Bioweapons&

Bioterrorism

By: Isobel Leddin, Diarmuid Carty, Jack Eaton & Fionn English

Biological Weapons - Abstract

The topic which we have chosen to research is bioterrorism, which is the use of biologicalagents in terrorist attacks and in biological warfare. During the course of this study we will

examine several areas of bioterrorism, including the history and the future path of bioterrorismand the different types and characteristics of biological agents. The aim of this study is to

inform and educate one about the dangers of biological agents, and suggest ways to plan andprepare for times of biological attack. It is important that people know about these topics, asalthough the prospect of nuclear or chemical attacks is quite terrifying to many people andalthough they have the ability to cause severe fatalities and destruction, the extreme effectsand lethal abilities of biological agents should not be overlooked and can cause widespreadpanic and fear beyond that of any nuclear or chemical attack. While bioterrorism is a tacticthat has really only come into focus in the past twenty years or so, the weaponization of

biological agents is becoming more and more advanced, and through the process of geneticmodification weaponized agents are more dangerous and lethal than ever before.This studyaims to outline and explain the above topics as well as others associated with the subject of

bioterrorism, and we hope that you find it both informative and illuminating.

Types of Biological Agents

A biological agent­ also called bio­agent or biological threat agents­ is a bacterium, virus,protozoan (diverse group of unicellular eukaryotic organisms), parasite, or fungus that can beused purposefully as a biological weapon in bioterrorism and biological warfare. In addition tothese, living or replicating pathogens (infectious agent) and biological toxins are also includedamong the bio­agents. There are more than 1200 different kinds of potentially weaponizablebio­agents that have been studied and described to date. There are three main categories ofbiological agents,as compiled by the U.S.A.’s Centre of Disease Control agency, althoughseveral harmful recreational drugs and designer viruses have not yet been categorised by theCDC as of yet. We will examine these categories below.(CDC.2013)

Category A

The agents in this category are high­priority agents which pose a risk to national securitybecause they can be easily disseminated or transmitted from person to person, they result inhigh mortality rates and have the potential for major health impact, they have the ability to causemajor public panic and social disruption , and require special action for public healthpreparedness. A prime example of a category A bio­agent is examined below.

Anthrax

A serious disease caused by bacillus anthracis, a bacterium that forms spores. A bacterium is avery small organism made up of only one cell. A spore is a cell that is dormant, but can come tolife if the right conditions are present. There are three types of anthrax, as classified by the CDC:

Cutaneous (skin) anthrax Inhalation (lungs) anthrax Gastrointestinal (digestive) anthrax

Anthrax is a non­contagious disease, and the two ways it spreads to humans are from animalsor its dissemination as a weapon.Humans can become infected with anthrax by handlingproducts from infected animals or by breathing in anthrax spores from infected animal products(wool etc). One can also be infected with gastrointestinal anthrax by eating undercooked meatfrom infected animals. Anthrax can also be used as a weapon. This happened in the U.S.A in2001, when anthrax was deliberately spread through the postal system using letters. 5 peoplewere killed and at least 17 more were injured.

Symptoms of anthrax are different depending on the type of the disease.Symptoms of cutaneous

anthrax are small sores that appear on the skin and turn into blisters, which then develops into askin ulcer with a black area in the centre. Symptoms of inhalation anthrax are similar to cold orflu symptoms at first and can include a sore throat, mild fever and muscle aches. Latersymptoms include coughing, chest discomfort, tiredness, and shortness of breath. Symptomsof gastrointestinal anthrax include nausea, loss of appetite, bloody diarrhoea andviolent stomach pains and fever.

These symptoms can appear within seven days of coming in contact with thebacterium for all three types of anthrax. For inhalation anthrax, symptoms cansometimes take up to 42 days to appear.

Anthrax can be both prevented and treated, however. There is a vaccine to preventanthrax, but it is not available to the general public as of yet, and is only available to armyofficers, laboratory workers and workers who may enter contaminated areas.If a person hasbeen exposed to anthrax, they will be treated using antibiotics (such as ciprofloxacin, penicillin,levofloxacin and doxycycline) and they will also be given the anthrax vaccine to prevent infection.If a person has been infected, they must undergo what is usually a 60 day course of antibiotics.Success of treatment depends on the type of anthrax and how soon treatment is given.The points above give a brief introduction to the biological agent anthrax and the various types and symptoms of anthrax. (Biology.about.com, 2011, CDC.2013, HSA.2013)

Category B

The agents in this category are the second highest priority agents (as classified by the CDC)because they are moderately easy to spread, they result in moderate illness rates and low deathrates, and they require enhanced disease monitoring. An example of a biological agent incategory B is examined below.

Brucellosis­a highly contagious zoonoses (infectious disease that is transmitted between species) causedby ingestion of unsterilized milk or meat from infected animals or close contact with theirsecretions. Transmissions between humans can also occur, for example from mother to child orthrough sexual contact, but it is quite rare. Brucellosis has several other names, includingBang’s disease, Crimean fever and Malta fever. Brucella, a genus of Gram­negative bacteria, isthe cause of brucellosis. There are three ways brucellosis can be transmitted tohumans:

Eating undercooked meat or consuming unpasteurised/raw or dairy products.This is the mostcommon way to become infected. When cows, goats, sheep or camels are infected, forexample, their milk becomes contaminated with the bacteria. If milk from infected animals is notpasteurised the infection will be transmitted to people who consume the finished dairy products.Inhaling the bacteria that causes brucellosis can also cause infection. In general this risk is

greater for people who work in laboratories that work with the bacteria. In addition,slaughterhouse and meat­packing employees have also been known to be exposed to thebacteria and ultimately become infected.Bacteria entering the body through skin wounds or mucous membranes. This type oftransmission poses a problem for workers who have close contact with animals or animalexcretions (newborn animals, fetuses, and excretions that may result from birth), such asveterinarians, slaughterhouse workers etc.

