Deadly E. Coli Strain Kills throughout German_Source Unknown

A highly lethal strain of E. Coli that kills victims by inflicting acute kidney falure has hit Germany.  At least 1500 people have succumbed to serous illness from the biological agent with at least 16 people already dead. 

It is serious.  It is a mystery.

The E. Coli strain has been found to secrete a more potent form of a shiga toxin.  The E. Coli will cling to a person's intestinal wall and release massive amounts of shiga poisons to make people sick, causing amongst other things, sezures and stroke. 

But this new strain of E. Coli also appears to have other behavior that makes it highly unusual, one of which is making it difficult to detect by conventional means. 

E.Coli is a standard microbe used in biological research, both in biomedical and agricultural genetic research. This German strain of E. Coli could have undergone natural or made-made genetic changes to make it more potent.



One of the other main mysteries to this killer strain, is that public health officials cannot trace its source.  They assume it comes from raw vegetables and warn the public from eating raw tomatoes, cucumbers and lettuces.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/world/europe/02ecoli.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2

Synthetic Biology on the Loose!

As biotechnology advances, so do the safety issues. Synthetic biology poses additional threats to public health and safety as biocontainment in private companies remains unregulated.

Craig Venter and company have built the genome of a bacterium from scratch and incorporated it into a cell to make what they call the world's first synthetic life form. Although this is a startling scientific advancement with ethical and safety issues, Ventor naturally downplays safety risks. For more on this story see this link with a great video: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/may/20/craig-venter-synthetic-life-form.

See also:
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20100521_First_lab-created_organism_raises_ethical_questions.html#axzz0oXwzHZSL

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2010/05/21/MN4V1DI027.DTL

http://www.jcvi.org/cms/research/projects/first-self-replicating-synthetic-bacterial-cell/overview/

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/science/21cell.html?hpw

ANOTHER LABORATORY BIOSAFETY CASE_BIOTECH WORKER SICKENED WITH DANGEROUS INFECTIOUS AGENT

In light of all the recent biosafety issues, another biotech worker has become infected by an infectious microorganism while working in an infectious disease laboratory at University of Wisconsin-Madison. The University has been fined and a Professor of Infectious Disease has been punished by removal of his laboratory privileges.

University of W-Madison Professor Gary Splitter worked on Brucella, a microorganism which can cause Brucellosis, a major zoonotic disease. The disease can infect animals and can also cause a contagious disease in humans. Brucella is considered a bioterrorist agent. A biotech worker had become infected while working in Splitter's laboratory.

The Wisconsin State Journal states: "His lab created antibiotic-resistant strains of brucellosis and inserted them into mice in 2007 and possibly earlier, university officials said, without approval from local or federal agencies. The concern is that if someone contracted the antibiotic-resistant version of the disease created in the lab, treatment might have been more difficult." "

Splitter will lose his laboratory privileges for five years due to this serious biosafety incident and since his laboratory was not within recombinant DNA NIH standards. The university was fined $40,000 for their role also in violations of laboratory and public health and safety standards.

Biosafety is a current worker safety and public health and safety issue. Injured biotech workers can remain ill and untreated in the United States since diseases from genetically modified organisms or laboratory strains are difficult to diagnose. In addition biotech workers have no legal rights to appropriate exposure records for treatment after incurring an exposure.

Although academic labs such as University of Wisconsin are mandated to follow NIH guidelines, private industry is under no such constraint, leaving a big gap in public health and safety standards.

The biotech worker in Splitter's lab who became infected with Brucella remains unidentified.


links:
http://qwstnevrythg.com/2010/05/university-professor-barred/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/12/gary-splitter-u-of-wiscon_n_573391.html
http://cmr.asm.org/cgi/content/short/16/1/65
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/education/university/article_bc095ae8-5d4a-11df-8e83-001cc4c03286.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brucellosis

http://www.antifascistencyclopedia.com/allposts/uw-madison-suspends-scientists-research-due-to-unauthorized-dangerous-bioterror-experimentsthe-lie

