The U.S. military mistakenly sent live anthrax bacteria to laboratories in nine U.S. states and a U.S. air base in South Korea, after failing to properly inactivate the bacteria 11 months ago. The anthrax was initially sent from a Utah military lab and was meant to be shipped in an inactive state as part of efforts to develop a field-based test to identify biological threats. No one appears to have developed any symptoms, but have been given treatments as a precaution.
What went wrong? What are the best way to handle diseases such as this?
[Editor's Comment: Original Submission]
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
U.S. Military Mistakenly Ships Live Anthrax To Nine States
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 31 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @09:18PM
WTF are they doing with anthrax at an air base in South Korea? Is this the new standard in scientific research on dangerous organisms?
<sarcasm>Maybe that's where they load the chemtrail tanks on aircraft</sarcasm>
(Score: 2) by Tork on Thursday May 28 2015, @10:37PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday May 29 2015, @11:33AM
Perhaps thinking about ways it can be transmitted to North Korea? Yes, that's an atrocity, but I wouldn't put it past people in the US military structure to do it.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @04:18PM
So how long until they have a false flag involving brown terrywrists and this thrax. Would make a good cover,ship it everywhere, say oops, one year later....
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @10:07PM
The treatments given as a precaution were accidentally switched with the active anthrax.
But this is only in South Korea.
More News at 11
(Score: 5, Informative) by Sir Finkus on Thursday May 28 2015, @11:01PM
Anthrax is a rather common livestock disease. It only becomes really nasty if you weaponize it. Was it weaponized anthrax designed to be dispersed through the air? Since the TFA doesn't mention it I'll assume it wasn't, because I doubt any media organization could resist using "weaponized anthrax" if they could. Gotta get those clicks.
It doesn't really present any security implications since getting the Anthrax itself isn't the problem (as I said, it's a rather common disease) the main problems lie with weaponization. I believe the process involves binding the spores to particles of an appropriate size so they linger in the air without being dispersed, and can get deep into the lungs to cause the most serious form of infection.
Join our Folding@Home team! [stanford.edu]
(Score: 2) by jbWolf on Friday May 29 2015, @02:49AM
Original submitter here.
I'd like to give Reuters big points for not saying anything like that to get clicks, although it leaves a huge question mark in my mind. From the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of the article:
Maybe they weren't weaponizing it, but it sounds like they were experimenting on it as if it were already weaponized. An anti-weaponization experiment of sorts. I admit that is purely speculation on my part. But why else would they be "sending it into the air"?
In any case, they were putting into the air without "enough safeguards" and that is cause for concern and investigation.
www.jb-wolf.com [jb-wolf.com]
(Score: 2) by Joe on Friday May 29 2015, @03:08AM
why else would they be "sending it into the air"
Inhalation anthrax is the most dangerous form, so any procedures that could potentially aerosolize spores have to be treated as if they did to err on the side of caution. Similar precautions were taken for the previous case with the CDC since the samples were used for Mass Spec analysis.
putting into the air without "enough safeguards" and that is cause for concern and investigation
Aerosolization of completely inactivated bacteria would pose no danger to the researchers. Also, the labs were probably still working under BSL-2 safety protocols so they would still act under protocols that would minimize exposure (it isn't like they would intentionally try to inhale inactivated anthrax).
http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2014/p0711-lab-safety-infographic.html/ [cdc.gov]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix-assisted_laser_desorption/ionization [wikipedia.org]
- Joe
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Gravis on Thursday May 28 2015, @11:41PM
What went wrong?
the article said the CDC is investigating. SN editors, why did you asked the readers?
What are the best way to handle diseases such as this?
SN editors, this is they type of question for an infectious disease specialist... like oh i dunno, the CDC!
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday May 29 2015, @12:37AM
Make fun of jbwolf, not the editors.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Touché) by Gravis on Friday May 29 2015, @01:26AM
look at the original submission, it's the editors, not jbwolf that asked.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday May 29 2015, @01:44AM
Point taken.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by jbWolf on Friday May 29 2015, @03:05AM
It's ok. You can make fun of me. No one refrained in all my years of school and jobs. If I'm not being ribbed, I don't feel loved. ;)
More seriously, I addressed Gravis' issue in this comment [soylentnews.org].
www.jb-wolf.com [jb-wolf.com]
(Score: 2) by tibman on Friday May 29 2015, @02:14AM
It is surprising who you find in the readership. There could be a CDC person here somewhere : ) Older slashdot had all kinds of big names and positions pop up occasionally. But you are right, it is clearly calling for speculation, lol.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by jbWolf on Friday May 29 2015, @02:59AM
Original submitter here.
No, not really. When I submitted the article, I had a worry about people trolling because of the nature of the article. The article is fairly neutral and what I submitted is fairly neutral. (In my opinion.) I don't know of a good way to handle an article that invites trolls despite benign intentions. Some subjects are just like that. It was my hope that there could be a CDC person (or equivalent knowledge) on here who we could bounce questions off of. I expressed the trolling concern to the editors (as you can see in the original submission) and they took their best shot to help direct the conversation. You misinterpreted that as speculation.