There are a range of different symptoms caused by Brucellosis, some of which may be presentfor prolonged periods of time. Initial symptoms include fever, sweats, headaches, anorexia,fatigue, malaise, and pain in muscles/joints.Some signs or symptoms that can persist for longerperiods of time can include recurrent fevers, arthritis, neurological symptoms, chronic fatigue,depression, swelling of the heart (endocarditis), swelling of the liver/spleen, and swelling of thetesticle and scrotum area.

The best way to prevent brucellosis infection is to make sure not to consume undercooked meatand unpasteurised dairy products. People who handle animal tissues (such as hunters) shouldprotect themselves by using rubber gloves, goggles, and gowns or aprons. This can help ensurethat bacteria from potentially infected animals do not get into the eyes or inside an abrasion orcut on the skin.

Before treatment can begin, diagnosis of brucellosis infection must be made by a doctor. Testsmust be performed to look for bacteria in samples of blood, bone marrow, or other bodily fluids.A doctor can prescribe antibiotics once a diagnosis is made. In general, the antibioticsdoxycycline and rifampin are recommended in combination for a minimum of 6­8 weeks.The points above portray a brief outline of the disease brucellosis and its types andsymptoms.(CDC.2013,Homeland Security.2011, HPA.2012)

Category C

The agents in this category are the third highest priority agents (as classified by the CDC). Theyinclude emerging pathogens (infectious agents) that could be engineered for massdissemination in the future because of their availability, ease of production and dissemination,high mortality rate and their ability to cause a major health impact. An example of a category Cagent is examined below.

Hantavirus­negative sense RNA viruses in the Bunyaviridae family (negative stranded, enveloped RNAviruses). Humans may become infected with hantaviruses through saliva, urine or contact withrodent waste products. Some hantaviruses can cause potentially fatal diseases in humans,such as hantavirus pulmonary syndrome (HPS) and hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome(HFRS). Most human infections of hantaviruses have been linked to human contact with rodent

excrement. When fresh rodent droppings, urine or nesting materials are stirred up, tiny dropletscontaining the virus get into the air. This process is known as ‘airborne transmission’. There areseveral other ways rodents may spread hantavirus to people:If a person is bitten by a rodent carrying the virus, the virus can be spread to the person, but this type of transmission is rare.People may become infected by touching something that has been contaminated with rodent waste products, and then proceeding to touch their nose or mouth.People can also become infected if they eat food contaminated by urine, droppings, or saliva from an infected rodent.

Symptoms of hantavirus may develop in an infected person between 1 and 5 weeks afterexposure to the virus. Early symptoms include fever, fatigue, muscle aches, head aches,dizziness, chills, nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. Four to ten days after the initial phase ofillness, the late symptoms of HPS appear. These include coughing and shortness of breath.HPS can be deadly, and has a mortality rate of approx. 38%.

To prevent contraction of the hantavirus, one must try to eliminate or minimise contact withrodents in the home, workplace, etc. Holes in the home can be sealed up to keep rodents out,traps can be set up in the home to trap and kill rodents, and precautions can be taken whencleaning up rodent infested areas.

There is no specific treatment for infection of hantavirus, and diagnosis of the disease is difficult,as early symptoms are often confused with those of influenza. Once the disease has beendiagnosed, the best thing for a patient to do is to receive medical care in an intensive care unit, inwhich they are intubated and given oxygen therapy to help them through the period of severerespiratory distress.(CDC.2013, HPA.2012, Homeland Security.2011, Biology.About.com.2011)

The above points give a brief introduction to the hantavirus, and its symptoms and its methods oftransmission.

Genetic Engineering

Starting offTo understand how genetic engineering works you first need an understanding of what DNA is,how it’s

formed and how it works:

Dna (Deoxyribonucleic acid) is a long polymer made from repeating units called nucleotides(anucleotide is the basic structural unit of nucleic acid such as DNA) and a backbone attached to eachnucleotide consisting of sugars (called 2­deoxyribose sugars) bonded to a phosphate group , eachnucleotide consists of a 5­carbon sugar, a nitrogen containing base attached to the sugar, and a phosphategroup. The nucleoid attaches to the backbone and then two come together and their nucleoids bond to form“base pairs” , when these are formed, the DNA twists into what is known as a “double helix”.It is the sequence of these nucleobases along the backbone that encodes genetic information. A gene is adistinct portion of a cell’s DNA. Genes are coded instructions for making everything the body needs,especially proteins. Human beings have about 25,000 genes.

Genetic engineering is the deliberate modification of the characteristics of an organism bymanipulating its genetic material(modifying it’s genes).An organism that is generated through geneticengineering is considered to be a genetically modified organism (GMO).Bacteria were the first organisms tobe genetically modified. (Plasmid DNA containing new genes can be inserted into the bacterial cell and thebacteria will then express those genes.)

How it’s doneThe main step in genetic engineering is to choose and isolate the gene that will be inserted into the

genetically modified organism. The gene can be isolated using restriction enzymes(Nucleases) to cut DNAinto fragments and gel electrophoresis to separate them out according to length.Polymerase chain reaction(PCR) can also be used to amplify up a gene segment, which can then be isolated through gelelectrophoresis. If the DNA sequence is known, but no copies of the gene are available, it can be artificiallysynthesized.

One technique of genetic engineering the plasmid method (A plasmid is a linear or circulardouble­stranded DNA that is capable of replicating independently of the chromosomal DNA). , is generallyused for altering microorganisms such as bacteria. In the plasmid method, a small ring of DNA called aplasmid (generally found in bacteria) is placed in a container with special restriction enzymes (nucleases)that cut the DNA at a certain recognizable sequence. The same enzyme is then used to treat the DNAsequence to be engineered into the bacteria; this procedure creates ends that will fuse together if given theopportunity.

Next, the two separate cut­up DNA sequences are introduced into the same container, where theends allow them to fuse, thus forming a ring of DNA with additional content. New enzymes are added to helpcement the new linkages, and the culture is then separated by molecular weight. Those molecules thatweigh the most have successfully incorporated the new DNA, and they are to be preserved.The next step involves adding the newly formed plasmids to a culture of live bacteria with known genomes (agenome is The complete set of genetic material of an organism) some of which will take up the free­floatingplasmids and begin to express them. In general, the DNA introduced into the plasmid will include not onlyinstructions for making a protein, but also antibiotic­resistance genes. These resistance genes can then beused to separate the bacteria which have taken up the plasmid from those that have not. The scientistsimply adds the appropriate antibiotic, and the survivors are virtually guaranteed (barring spontaneousmutations) to possess the new genes.