Safety Lapses with Infected Biotech Worker at Defense Lab

Apr 6, 2010 6:26 pm US/Eastern
Army Finds Safety Lapses In Lab Infection Case

DAVID DISHNEAU, Associated Press Writer

HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) ― Army investigators at Fort Detrick recommended on Tueday that some laboratory safety procedures be reviewed after finding lapses in the case of a biodefense worker who became infected with tularemia, a potentially fatal respiratory disease.The woman survived the infection after a brief hospitalization at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in December.In an executive summary of an internal investigation, the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases said the unidentified woman probably inhaled the bacteria between Nov. 13 and Nov. 17.Although there was no significant event investigators could point to, such as a spill or dropped flask, they cited several lapses in proper laboratory techniques that, taken together, may have increased her risk of exposure.The report said potentially contaminated waste wasn't placed in a cabinet designed to contain bacteria. Instead, it was deposited in a waste container inside the sealed laboratory suite.Even though she hadn't been voluntarily immunized with an experimental tularemia vaccine, the woman wasn't wearing a battery-powered device that delivers filtered air into a plastic hood, as required. Instead, she wore a half-face filter respirator. The less-protective device apparently was deemed sufficient because a blood test indicated she had developed antibodies to tularemia, perhaps due to a natural exposure in the past.The worker wasn't clear on the proper procedures for illness reporting, investigators found. She didn't immediately report her symptoms and when she did, on Nov. 23, she failed to immediately notify a second office, the institute's Special Immunizations Clinic, for an evaluation to determine if the illness could be work-related. She finally reported to the clinic on Dec. 1.The report's recommendations include a review of standard laboratory procedures for working with tularemia; a re-evaluation of policies for vaccination and the use of personal protective gear for tularemia; and formulation of an official policy for reporting illnesses and monitoring employee absences.
(© 2010 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

BIOTECH LAWSUIT

Scientist blames Pfizer for illness

By Lee Howard

Article published Jan 19, 2010 in New London Day

Day Staff Writer

Molecular biologist's lawsuit goes to trial in March in Hartford. A former Pfizer Inc. scientist who claims to have been infected by an unknown virus at the company's Groton laboratories will have her civil lawsuit heard in U.S. District Court in Hartford.Becky McClain of Deep River, a molecular biologist who filed her suit nearly three years ago in New London Superior Court, confirmed last week that the jury trial is scheduled to commence in March on allegations that Pfizer violated whistleblower laws and exposed her to a hazardous workplace. McClain, who also charges that Pfizer violated her freedom of speech by terminating her after she pressed workplace complaints, is a former member of the company's safety committee.McClain's attorney, Bruce E. Newman of Bristol, originally had filed suit on 11 counts, but eight of the complaints have been dismissed. Newman said in a phone interview that he considers the case to be precedent-setting because there are few government standards regulating the bioengineering field.Pfizer denies all of the suit's most substantive charges. The company "does not retaliate against employees who raise health and safety concerns," according to Pfizer's response to the suit. The response also denies that McClain was wrongfully discharged. "We have thoroughly investigated Ms. McClain's claims and our investigation concluded that her workplace was safe and that she was not infected by any virologic materials while she was employed by Pfizer," company spokeswoman Liz Power said in an e-mail. "Pfizer is committed to protecting the health and safety of our colleagues and the communities in which we operate," Power said. McClain, who worked at Pfizer for nearly a decade before being terminated in 2005, was employed in Groton's embryonic stem cells program when she said she became ill after being subjected to repeated noxious fumes coming from the hood of a device at Lab B313. She said her supervisor also became ill, but later conspired to cover up the incident, warning her that she "would lose her job if she made too big an issue out of lab safety," according to the suit.McClain said she asked for a transfer out of Lab B313 because of ongoing health concerns. Later, she developed chronic fatigue symptoms, according to the suit, and discovered that a co-worker had been working next to her with a "dangerous lentivirus material and embryonic stem cells on an open lab bench without biological containment."McClain later went on medical leave, according to the suit, but "continued to raise safety concerns which were never addressed," including filing five complaints about Pfizer's lab with the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration. She received a termination notice during her medical leave, the suit said, despite the fact that "Pfizer had promised McClain that she would not be retaliated against in any way for raising health and safety concerns."OSHA never moved forward on her complaints, McClain said in a separate interview, largely because federal worker-safety laws have not kept pace with the rising hazards in U.S. laboratories."McClain was penalized in terms of her performance appraisals at Pfizer and ultimately terminated as a result of exercising her free-speech rights," according to the suit.The lawsuit, which seeks more than $75,000 in damages, said McClain had counted on Pfizer to maintain a safe work environment. Instead, her continued exposure to genetically engineered viruses, according to the documents, has resulted in the 51-year-old scientist developing a condition that leads to periodic paralysis, joint pain and fatigue."During these attacks, it is difficult for her to speak and she has no voluntary muscle control," the suit stated. "The attacks themselves are accompanied by a severe chest pain and spinal pain."The suit said the condition is believed to be permanent, and there is no known cure.

