subway's air exchange system would likely carry the BW agent rapidly out into the general environment, usually a crowded city. An individual carrying a large suitcase or backpack could disperse BW material while walking the streets. Even more fearsome is the possible use of better remote-control devices than those used in Japan. In this case the suspension of BW material could be placed in a container attached to an aerosol-producing pump (such as used to spray insecticide on trees) that could be turned on by remote control or with a timer. Such a unit could even be set to release material periodically over several days depending on the direction of the wind; something the Mission Impossible crew might do if they went bad.

Robotic delivery offers another likely possibility. As illustrated by the Mars Rover satellite-controlled robotic delivery is possible with today’s technology. Such robots would be small enough to be camouflaged as pieces of wood or rocks and could be programmed to bury themselves under ground until activated. They could even be solar-powered so they could function independently for long periods. 

A version of a robotic delivery method was described in the James Bond movie (as depicted in James Bond movie, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service) that involved brainwashed young women. These nubile young ladies had been brainwashed to return to their countries of origin with the biological-crop-destroying-agent and, on command, to go to an assigned location and release it unless the Evil Scientist was paid a humongous amount of boodle. The use of mechanical robots would not only abolish the sexism of the movie, but would be more efficient; particularly if extended concealment underground was required.

A case of Salmonella terrorism in Oregon: A microbiologist applied Salmonella she grew in her house to food in a local restaurant in Dalles OR, sickening 750 people.

If these scenarios frighten you, you are normal; if they don't cause you to suffer a "pucker attack" on critical sphincter muscles of your body, there is probably something wrong with you and you should seek help. However, there are things that you can do to lessen the chances of the above happening or if the worse should happen, of limiting the damage. Some of these are listed in the concluding section.

The following site is a 10/13/98 FAQ section form a Frontline report and contains much of the information I've collected plus some additional material; read it and be very, very concerned folks.


CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION

It would be extremely naive to assume that the horror and indiscriminate nature of BWs will prevent their use. Indeed it is this very horror and dread of these weapons that appeal to certain mind-sets. The panic and societal disruption that a BW attack would engender in a population satisfies the aim of those who wish to punish their enemies in the most painful way possible. BWs are more implements of that most powerful of destructive urges, revenge, than of conquest. BW also have the added perverse "advantage" of destroying an enemy while leaving his infrastructure intact as booty for the winner. That is, an atomic bomb leaves only radioactive rubble, whereas a successful BW leaves only a few million rotting bodies and an intact, functioning city. This scenario has been chillingly depicted in several science fiction movies; it is frightening to realize that Sci-Fi is often predictive.

However, it is worth considering what can be done about the possibility of BW use? First, of course, is to gain a clear understanding of the nature of the problem. A chilling analysis of the economic effects of a biological attack and the efficacy of various counter measures can be read at this site. Ignorance leads only to misunderstandings, panic, chaos and fatal mistakes; ignorance always makes a bad situation catastrophic. While a careful analysis of the situation probably can’t prevent BWs from being used, it can lead to actions that minimize that possibility and lessen the death and destruction if it occurs. The following are a partial list of measures that might be taken to diminish the problem:

"The Presedential Commission on Bioethics spends lots of time on the ethics of cloning; bioweapons are not even a topic of concern. Yet, genetically engineered bioweapons are the single greatest problem in bioethics today." Richard Preston in Genetic Engineering News March 1, 1998

  1. Develop full international cooperation in dealing with this problem; probably through the UN. See "Botulism Surveillance and Emergency Response: A Public Health Strategy for a Global Challenge" in the JAMA - August 6, 1997
  2. Educate likely target populations as to what precautions and protective actions to take in case of an BW attack. Simply extend the "disaster plans" already in effect to include BW. The Israelis, who have already done this, can provide valuable experience as to what does and doesn’t work.
  3. Coordinate the monitoring of the potential producers and users of BW as closely as possible; this is implied in #1, but requires both money, close cooperation and highly trained personnel.