Next, the scientist allows the successfully altered bacteria to grow and reproduce. They can now beused in experiments or put to work in industry, or warfare. Furthermore, the bacteria can be allowed toevolve on their own, with a "selection pressure" provided by the scientist for producing more protein.Because of the power of natural selection, the bacteria produced after many generations will outperform thebest of the early generations.(Ecology by James M. Tiedje, Robert K. Colwell, Yaffa L. Grossman, Robert E.Hodson, Richard E. Lenski, Richard N. Mack and Philip J. Rega 1989l)

Many people strongly object to the plasmid method of genetic engineering because they fear thatthe engineered plasmids will be transferred into other bacteria which would cause problems if theyexpressed the gene. Lateral gene transfer of this type is indeed quite common in bacteria, but in general thebacteria engineered by this method do not come in contact with natural bacteria except in controlledlaboratory conditions. Those bacteria that will be used in the wild, for example, those that could clean up oilspills are generally released for a specific purpose and in a specific area, and they are carefully supervisedby scientists.(Slick Solution: How Microbes Will Clean Up the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill by David Biello2010 )

Gel Electrophoresis

Earlier i mentioned Gel electrophoresis, Gel electrophoresis is a method used to separate DNA,RNA Proteins and their fragments based on their size and charge,Nucleic acid molecules are separatedby applying an electric field to move the negatively charged molecules through an agarose matrix. Agaroseis a material generally extracted from seaweed made of a linear polymer of repeating units of agarobiose,the nucleic acid molecules are separated by applying an electric field to move the molecules through theagarose, the shorter molecules move faster and migrate farther than longer ones. Once separated thenucleic acids form distinct “bands” in the agarose.

PCR

Earlier i also mentioned Polymerase chain reaction, Polymerase chain reaction is a method used toamplify/copy small segments of DNA, it is done using a DNA polymerase ( An enzyme which synthesisesDNA) and materials used to build new strands of DNA, it involves a complicated series of heating andcooling the DNA in solution to allow the polymerase to construct “new” DNA identical to the original DNAplaced in the reaction mixture. It’s speed relies on the polymerase used, working temperature, and theamount of base pairs in the DNA. (The more base pairs, the slower the copying). This reaction is veryuseful for copying an isolated gene to make many copies, which can then be used for modifying organisms.

Uses: The Good and The Bad

Genetic engineering can have many uses for humanity, many uses being good such as modifyingE.coli to produce insulin (Done by Herbert Boyer in 1978) which can be used as a source for insulin inmedicine or creating nutrient enhanced crops that provide more nutrients than common crops such as

golden rice ( rice which has been modified to contain vitamin and iron) , or even for fun by modifying cats toproduce fluorescent light under ultraviolet light (done in Gyeongsang National University in South Korea) orthe commonly available (in America) Glofish®, a genetically engineered zebrafish the glows.

You may ask at this point “what has this got to do with Bioterrorism?”. So far it seems like it’s amarvelous technique used to improve lives, But Genetic engineering can be used to make antibiotic­resistant bacteria and viruses for use in biological warfare, and it can turn usually harmless bacteria intoweapons.

Genetic engineering can turn harmless bacteria into lethal biological weapons by introducing deadly genesfrom a highly pathogenic organism. This was done by US researchers as early as 1986. They isolated thegene for the lethal factor of Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax, and introduced intoEscherichia coli (E coli), a normally harmless gut bacteria. The US team reported that the lethal factorprotein was active in E. coli and displayed the same deadly effects as it did when in its native B. anthracis.If these modified bacteria were able to cultivate themselves in our body like normal E.coli it would causeserious harm with the same effects of Anthrax. Recently, researchers from Porton Down in the UK usedgenes conferring resistance to antibiotics for genetic studies in fully virulent strains of anthrax (BiologicalWeapons By Sharad S. Chauhan). Ken Alibek, a former Soviet biological weapons leader, has reported thatduring the 1980’s the Soviet Union developed antibiotic­resistant strains of plague, anthrax, tularemia, andglanders bacteria.

Viruses can be also used in genetic engineering to genetically modify an animal or even a plant.They act as carriers called vectors to carry modified DNA (genes) or RNA into an organism's cells, thegenetic material within a virus can be modified and inserted into an organism, cells take the DNA from thevirus and makes it part of it’s DNA (recombinant DNA), then the cell can undergo DNA replication and makethe new DNA part of the hosts genome. This can be used in gene therapy, which focuses on single genedefects, such as cystic fibrosis, if it’s successful, the new gene can produce proteins to treat the disease.The viruses can also be modified to create new strains of that virus that possess different charistics to theoriginal virus, these can include their detectability or their ability to resist eradication from the host by theimmune system.

Gene Therapy

Gene therapy is an experimental technique that uses genes to treat or prevent disease. It works by“knocking out” mutated genes that may be causing adverse effects to the individual or adding new genesthat may function better than the ones already present in the individual. In the future, this technique mayallow doctors to treat a disorder by inserting a gene into a patient’s cells instead of using drugs or surgery.Gene therapy is currently only being tested for the treatment of diseases that have no other cures.These genes are inserted using viruses as vectors, These viruses can include:Retroviruses:A class of viruses that can create double­stranded DNA copies of their RNA genomes. Thesecopies of its genome can be integrated into the chromosomes of host cells. An example of a retrovirus isHIV.Adenoviruses: A class of viruses with double­stranded DNA genomes that cause respiratory, intestinal,and eye infections in humans. The virus that causes the common cold is an adenovirus.Adeno­associated viruses: A class of small, single­stranded DNA viruses that can insert their geneticmaterial at a specific site on chromosome 19.Herpes simplex viruses: A class of double­stranded DNA viruses that infect a particular cell type, neurons.Herpes simplex virus type 1 is a common human pathogen that causes cold sores.