Genetically Modified Maize Withdrawn by Monsanto-Safety Concerns

In a dramatic move, Monsanto has withdrawn its genetically modified (GM) maize, LY038 from commercial approval in Europe after safety concerns prompted the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to request further evidence from the company [1].

At the end of April 2009, two letters were sent to EFSA by Monsanto's European subsidiary company Renessen, withdrawing applications originally submitted in 2005 [2]. The whole episode was shrouded in secrecy before being uncovered by Dr. Brian John of GM-Free Cymru. There has been no mainstream press report, and no record on the EFSA website. Not only LY038, but also the stacked variety LY038 x MON810 - derived from a cross between LY038 and another GM variety MON810 - has been withdrawn. MON810 is currently banned in many countries in Europe [3] Europe Holds the Key to a GM-Free World, 5th Conference of GM-Free Regions, Food & Democracy ( SiS 43), and has its own hazards [4-6] ( GM Maize Disturbs Immune System of Young and Old Mice , GM Maize Reduces Fertility & Deregulates Genes in Mice , SiS 41; MON810 Genome Rearranged Again , SiS 39).

Like other “nutritionally enhanced” GMOs, LY038 is created by grossly unbalancing the metabolic network [8]; and that is where the metabolic hazards arise. It is well known that overdose of many single nutritional factors is toxic, and it is not surprising that overproduction of any single metabolite creates further toxicities. Another case in point is the notorious ‘Golden Rice', now mired in controversy as phase 2 clinical trials have been conducted on children with unapproved experimental events. It is well known that high concentrations of pro-Vitamin A can cause birth defects and developmental abnormalities, and the potential for further toxicities in Golden Rice is uncomfortably high [12] ( The Golden Rice Scandal Unfolds , SiS 42).

However, there are also important hazards unique to each GMO, and in the case of LY038, it is due to the high concentrations of the amino acid lysine and derivatives - saccharopine, a -aminoadipic acid (a neurotoxin), pipecolic acid and cadaverine – present in the grain [9, 10] .

The excerpts above were taken directly from ISIS Press Release 11/11/09.
For the complete press release please see this link: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/HighLysineGMMaize.php

Biotech Health Risks Cause Concern

An article in Harzards Magazine V427 October 10, 2009 voices concerns over biotech safety in the USA. See story below:

USA: Biotech health risks cause concern
The mother of a worker who believes his health was ruined as a result of working in California's cutting edge biotech industry has expressed her anger at the refusal by the firm's health insurers to pay his medical bills. Sandi Trend's son, David Bell, was sickened at the Davis based company AgraQuest. She says the firm's owner, Pam Marrone, and its health insurer Liberty Mutual have refused to provide his healthcare despite evidence that he had the genetically engineered products in his body. She says these products have wrecked her son's immune system. The campaigning mother has also accused the California Fraud Assessment Commission of failing to bring fraud charges against the firm. She alleged the watchdog and district attorneys care more for wealthy companies in the state than for sick workers. David Bell says the lack of proper health and safety protection at AgraQuest led to his contamination and sickness. He also alleges the company sought to cover-up their responsibility for his illness. A US poll published last week found 90 per cent of Americans think that the public should be better informed about the development of cutting-edge technologies including synthetic biology. Two-thirds of the respondents supported regulation of this emerging technology. 'Regardless of their awareness of synthetic biology, or where they come down on the risk-benefit tradeoff, a strong majority of adults think this research should be regulated by the federal government,' said Geoff Garin, president of Peter D Hart Research, the organisation that conducted the poll.
Blip TV - labor Video Project. Biotechnology Awareness webpages on David Bell. PEN news item.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/h_and_s/tuc-17069-f0.cfm#tuc-17069-22

Federal Task Force on Biosafety Needs Broader Oversight For Public Health and Safety

A Report of the Trans-Federal Task Force on Optimizing Biosafety and Biocontainment Oversight was finalized on June 2009. This report outlines the need to optimize biosafety oversight in BL3-BL4 high and maximum containment facilities.