    "Most practicing doctors have never seen smallpox or anthrax. Anthrax is hard to diagnose, but easy to manufacture and disperse. The military and the FBI have a biotectection device that can identify anthrax in 20 seconds."Richard Preston in Genetic Engineering News March 1, 1998

  4. Continue to improve on BW monitoring techniques and apparatus; making them smaller, faster, more sensitive and more accurate so as to detect BWs rapidly so as to take action to minimize loses and disruption. New detection systems using biochips will soon make it possible to deploy small, automated monitoring stations at appropriate locations as early warning detectors of a BW attack. Air quality in cities throughout the world is routinely monitored using similar automated equipment. Police cars, buses and other vehicles that travel daily throughout an area could be equipped with detection units to routinely monitor an area.
  5. Stockpile BW-fighting supplies, particularly medical ones, throughout the world so that they could be transported quickly to areas of BW use. It might be reasonable to have these supplies stored in transport aircraft ready to take of in a few minutes. After all this was the situation during the cold war when military planes were kept at the ends of the runways with their engines running and pilots in their cockpits ready to go.

Task Force Scorpio is a "biological swat team" based in Switzerland. Scorpio had its own jet transportation, and when in standby mode could leave within 24 hours of a call, traveling under the protection of neutral Swiss diplomatic passports. Task Force Scorpio was put at the disposal of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and was immunized, trained and ready to go when the ground war began on 28 February 1991.

POSITIVE PROGRESS (as of spring 1999)

ACTION EFFECT STATUS REFERENCE
Surveillance for odd outbreaks Early detection of BW attack Proposed 22% increase inFunds 19
Establish regional BW labs Early management of BW attack Part of above 19
25 New metropolitan emergency centers Effective management & coordination of BW attack Funds being sought 19
Research on vaccines Prevent infection Boosted by $30 million 19
Work on new sensors & study airflow in cities Early detection and prediction of patterns of dispersion Research by Dept. of Energy & Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 19
Development of blocking spread of BW in cities Minimize infection Research at Sandia  labs 19
Development of agents to neutralize many BW Minimize/stop infection Research at Sandia  labs & DARPA 19
Search for broad-spectrum material to neutalize BW Minimize/stop infection Research at DARPA 19
Development of DNA vaccines against BW Prevent infections Research at Maxygen Labs 19
Understanding motivation of BW users Prevent use of BW Research at Monterey Institute of International Studies 19
Moral suasion Prevent use of BW Research at Rutgers University 19
Improve organization of Federal agencies More efficient response to BW attack Presidential directive; Roles of FBI, FEMA, OEP, HHS, DOD defined 20
Involvement of professional scientific societies Improvement of BW education Committees at work 20
WHO involvement Better world coordination in dealing with BW At work revising prgm for dealing with BW 20
National guard units Trained to deal with BW 10 NG units: Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection Teams 20
Marine Corp BW Units Deals rapidly with BW incidents MC Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force ready 20
DOD Research on BW equipment Protection: masks and suits; Detection of BW Rapid detection of BW; efficient clean up 20
US armed service personnel vaccinated against anthrax Protection In effect NOW 20
Degree of technical knowledge required Few people have the expertise to isolate & grow BW Number of possible users of BW are growing slowly 20
Money to HHS More knowledge on all aspects of the BW problem $133 million for dealing with BW threats; $51 million for vaccines & antibiotics 19, 20
Anthrax   hoaxes Publicizes BW issue Keep response teams on alert & trained 21

 

Bioagent Chip: A sensor to detect a biological warfare attack in seconds. Reported in Sci. Am. March 2000, pg. 35

A biochip to rapidly detect biological warfare agents is being developed as part of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. The cip works as follows. Ten thousand genetically modified mouse B-cells expressing specific antibodies on their cell surface are placed in a small well on a 2.5 mm square plastic chip. Captured test material  suspended in a liquid is channeled over the B cells on the chip. The B cells have been modified to contain a gene that produces a protein that emits light when triggered by Ca ions. When the appropriate antigen binds to the B cells a biochemical cascade is induced which releases Ca ion within a second. The Ca then induces a flask of light that can be detected by an attached CCD device. A single particle is all that is required to produce a detectable flash. This chip is expected to be ready in approximately 18 months.

 

MAJOR GAPS IN BW PROTECTION

REFERENCES

Little involvement of FIRST RESPONDERS to BW incident training: ER physicians, nurses, family physicians, epidemiologists, Public Health personnel

20

Massive misunderstanding of the difference between chemical and biological weapons and how each should be dealt with.