Controversy

Genetically modified food: Critics argue that the effects of genetic engineering are not fully knownyet, they argue that the new genes placed within plants could make their way into the wild population andmutate creating organisms to which humans may have to defence to.They also possess some dangers, oneexample is when mutated soybeans that had genes from the brazil nut also carried the allergenic propertiesof that nut, this was unexpected and could have caused many allergic reactions if the beans had beenreleased to the public. (Genetically modified soybeans and food allergies by Eliot M. Herman 2003 )

Gene Therapy: Opponents of Gene therapy argue over the unknown and unpredictable results of changing

someone’s genes, they argue that changing someone’s genome could contribute to genetic disorders or

diseases and that it could affect future generations in unexpected ways. (The Ethics of Gene Therapy byEmilie R. Bergeson 1997 )

Conclusion

Genetic engineering is a massively beneficial process that could change the way we see the world,it could be used for the benefit of the world, producing more medicine and food in harsher conditions or ingreater quantities, it could solve world hunger if we achieve it’s true potential or cure diseases previouslyuntreatable. But in the wrong hands it could be a lethal weapon posing a threat to the world, it could wipeout races or wipe out a countries population, the threat is present and people are aware of it. ( DoD NewsBriefing Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen 1997 )If an organisation designated for harm managed to produce a genetically engineered pathogen, the world canonly theorise what could happen. Although it is surrounded in controversy, it could be a blessing to the worldthat could cure millions of diseases and fix disorders that are not treatable by normal medical methods.(Diseases by Dr. Maggie Pearce 2011)

Biological Weaponization

When weaponizing a biological agent, several factors must be taken into consideration. Themethod of weaponizing the biological agent depends on what the creator wants to accomplish bydoing so. In general, ideal characteristics of a biological agent to be used as a weapon againsthumans are high infectivity, high virulence, non­availability of vaccines, availability of an efficientand effective delivery system, and the stability of the weaponized agent, that is its ability to retainits virulence and infectivity after a prolonged period of storage. The main reasons why biologicalagents are commonly chosen to be used as biological weapons are that they are highly toxic,easily obtainable and are inexpensive to produce. (Neal Chamberlain.2005)

As mentioned, a major factor that must be considered when weaponizing a biological agent isits delivery system or its means of dissemination into the environment. There are several waysin which a biological agent can be released. They can be sprayed into the air as a wet or dryaerosol, they can be placed wet or dry in water or food sources and injected into people, plantsor animals, or they can be released by explosive dissemination.(CDC Emergency RiskCommunication Branch [(ERCB)], Division of Emergency.2006)

Biological weapons released into the air using aerosols have the potential to infect many peoplein highly populated areas. Release into food and water sources can also infect large numbers ofpeople. Injection of a bioweapon usually targets just a few people at a time. Aerosols, water andfood contamination can make it difficult for an attacker when they want to the occupy the area ofthe biological weapon release, since they are also likely to become infected, although in terms ofspeed and efficiency they are effective forms of dissemination.

There are five different categories of biological agents that could be weaponized and used inwarfare or terrorism. We will examine these categories below.

Bacteria­single­cell organisms that cause diseases such as anthrax, brucellosis, and plague.

Rickettsiae­ microorganisms that are similar in appearance to bacteria, but differ in that they areintracellular parasites that reproduce inside cells. Typhus is an example of a disease caused byrickettsia organisms.

Fungi­ pathogens that can be weaponized for use against crops to cause diseases such as

potato blight and rice blast.

Toxins­ poisons that can be weaponized after extraction from creatures such as insects, snakes, marine organisms, spiders, and other organisms. A ricin is a good example of a toxin, as it isderived from the seed of a castor bean.

Viruses­ intracellular parasites about 100 times smaller than bacteria. They can be weaponizedto cause diseases such as Venezuelan equine encephalitis. (Barry R.Schneider.2013)

All these biological agents can be weaponized into biological weapons, and in the process canbe genetically modified through the process of genetic engineering to be made more powerfuland more dangerous to the target victims. We will examine genetic engineering in relation tobiological weapons later on. Some of these biological agents have properties that would makethem more likely candidates for weaponization owing to their lethality, ability to incapacitate ,contagiousness or non­contagiousness, hardiness and stability etc. An example of an effectiveagent for weaponization is bacillus anthracis, or anthrax as it more commonly known.(UPMCHealth Security.2011)

Firstly, it forms hardy spores, perfect for dispersal aerosols. Secondly, anthrax is notconsidered transmissible from person to person, which means it rarely causes secondaryinfections. Finally a pulmonary anthrax infection starts with ordinary influenza­like symptoms andprogresses to a lethal hemorrhagic mediastinitis within 3–7 days, with a fatality rate that is 90%or higher in untreated patients. A large scale anthrax attack would require the creation of aerosolparticles of 1.5 to 5 microns : larger particles would not reach the lower respiratory tract, whilesmaller particles would be exhaled back into the atmosphere. At this size, conductive powershave the tendency to aggregate because of electrostatic charges, hindering dispersion. Thismeans that that the materials must be treated to insulate and neutralize the charges. Theweaponized agent must be resistant to degradation by rain and ultraviolet radiation from sunlight,while keeping the ability to efficiently to infect the human lung. An effective aerosol must haveparticle sizes between 0.5 and 5 micrometers. These aerosols are invisible, do not have anyodor, and can remain in the air for long periods of time depending on the weather conditions.If the aerosol is dry then the organisms must first be concentrated and dried. After drying theymust be gently ground up to the correct particle size. If the grinding is too rough it will kill theorganisms. When particles are at the size to settle on the inner surfaces of the lungselectrostatic charges cause the particles to clump together. As a result, additives must beincluded to eliminate the clumping of the particles. The particle sizes in wet aerosols aredetermined in part by the size of the nozzle used to deliver the aerosol and by certain additivesplaced with the BW before release. In summary a lot of technology and engineering is needed todeliver these aerosols making it nearly impossible for an untrained person to release an effectiveaerosol. (Neal Chamberlain.2005)

Biological agents as weapons are often overlooked in the face of chemical or nuclear weapons,but the utter panic and fear that they can cause is far greater than that of any chemical ornuclear weapon, and the destruction and fatalities they inflict can often be lethal. It is imperativethat more research is carried out to counter and prevent the weaponization and improper use ofbiological agents, and to ensure that in the event of a biological attack, the correct steps aretaken to control the spread of the agent and to minimize the amount of damage done.