Unfortunately the report for oversight does not cover infectious agents used in BL2 laboratories which are more numerous in number, found in every major research institute and which also pose significant worker and public health and safety threats.

Some information in the report is a bit shocking. The government doesn’t even have a current registry of all BL3-BL4 labs where extremely hazardous and contagious biological agents are being used. In addition, the government does not have a centralized incident-reporting analysis for injuries or mishaps in biological laboratories.

Some of the information in the report is also a bit skewed in my opinion. For example, the report includes a table of injury statistics in R&D facilities from OSHA which I find to be unreliable data. The result of this OSHA study gives the impression that R&D facilities have a much lower average of injuries than general private industry. But “not all private R&D facilities were surveyed, and no Federal high or maximum containment research facilities were surveyed”

Also, through my own personal experience, I am more than skeptical regarding OSHA data. When I was employed as a biologist working in R&D in 2002, at least 5 people became ill (incapacitating, headaches, nausea or vomiting) from an exposure from a biological hood and NOT one of the illnesses was reported to OSHA. So much for trusting OSHA data and the dangers at R&D facilities.

Although the report does a good job summarizing the current agencies and regulations which impact biological laboratories, it is a bit slanted in not reporting the weakness of the laws and oversight. For example, the report gives a good summary of the OSHA laws but never mentions that the statute of limitations are so restrictive that the OSHA law is impractical for scientists to report safety problems or illness in biological laboratories.

Similarly they mention that the State of Connecticut instituted a law regarding agents capable of infecting humans. But what they do not mention is that this law does not cover genetically engineered agents or recombinant DN A infectious agents.

The other major weakness in the report is that it does not address our poor whistleblower laws which currently are so weak they provide no protections for scientists and protections for public health and safety. In addition, important human rights issues such as the lack of worker’s right to obtain appropriate exposure records necessary for medical care after incurring a biological exposure was purposely left out of the report.

Despite the fact of its deficiencies, the report is a step in the right direction in an attempt to clarify some objectives needed for better governmental oversight on the most dangerous biological research laboratories in the United States. In short, the report identifies eight new objectives to increase biological safety in these labs. They are listed below:

Summary of Objectives

1. Enhance the overarching framework for biosafety and biocontainment oversight of high and maximum containment research through improved coordination of oversight activities.

2. Encourage a robust culture of accountability characterized by individual and institutional compliance with biosafety and biocontainment regulations, guidelines, standards, and policies.

3. Develop a national strategy to enable and ensure the appropriate training and technical competence of all individuals who work in, oversee, support, or manage high or maximum containment research laboratories.

4. Obtain and analyze information about laboratory incidents to enable trend analysis, minimize the number of future incidents, and share lessons learned, with the overall goals of optimizing laboratory safety and oversight.

5. Ensure that biosafety and biocontainment regulations and guidelines cover current and emerging hazardous biological agents, and develop an agricultural equivalent of the BMBL.

6. Ensure that the infrastructure and equipment necessary for biosafety and biocontainment at high and maximum containment research facilities are in place and properly maintained.

7. Develop and support a national research agenda for applied biosafety and biocontainment to improve the management of biohazard risks.

8. Improve and share strategies to ensure effective public communication, outreach, and transparency about biosafety and biocontainment issues.

The Plague of Biosafety

The Plague of Biosafety

There is mounting evidence that biosafety is not being regulated efficiently in the biotech and academic laboratories. Despite the fact that the media altogether downplays the public health and safety ramifications of biological research, this is serious stuff. It costs lives in more ways than one.

Recently, University of Chicago Professor Malcolm Casadaban died from the plague bacteria he was studiying. For more on this story click here.

Public Health and Safety has taken a back seat when it comes to biological research and development. Laws and regulations are lacking in this field of research. It is increasingly difficult to obtain information about laboratory aquired infections since institutions are self-policing. Bio-terrorism could easily be produced from a lab in the U.S.

As new emerging disease and chronic illness rise, laboratories, using dangerous genetically engineered organisms and other infectious agents, fail to ensure public health and safety. People with chronic illness or new disease remain to suffer with unexplained ailments, conditions that could be a result of biological research.