20

Limited vaccine supplies: only 7 million doses of smallpox vaccine for >250 million susceptible Americans

19

No mechanism to verify compliance with BW-treaty; the US refuses to agree to inspection

20

Evidence of stocks of BW in several countries

19, 20

Vast majority of world's population is susceptible to smallpox

19, 20

The Japanese cult that attempted to disperse both botulism and anthrax is still active with lots of money

19, 20

Libya, Iran, Syria, Iraq, and North Korea are actively recruiting Russia BW scientists to work for them

20

The number of countries that possess the sophistication and capacity to produce BW is growing

20

No mechanisms for screening for BW at borders are available

20

Only a small quantity of a BW agent is required to infect a large area and population

20

Hospital facilities for dealing with BW very limited; 100 cases would overwhelm most communities

20

Tooling up smallpox vaccine production would take 36 months

19, 20

Facilities for growing BW are readily available from the Western world

20

Biological Scientists not involved in educating society about BW issues

20

REFERENCES

1. http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/sbtwc/; Index to resources on BW

2. http://www.fas.org/bwc/index.html; The Federation of American Scientist's Biological and Toxin Weapons Verification Program.

3. Cole LA. The specter of biological weapons. Sci Am 1996;275:60-5.

4. http://www.usia.gob/journals/itgic/0297/ijge/ijge0297.htm; Links to sites about terrorism.

5. http://www.sipri.se/cbw/sipri-bradford.html; BW site.

6. http://www.emergency.com/anthrax.htm; Information on anthrax.

7. http://www.emergency.com/hzmtpage.htm; Hazardous materials site, including biological weapons..

8. http://198.202.146.1/factshee/wmd/bw/auslist.htm; Much of the information above was extracted from this site.

9. Outbreak; Great site for emerging disease, current and complete, but must register to obtain best information; has recently added material on biological weapons.

10. http://www.ama-assn.org/sci-pubs/journals/archive/jama/vol_278/no_5/toc.htm#top August 6, 1997 - Vol 278, No 5. JAMA - The Journal of the American Medical Association; several articles on biological warfare.

11. http://www.calpoly.edu/~drjones/chemwarf.html; This is well thought out site written by students at Cal Poly that shows what a great job students can do when they accept a challenge.

12. http://www.fas.org/bwc/index.html; Biological Weapons index fo sites on the Internet.

13. http://www.cm.utexas.edu/groups/robertus/rcn_ppt/index.htm; Ricin site.

14. http://www.fas.org/bwc/papers/scorpro.htm; Information about Task Force Scopio.

15. http://golgi.harvard.edu/meselson/cbwbib.html; Bibliography of chemical and biological warfare; not for reading before you go to bed. Information on potential monitoring equipment:

18. Biological weapons pose challenge for microbiology community. Ronald A. Atlas ASM News 64:383 (1998). An excellent overview of the situation and the role microbiologists can play in dealing with this horror.

19. Facing an Ill Wind, Scientific American April 1999, pg. 19.

20. The Looming Threat of Bioterrorism: Science 283:1279 (1999).

21. The New Bomb Threat: Newsweek Magazine 3/22/1999, pg 36.

22. http://www.mindspring.com/~nbcnco/; A very fancy and scary site. Will need a Pentium computer and a fair amount of memory to view some of the items at this site. I can not verify the accuracy of everything on this site so "reader caution" is advised.

23. "A conversation with Richard Preston" in Laboratory Medicine, vol. 30, pg 517 Aug. 1999.

24. "Bioterrorism Prevention" in Genetic Engineering News June 1, 1999, pg. 6.

25. The New Yorker, March 9, 1998. "The Bioweaponeers", by Richard Preston. The Washington Post, New York Times and "Prime Time Live"/ABC News, February 26, 1998.

26. http://www.newscientist.com/nsplus/insight/bioterrorism/allfall.html; Review of bioterrorism

27 The Biology of Doom: The history of America’s secret germ warfare project. by Ed. Regis. Henry Holt and Co. 1999.

28. ASM News 65: 734 (1999)

Several recent books, fiction and nonfiction, that offer interesting, instructive information and imaginative insights into BW and related issues:


Copyright © Dr. R. E. Hurlbert, 1997.
This material may be used for educational purposes only and may not be duplicated for commercial purposes.
SCIENCE HALL, ROOM 440CA
PHONE: 509-335-5108
FAX: 509-335-1907
E-MAIL: hurlbert@wsu.edu or hurlbert@pullman.com
OFFICE HOURS: Mon. Wed. 2-4 PM

TOC