A Short History of Bioterrorism(Chronologically)

Early Bioterrorism

Our species has very early roots in biological warfare. Biological terrorism dates as far back as AncientRome, when faeces were thrown into faces of enemies, to both blind enemies and transmit diseases.(Bossi, 2004.)The bubonic plague was used to infiltrate enemy cities, it was common practise during a siege for thepeople holding the siege to catapult plague victims and dead animals into cities, it spread disease easilyand the smell was unbearable. (Bioterrorism Week. 2005)

Anthrax

One significant enhancement in biological weapon development was the first use of anthrax, in 1886 anthraxwas the first bacterium to be discovered that inflicted disease, ever since then its been a prominent figure inbioterrorism.Inhalational anthrax and bioterrorism. (Quintiliani, R. 2001)

WWIBy the time World War I began, attempts to use anthrax were directed at animal populations, in order toweaken the enemies supplies. (Bill Bishop. 2001)

1940 ­ World War IIThe Japanese dropped paper bags filled with plague­infested fleas over the cities of Ningbo and Quzhou inZhejiang province, which was intended to spread over enemy lines like it once had but most who contractedthe plague died of more immediate injuries, and many of the dropped bags were unsuccessful as largeamounts of rain drowned many fleas. (GUILLEMIN, Jeanne.2001)

USAAmerican biological weapon development began in 1942. President Richard Nixon shut down all programsrelated to American offensive use of biological weapons in 1969, he also vastly cut funds for defence againstbioweapons which is partially responsible for the effectiveness of the bioterrorism attacks of the USA in2001. (Wegmann, AS. 2002.)

1972,The U.S. and more than 100 nations signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, the world's firsttreaty banning an entire class of weapons. (Department of Peace Studies of the University of Bradford. 1972)

“Soviet Superbugs"In 1979, a rare outbreak of anthrax disease in the city of Sverdlovsk killed nearly 70 people. The Sovietgovernment publicly blamed contaminated meat, but U.S. intelligence sources suspected the outbreak waslinked to secret weapons work at a nearby army lab.

In 1992, Russia allowed a U.S. team to visit Sverdlovsk. The team's investigation turned up telltale evidencein the lungs of victims that many died from inhalation anthrax, likely caused bythe accidental release of aerosolized anthrax spores from the military base. Given the hundreds of tons ofanthrax the Sverdlovsk facility could produce, the release of just a small amount of spores was fortunate.

News of the immensity of the Soviets' biological weapons program began to reach the West in 1989, whenbiologist Vladimir Pasechnik defected to Britain. The stories he told—of genetically altered "superplague"antibiotic­resistant anthrax, and long­range missiles designed to spread disease—were confirmed by laterdefectors like Ken Alibek and Sergei Popov.

The Soviet program was spread over dozens of facilities and involved tens of thousands of specialists. In thelate 1980s and 1990s, many of these scientists became free agents—with dangerous knowledge for sale.(Jack Woodall. 1999)

1984 ­ USA ­ Rajneeshee bioterror attack

In Oregon in 1984, followers of the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh attempted to control a local election byincapacitating the local population. This was done by infecting salad bars in 11 restaurants, produce ingrocery stores, doorknobs, and other public domains with Salmonella typhimurium bacteria in the city of TheDalles, Oregon. The attack infected 751 people with severe food poisoning. However, there were no fatalities.This incident was the first known bioterrorist attack in the United States in the 20th century.(Marlantes, Liz. 2001)

Iraq Bioweaponsbioweapons experts may have been lured to Iraq. Iraq launched its own bioweapons program around 1985.In 1991, however, Iraq had weaponized anthrax, botulinum toxin, and aflatoxin and had several other lethalagents in development.Iraq is known to have unleashed chemical weapons in the 1980s, What is almost certain, though, is thatthis arsenal still exists the Iraqi arsenal is likely growing in power. (Richard Stone. 2002)

1993 ­ Japan ­ Aum Shinrikyo anthrax release in Kameido

In June 1993 the religious group Aum Shinrikyo released anthrax in Tokyo. Eyewitnesses reported a foulodor. The attack was a total failure, infecting not a single person. The reason for this, ironically, is that thegroup used the vaccine strain of the bacterium. The spores recovered from the attack showed that they wereidentical to an anthrax vaccine strain given to animals at the time. These vaccine strains are missing thegenes that cause a symptomatic response. (The Observer(London). 2000)

2001 ­ USA ­ Anthrax Attacks

For more than two decades, bioterrorism experts warned that America may be vulnerable to attack withbiological weapons. In the fall of 2001, these warnings took on a new urgency.In September and October 2001, several cases of anthrax broke out in the United States in the 2001 anthraxattacks, caused deliberately. Letters laced with infectious anthrax were delivered to news media offices andthe U.S Congress. The letters infected 18 and killed 5. The attacks caused fear for hundreds of millions dueto the lack of knowledge about bioterrorism. As New York Times reporter Judith Miller notes in NOVA's"Bioterror," the anthrax­laced letters sparked "mass disruption" rather than "mass destruction." Tests on the

anthrax strain used in the attack pointed to a domestic source, possibly from the biological weaponsprogram. Still the attacks provoked efforts to define biodefense and biosecurity, where more limiteddefinitions of biosafety had focused on unintentional or accidental impacts of agricultural and medicaltechnologies. (Hugh Doherty. 2001) (M. Mcarthy. 2001)

The Future of Bio­Terrorism

Introduction:

For many years we did not think of bio­terrorism as an actual threat, it was only after 9/11 and thesubsequent anthrax mailings to the top US politicians ( Tom Daschle of South Dakota and Patrick Leahy ofVermont) and reporting companies ( ABC News, CBS News, NBC News and the New York Post), that theworld, and the U.S.A in particular, really started to see bioterrorism as a future issue. The real problem, theydiscovered, was the ease at which a potential terrorist could construct a biological weapon that could killhundreds of millions of people. all it would take is a few months' work in a makeshift laboratory, Thescientific information is freely available and the raw materials easily sourced. The only difficult part would bemastering the necessary scientific skills, and they are taught on most biology degree courses.