Laboratory Aquired Infection Leads to Death at Univerisity of Chicago

USA. Plague Bacteria May Have Killed Chicago Researcher - cbs2chicago.com
Sep 19, 2009 3:45 pm US/CentralPlague Bacteria May Have Killed Chicago ResearcherUniversity Of Chicago Insists The Public Is Not In DangerCHICAGO (CBS)

A University of Chicago researcher died Sunday, Sept. 13 from an infection which may be from a weakened strain of the bacteria that causes the plague, a University of Chicago Medical Center news release said.The Chicago Tribune identified the researcher as 60-year-old Malcolm Casadaban, a professor who was studying what school officials call a weakened strain of the bacteria in a school lab.The researcher was studying the genetics of harmful bacteria, including Yersinia pestis, a weakened strain of the plague bacteria. An initial autopsy showed no obvious cause of death except for the presence of the bacteria. Cultures of the researcher's blood grew the weakened strain of the bacteria, but whether it is the cause of the fatal illness remains unknown, the news release said.The researcher died at the University of Chicago Medical Center's Bernard Mitchell Hospital.Dr. Kenneth Alexander, chief of pediatric infectious diseases at the U of C Medical Center, said the public has "nothing to fear at this point.""What has become a mystery in this case is why this gentleman appeared to have succumbed to an organism which is not normally fatal in humans," Alexander said.People exposed to the bacteria typically develop symptoms within two to 10 days--none of the potential contacts reported any illnesses, the news release said.The strain is not known to cause illness and has been used in some countries as a vaccine to protect against the plague. It has been approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for laboratory studies.The plague is rare in the United States but remains a problem in the developing world where up to 3,000 cases are reported every year, the release said.Medical Center officials notified the Chicago Department of Public Health as well as the researcher's family, friends, colleagues and anyone else who may have had contact with the researcher.

http://hygimia69.blogspot.com/2009/09/usa-plague-bacteria-may-have-killed.html#comment-form

read full article here: http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1780803,CST-NWS-plague20.article

Also see:http://www.examiner.com/x-7707-Infectious-Disease-Examiner~y2009m8d4-What-is-the-difference-between-bubonic-and-pneumonic-plague

Corrupt Doctors: The Untold MOLD Story

Sharon Kramer, an expert on mold and ACOEM spoke at a press conference called by the California Coalition For Workers Memorial Day for injured workers at the Downey toxic dump site. She spoke on the conflict of interest between the trade group ACOEM and the need to defend people who are sickened by mold. She also reported on her efforts to get a Congressional investigation on this conflict of interest by ACOEM and the role of Senator Edward Kennedy on deleting this aspect in this important expose in a Congressional study. www.workersmemorialday.org
source: http://www.blip.tv/file/2520407

Biotech Worker's Rights DENIED

Biotech worker, David Bell is denied Health and Safety Protections and Workers' Compensation after exposure to Agraquest's biological agents.

Below is a complaint written by David Bell's mother to the Commission on Health and Safety and Worker's Compensation in California.


August 27, 2009
Commission on Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation
1515 Clay St,
Oakland, CA 94612

RE: Complaint

California is NOT protecting employees rights to work in safe and healthy
environments nor are injured employees given the right to know of the hazards they
have been exposed to.

California employers, who willfully violate Federal and state laws are not held
accountable, they are given the green light to continue to violate the law and there
misdeeds of fraud and concealment are hidden under the umbrella of protection
within the corrupt California worker’s compensation system.

My son, David Bell worked as a laboratory Assistant Researcher/Microbiologist (to
obtain lab hours for his Bachelor of Science Degree) for one of these employers,
Agraquest Inc. (AQ) a biotechnology company that discovers, screens and
experiments with known and unknown microorganisms, AQ searches the world for
microorganisms; and brings them into the U.S., mostly in soil, They receive
microorganisms from “microbe hunters” and other biotech companies; not known is
whether they were natural or mutations and had been genetically modified. At last
count there were over 23,000 microorganisms in AQ’s “microbe collection”.
David also worked with and was exposed to larvae and live insects.

After 5 months and 9 days at AQ, after vomiting and being sick for days David had
purulent bloody pus draining from his nose. He told his supervisor he was sick and
clocked out. He then went to Immediate Care Medical Clinic; was placed on the broad
spectrum antibiotic Zithromax and told to see an ear, nose and throat specialist. This
he did; now the left side of his face and teeth were numb. He was scheduled for the
first, of what would become four major sinus surgeries only seven ( 7 ) days after
seeking emergency medical care. He’s had countless other sinus procedures in
physicians offices through the years.