What suggestions do you have to prevent speculation and trolling in an article like this? I'm curious to know and I'm sure the editors are too.
www.jb-wolf.com [jb-wolf.com]
(Score: 2) by tibman on Friday May 29 2015, @01:19PM
I don't see anything wrong with speculation as long as it makes logical sense. It can actually be a lot of fun. But if you don't want to encourage any speculation then the story needs the five W's [wikipedia.org]. If you are submitting a story and not writing it then that may not be possible.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Bill Evans on Friday May 29 2015, @12:32AM
One of the states was Texas. Just wait for the derp.
(Score: 1) by KGIII on Friday May 29 2015, @01:26AM
I can see it now... "That ni... Uh... Black man in the White House is trying to eradicate all Texans because he hates baby Jesus!"
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday May 29 2015, @12:36AM
They should destroy the samples and keep the DNA sequences. Synthesize the organism from the DNA if they need to study it.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Sir Finkus on Friday May 29 2015, @12:51AM
They should destroy the samples and keep the DNA sequences. Synthesize the organism from the DNA if they need to study it.
I suspect that's much easier said than done, and not really worth the effort for such a common disease. That sort of thing might make sense if it was The Andromeda Strain or something. I'd be much more worried about "live" flu viruses accidentally being shipped even though it isn't as "sexy" as anthrax.
Join our Folding@Home team! [stanford.edu]
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @02:31AM
much more worried about "live" flu viruses accidentally being shipped
"Live" flu is shipped all the time. People travel on boats.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @03:00PM
Indeed, people even disperse it in air. It's called sneezing.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Joe on Friday May 29 2015, @03:27AM
That would be too excessive. All you would need to do is transform/transduce the vaccine strain with its missing virulence plasmid.
The vaccine strain of anthrax only lacks a plasmid (circular segment of DNA that is much smaller and separate from genomic DNA) that is needed to cause disease in people. As far as I can remember, loss of either pX01 or pX02 (the vaccine strain doesn't have this one) will render the bacteria unable to cause disease.
pX01 encodes the anthrax toxin which can kill immune cells and pX02 encodes the capsule that helps the bacteria evade immune recognition.
http://www.cdc.gov/nczved/divisions/dfbmd/diseases/anthrax_sterne/ [cdc.gov]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax_toxin [wikipedia.org]
- Joe
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday May 29 2015, @03:44AM
Synthesizing organisms, especially single-celled bacteria [wikipedia.org] or even viruses, from digital DNA/RNA sequences will be commonplace in the future.
That is the reason why researchers are being discouraged from publishing results on making the flu more virulent or morphine-excreting yeast.
It's also the reason why you can just sequence anthrax strains, destroy the samples, store the DNA, save yourself from embarrassing and dangerous incidents such as this one, and pull it out of "storage" in 10-20 years when you need to do experiments or create countermeasures.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Joe on Friday May 29 2015, @04:15AM
Making the membrane and all the other proteins needed to kick-start a sythesized genome into a "live" state is the much harder part. The example you gave is very similar to what I mentioned. The researchers implanted their synthesized genome into a donor cell instead of putting in a much smaller plasmid into a bacteria that still has its genome.
As for viruses, that is already being done. I'm pretty sure at least one research group synthesized the genome of MERS to get around the complications of obtaining samples of infectious virus.
researchers are being discouraged from publishing results on making the flu more virulent or morphine-excreting yeast
I think it is more to do with scaremongering and post-apocalyptic movies. The "controversial" influenza papers didn't do anything complicated - they repetedly infected ferrets (about ten times) with the virus, until it mutated and aquired aerosol transmission. What basically every article about this study failed to mention was that this "incredibly dangerous virus" that they made "airborne" lost its ability to kill animals.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3388103/ [nih.gov]
- Joe
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday May 29 2015, @04:32AM
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Once the DNA sequence is widely-known, you aren't subject to the multi-million dollar research efforts of today, but the bioprinting capabilities of 20 years from now, available to non-state actors with a few thousand bucks and time to spare.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Joe on Friday May 29 2015, @06:34PM
The genie is already out of the bottle. Disease-causing bacteria and viruses are already here.
As Sir Finkus mentioned, there is endemic anthrax in livestock. There is also endemic H5N1 ("bird flu"), plague, MDR tuberculosis, MRSA, and many other pathogens. All you need to do is find a sick animal/person and do basic microbiology to get more or induce new mutations.
This is without DNA sequencing or a multi-million dollar lab and the information/technology is available now.
https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=7671&cid=189383 [soylentnews.org]
- Joe
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @02:47AM
What went wrong?
The bacteria was incompletely inactivated and there were still spores that could germinate.
What are the best way to handle diseases such as this?
Require vaccination for any researchers that would receive inactivated anthrax. Require testing for live bacteria on the receiving end before use for experiments at a lower safety level. Evaluate which safety measures are necessary and which ones that just cause fatigue and corner-cutting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarm_fatigue [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @06:56AM
Anthrax on your border, China! Will you stop piling sand in the South China Seas? Or, the US Military is just incompetent. Ockham's razor to the rescue::: incompetent. Kinda like the USAF losing Nukes, but hey, they are pilots, so smarter than grunts! We are doomed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @11:34AM
In subsequent developments, China accidentally sends its aircraft carrier to the coast of S. Korea and accidentally points missiles at Seoul.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @02:50PM
Most pilot desks.