Following on from the human genome project (13­year project coordinated by the U.S. Departmentof Energy and the National Institutes of Health, which primary goal was to identify all the genes and thesequences of the chemical base pairs in human DNA) in 2003, there has been a surge of investment anddiscovery in both the gene sequencing and synthetic biology sectors of biotechnology. While the informationcontained in genome databases is not inherently dangerous, it can be used for destructive purposes. Withsynthesis technology becoming less expensive, more accurate, and faster every year, it is foreseeable thatby 2020 manufacturers will have the ability to manipulate genomes in order to engineer new bioterrorismweapons.

One of the simplest ways of constructing a biological weapon would be to engineer an existinghuman disease to make it even more lethal. Something as simple as the flu virus, when engineered with thegene for the botulinum toxin (the most acutely toxic substance known), could wipe out a significant part ofthe human race. A low dose of this toxin is the main ingredient in cosmetic botox injections.The geneticsequence for the toxin is freely available. This sequence could then be uploaded to a commonly availablegene synthesiser, which would churn out millions of copies of the gene in a few hours. The flu virus wouldthen be grown in the presence of this newly synthesised gene. As the virus reproduced, a few of the virusparticles would absorb the gene. With a bit of luck, the potential terrorist would have produced a newbiological weapon.

Think that sounds impossible, American scientists did it earlier in the year to prove to complacentpolicy makers just how simple it was. Delivery of the weapon would be straightforward. A potential suicide"bomber" need only inject himself and take a few rides on the tube. To be certain of spreading the disease,he could take a few international flights to ensure the plague hit all parts of the globe simultaneously.But how likely is it? That depends on just how mad ­ or committed ­ this new breed of terrorist is.

(Ethel Machi and Jena Baker McNeill August 24, 2010http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/08/new­technologies­future­weapons­gene­sequencing­and­synthetic­biology) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks, 2013)

Bioterrorism prevention strategy

Upon reading the introduction you have probably come to the conclusion that restricting access tothe genomic database could ameliorate much of the problem. But in­fact the gene databases are afundamental tool for researchers and futures advances in gene sequencing and synthesis would actually beseverely hindered by government, regulation of theses databases. Moreover, the full genetic sequence formany select agents and other pathogenic genomes (smallpox, botulism, anthrax) are already inInternet­accessible databases that are open to the general public and allow anonymous and unmandatedaccess. Once a genome has been released onto the Web, it makes little sense to restrict future publicationof that genome. (Posting something to the Internet is easy; removing all copies of said post is anear­impossible feat.)

Over Regulation will have a negative effect on research, while under regulation would undoubtedlyexpose countries to national security risks, Federal american agencies such as the NIH and the NSF maybe best suited to conduct ongoing risk assessments for synthetic biology and gene sequencingtechnologies. As the field develops, regulations should be updated frequently so that they can be narrowlytailored to fit the current risks, thereby impacting future research as little as possible. In addition,independent committees of industry leaders, agency officials, and academics should be appointed to createregulations based on these risk assessments, effectively creating a system of systems.

(Ethel Machi and Jena Baker McNeill August 24, 2010http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/08/new­technologies­future­weapons­gene­sequencing­and­synthetic­biology)

System of systems

You are probably wondering what exactly is meant by a system of systems. Basically there is noone way to universally combat the terrorist challenge, preparedness cannot be focused on a single tool foraddressing the problem but on a system of systems, so to speak, that integrates a broad range of activities.The nation’s public health resources, surveillance systems, epidemiological expertise, and laboratorynetworks must be integrated with health care, emergency management, law enforcement systems, andothers, and all of these must be connected by a system for sharing information and communicating acrosssectors.

Bio­terrorism is very different than other types of mass casualty terrorism (e.g., chemical,radiological, or nuclear terrorism) in that it would impose heavy demands on the public health and healthcare systems, which would be called upon to assist the law enforcement community in gathering criminalevidence, following a bioterrorist attack. thus we must build medical management capacities includingstockpiles of vaccines, antibiotics, and other supplies and systems for rapidly distributing these materialsand a system connecting the "front­end" awareness and assessment capacities to the "back­end" of thebioterrorism response system. (http://goo.gl/Te7IF, Michael J. Powers and Jonathan Ban, Spring 2002)

Surveillance

Early detection will be critical to saving lives. The sooner a bioterrorist event is detected, the sooneran assessment of the event can be completed, and the sooner medical care can be administered to thoseexposed. In the case of highly contagious diseases such as smallpox or the pneumonic plague, detectingan outbreak early is essential to containing the outbreak. Unfortunately one of todays biggest problem isthat people are extremely mobile commuting in and out of urban centers on a daily bases and visiting foreigncountries frequently and failure to detect an outbreak of a contagious disease could result in its rapidspread.

A national surveillance system to provide an early warning of unusual outbreaks of disease, bothnatural and intentional, will be a critical component of our preparedness. This system will depend on aninformation infrastructure that includes electronic data networks connecting local public health departmentsand area health care providers and providing regular analyses of the data for the presence of unusual trendsthat could indicate a bioterrorist attack. Additional sources of data that could provide an early indication of abioterrorist attack include spikes in flu­like symptoms, over­the­counter drug sales, or absenteeism. Thecrucial element will be a robust information infrastructure for collecting, analyzing, and sharing informationfrom all of these sources. (http://goo.gl/Te7IF, Michael J. Powers and Jonathan Ban, Spring 2002)

Project Bioshield

Ok, after we have all the early detection methods in place the last step is to developcountermeasures to be used in the event of a biological attack. Project bioshield is a prime example of this.After 9/11 and the subsequent anthrax mailings, the US government launched a major programme calledproject bioshield, the aim of which was to develop countermeasures to a bio­attack, including, but notlimited to, the development of diagnostics, vaccines and drugs against bioterrorist threats, particularlyattacks using anthrax and smallpox.

The government poured funds into basic research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH); set upthe Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), to develop and test new

concepts; and established project BioShield. In 2004, the US Congress passed the Project BioShield Act(signed by President George W. Bush on 21 July 2004) calling for funding for purchasing vaccines thatwould be used in the event of a bioterrorist attack. Specifically, it proposed a $5.6 billion programme topurchase approved drugs and vaccines.According to the scientific journal Science, about $60 billion havebeen spent on biodefense preparedness in the USA. Of this, some $19 billion has gone into biodefenseresearch in America, a very large increase over previous levels. In June 2011, the US Congress proposedreauthorizing BARDA and funding BioShield at $2.8 billion for 2014­2018.BioShield has invested in astockpile of 20 million dose of smallpox vaccine and 28.75 million doses of anthrax vaccine and 1.98 milliondoses of four medicines to treat complications of smallpox, anthrax and botulism

Unfortunately only two vaccines currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)one for anthrax and one for smallpox. There are no vaccines for smallpox, the plague, tularemia, Ebola andMarburg viruses and botulinum, and no product is likely to become available in the foreseeable future. But inan emergency, antibiotics and antioxidants that are not FDA approved could, in an emergency, be given tothe general public (Russell PK 2007 Jul http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17582574)

Conclusion

Building and sustaining the public health system of systems described here will require sustainedinvestment in people, technology, and materials. Adequate numbers of trained public health and medicalpersonnel will be necessary to monitor the nation’s health on an ongoing basis, operate and maintain thenetwork of public health laboratories, investigate and analyze unusual outbreaks of disease, and providepreventive and therapeutic medical care for natural and intentional outbreaks. An effective system ofsystems will also require adequate stocks of antibiotics, vaccines, and medical supplies, at both thenational and local levels, to ensure that adequate treatment is available.

So, in conclusion the future of bio­terrorism is an easy to make, fast spreading, highlycontagious, genetically modified super virus! (most likely a mix of flu virus and the botulinum toxin) That ifreleased onto a major urban could spread at an alarming rate, with mortality rate ranging in the 100s ofmillions. and if we do not start to prepare right now, there will be nothing we can do stop this new breed ofterrorist.

The Ethical Implications of Biological WarfareIn biological warfare there are many different issues that need to be addressed. Some of the most pressing concerns are:

Is it ever condoned? Is its research and testing justified if it can potentially save lives? Is it ethically correct to instill a healthy fear in the population if it could be beneficial?

During this section I hope to address, expand and explain these issues as well as give my own opinion on them.

Are there scenarios in which a biological attack is condoned?I believe that in situations where genocide is a strong possibility a retaliation with a biological weapon could not help any faster than regular weapons, biological weapons are agents of terrorism and not warfare. If an enemy of your country tried to unleash a “superbug” which just targeted people from your country would modifying it to attack them be any faster than a regular bomb? Would it help those who’re already affected? The answer is no. Under no circumstances do I believe that biological warfare is condoned. But to keep this completely scientific I’ll analyse it from an opposing viewpoint. Perhaps it might be the only way to deal with hostage situations where the captors are all of a genetic makeup that the hostages are not. Or perhaps it could be a way to deal with an aggressive type of fungus that was poisonous to humans. Furthermore there would be many countries who would view it as a way to quickly deal with terrorist threats with no civilian casualties.

Most countries have signed the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention which means that theyhave agreed to absolutely no use of biological weapons. The Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention wasthe first convention to ban an entire class of weapons. But many countries have enemies and biologicalweapons are a good way to instill fear in a population which could lead to clumsy military mistakes and apotential conquering of a country. So biological weapons might not be prohibited by all major countries forlong. The consequences of biological weapons must be known by the populations of every country so thatnone could condone their use.

(Seumas Miller, Michael J. Selgelid. 2007)

Is the research and testing of biological weapons justified if it could potentially save lives?If it was possible to save lives through research in biological warfare would it be justified even if your countrycame into possession of a “superbug” would the possible prevention of genocide be outweighed by thepossible genocide that could result from the discovery of a “superbug”? The answer to this question is not aneasy one, but it is one that every country must decide for itself.

Another issue is the testing. Is it morally correct to expose animals to the agents that we fear wecould be exposed to? Is it right to shift the burden to another species, one that has no involvement inbiological warfare? My answer to these questions is cynical, and calculating. The risk of the animals isjustified as the animals aren't at risk of genocide like we are, only a few animals would need to be sacrificedto help insure humanities survival. Not to mention that due to animals being a source of food for us theywould most likely be at just as much risk as us of biological attacks as in World War I, and the researchwould be just as valuable to them as a species. Meaning that the tough decision would more than likelywork out for the greater good.(Bill Bishop. 2001)

Is it ethically correct to instill fear of biological weapons into the population if it could potentiallysave lives?The answer to this question is complicated and really depends on what kind of country you’re in. I think theanswer lies somewhere in the balance. It’s important for people to understand how dangerous the weaponscan be, but it shouldn’t be abused or used as a selling tool to get people to join the army. There is a hugerisk of genocide with these weapons so the citizens of countries that are at risk to biological warfare shouldbe equipped with gas masks just incase biological warfare could be used.(MG Kortepeter, GW Parke. 1999)

Conclusion:Many countries are at huge risk to biological warfare as the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention onlyprohibits use of biological weapons not possession, which countries like Iraq and America have takenadvantage of, which means that should a country decide that war is in its best interest it could have beenheavily researching biological weapons for many years. I believe that the Biological and Toxin WeaponsConvention needs to be revisited to include prohibition of possession of biological weapons so that none ofthe precautions and ethics of them need be addressed. Since their first use biological weapons have been aplague on humanity.(The Christian Science Monitor. 2002) (Dorey, E. 2001)

Summary of ChapterDuring the course of this chapter, we have researched and examined in detail the topics ofbiological agents, their types, their use as biological weapons, the history of biological warfare,bioterrorism, the use of genetic engineering to modify agents, and the expected future course ofbioterrorism and the use of biological agent as weapons.To briefly summarize, there are three categories of biological agents, A, B, and C, ranging fromhighly dangerous to moderately dangerous, and we have examined an example of an agent ineach of these categories earlier.We have also examined biological agents as weapons,the ideal characteristics of a biologicalagent to be used as a weapon and the different agents that can be made into a bio­weapon.We also researched the history of biological warfare, dating as far back as Ancient Romantimes, when the Romans through faeces into their enemies faces, right up to the 2001 Anthraxattacks in the U.S.A.. Bioterrorism has also been examined alongside biological warfare, as thetwo topics are similar and overlap quite a lot.Genetic engineering of biological weapons has also been examined in this chapter, that is, themodification of biological agents to make them more lethal and more effective as weapons.The future path of bioterrorism is another topic that has been examined during the course of thischapter, which is quite simply, the ability to engineer already existing viruses into more morelethal variations.

Overall, we have examined the above topics in great detail throughout this chapter, and we havecome to the conclusion that bioterrorism has the potential to become one of the biggest threats

to mankind

Special thanks for reading from: Isobel Leddin, Project leader Writer of Categorization of Bioweapons & Bioweapons Diarmuid Carty, Online Editor & Writer of Genetic Engineering Jack Eaton, Chapter Editor, Writer of A Short History of Bioweapons & The Ethical

Implications of Bioweapons Fionn English, Writer of The Future of Bioterrorism

ReferencesThe History of Bioterrorism

Bossi, P. 2004. Bichat guidelines for the clinical management of haemorrhagic fever viruses andbioterrorism­related haemorrhagic fever viruses. Euro surveillance : bulletin européen sur les maladiestransmissibles Euro Surveill9.12: E11­E12.

2005 Plague; Researchers distinguish bioterrorism and naturally occurring plague infections­ TB &outbreaks weekly. June. Page 54

Quintiliani, R Inhalational anthrax and bioterrorism. CURRENT OPINION IN PULMONARY MEDICINE.Volume 9. May. Page 221 ­ 226.

Bill Bishop. 2001. Anthrax in history: Disease is ancient but our fears are new, Tough spores afflictedanimals and humans but were not cause for panic. Series: War on Terrorism: America Responds. PageA.1.

2001. BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS. Kirkus reviews (New York, N.Y. : 1991) Issue 21.

American Biowarfare ­ Wegmann, AS

http://www.opbw.org/ ­ Department of Peace Studies of the University of Bradford

The soviet bioweapons programme: An insiders view ­ Jack Woodall

Anthrax attacks may be homegrown ; While agents continue to look abroad, they are also probing USextremist groups ­ Marlantes Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor, Liz

Peering into the shadows: Iraq’s bioweapon programme ­ Richard Stone

THE AUM SHINRIKYO CULT ­ The Observer(London)

Iraq 'may be behind US anthrax attacks' ­ Birmingham post (Birmingham, England) ­ Hugh Doherty

Anthrax Attack in the Usa ­ M. Mcarthy

The Ethical Implications of Biowarfare

Ethical and philosophical consideration of the dual­use dilemma in the biological sciences ­ S Miller, MJSelgelid

Anthrax in history: Disease is ancient but our fears are new, Tough spores afflicted animals and humans butwere not cause for panic. Series: War on Terrorism: America Responds­ Bill Bishop

MG Kortepeter, GW Parker ­ Emerging infectious diseases, 1999

Beyond Iraqs Bioweapons ­ The Christian Science Monitor

US rejects stronger bioweapons treaty ­ Nature biotechnology ­ Dorey, E

The Catagories of Agentswww.hsa,ie/eng/topic/biological_agents/ 2013 Health and Safety authority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_warfare June 2013

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioterrorism June 2012

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_agents May 2012

http://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/agentlist­category.asp 2012

Weaponisation of Biological Agents Bioterrorism Overview, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2008­02­12, retrieved 2009­05­22

http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/InfectiousDiseases/InfectionsAZ/Biological/GeneralInformation/drbi

o05Biologicalagents/ March 2012

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/938340/biological­weapon 2013 Barry R Shneider

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_warfare June 2013

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioterrorism June 2012

Future of BioterrorismEthel Machi and Jena Baker McNeill August 24, 2010http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/08/new­technologies­future­weapons­gene­sequencing­and­synthetic­biology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks, 2013

http://goo.gl/Te7IF, Michael J. Powers and Jonathan Ban, Spring 2002

Russell PK 2007 Jul http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17582574

Genetic Engineeringhttps://sites.google.com/site/bioterrorbible (a lot of stuff) <­ (sunshine project)

http://www.brighthub.com/science/genetics/articles/21889.aspx (first gmo)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26837/ (dna isolating, cloning and sequencing)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC232662/ (pcr)

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780121550899500077 (general dna)

http://dnasequencing.com/DNA­Backbone.html (dna backbone)

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how­microbes­clean­up­oil­spills (microbes that clean oilspills)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1572400/Glow­in­the­dark­cat­could­help­cut­disease.html (glow inthe dark cats)

Biological Weapons By Sharad S. Chauhan, pg 142

http://books.google.ie/books?id=MGZwgxoHxCAC&pg=PA142&lpg=PA142&dq=antibiotic+resistant+anthrax+porton+down&source=bl&ots=iOm05wkct8&sig=_v7opcza03Q_Y0BiZ5UuuLyS54s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KIHRUePoLsHJ0AWasIGICA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=antibiotic%20resistant%20anthrax%20porton%20down&f=false (antibiotic resistant anthrax)

http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/our­failing­food­system/genetic­engineering/genetic­engineering­techniques.html (genetic engineering techniques)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2004/oct/28/thisweekssciencequestions.weaponstechnology (ethnicweapon reference)

http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/be10.shtml (some controversy)

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/4935 (more controversy)

http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/therapy/genetherapy(gene therapy)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21601682 (gene synthesis)ecology (book, natural selection bacteria)

http://www.fas.org/biosecurity/education/dualuse/FAS_Levy/3_B.html soviet bioweapons