David stopped producing enough B-cells for an intact immune system; for 3 years,
every 28 days he was hooked up to an IV pump receiving IMMUNOGLOBULIN
infusions at the hospital; each lasting up to 7 hours.

Several of David’s vital organs have been affected as the result of his employment at
the AQ laboratory; respiratory, lungs, heart, liver, spleen and GI tract.
Denied by AQ as being the result of David’s workplace illness and disease were
nineteen (19 ) fungus and bacteria that have been identified in David’s blood, sputum
and/or nose cultures and/or lab results showing levels of antibodies as a result of
exposure; ranging from positive to HIGH POSITIVE. ALL of these fungus and bacteria
are linked to AQ’s products, patents and/or other companies patents that the
scientists at AQ are listed as inventors.

This is David’s medical from 1995-1998; seven ( 7 ) pages total, 1 page is a
Confidential Health Information Form. This is his medical costs after working for AQ
beginning 1999 through 2005 with a cost of over $333,000, mostly paid by medicare
and none by AQ’s workers comp carrier. I stopped calculating after 2005 although to
this day he is still sick and has mucous of every shade of the rainbow coming from
his nose. That is, when he can get it out.

As David’s mother, I swear to you; he has never been sick like this before he went to
work at AQ. He had seasonal allergies, normal colds and flu and he did have a
hernia surgery at the age of 6 because of a car accident.
California has to stop protecting businesses and start protecting it’s workers.

Thank you,
Sandi Trend

cc: file
attachments: Three ( 3 ) photo’s
1) David Bell medical prior to working at AQ; 3 years (1995-1998)
(7 pages ; (1 page is a Confidential Health Information Form) and
comparison to David Bell Medical billings after working at AQ;
(1999-2005)
2) David Bell medical billings after working at AQ (1999-2005)
3) Comparison of David Bell medical prior to working at AQ; 3 years
(1995-1998) and David Bell medical billings after working at AQ (1999-
2005)

Gibbs Makes Case for Lab Origin of Swin Flu

Virologist to make his case for lab origin of swine flu

http://www.petersnewyork.com/GIBBS.html

By Peter Duveen

PETER’S NEW YORK, Wednesday, July 1, 2009--The scientist who made headlines in May by positing a laboratory origin for the swine flu that has swept the world will defend his theory in the scientific literature, Peter’s New York has learned. Dr. Adrian Gibbs, a Canberra, Australia-based virologist with more than 200 scientific publications to his credit, said that over the weekend he submitted his latest work on the swine flu to a prominent scientific journal, and is awaiting a response. Gibbs, 75, was part of a team that developed the antiviral drug Tamiflu.

In May of 2009, Dr. Adrian Gibbs of Canberra, Australia, shown here on Bloomberg TV, achieved notoriety for his theory that the new swine flu may have been the result of an error in the vaccine manufacturing process.

Back in April, when the first cases of swine flu were diagnosed in Mexico, Gibbs examined the genetic structure of the virus that had been posted on a public database. His analysis led him to speculate that the virus may have been the result of a laboratory error. He contacted the Geneva, Switzerland-based World Health Organization with his conjecture, and scientists there scrutinized his findings, concluding, however, that the virus was most likely a product of nature. In a series of email exchanges with Peter’s New York, Gibbs said he was not satisfied with the WHO’s critique, indicating that the basis for it was ambiguous. “The WHO stated that they had no evidence to support my suggestion,” Gibbs said. “They made a very fair statement. However the principle reason for my conclusion remains—that none of the genes of the new virus had been sampled/found/caused epidemics since at least 2000, despite probably coming from at least two different parents on two continents, where other strains had been sampled.” Gibbs said that might have been a coincidence, but the unusual placement of the virus on what what virologists call phylogenetic trees—a sort of schematic family history of the virus--also piqued his interest. On top of that, Gibbs observed that there was a lack of evidence that pig populations in North America, from which the virus is believed to have emerged, had been infected. Only the pigs on one farm in Canada have as yet been shown to have contracted the virus. It has been established, said Gibbs, that swine easily contract the new flu from humans, and spread it among themselves. The absence of infection in the North American swine, Gibbs noted, may be evidence that the swine had already contracted the disease and built up immunity, or that they were vaccinated against viruses that resembled the novel swine flu closely enough for them to have been protected against it. Gibbs said the one Canadian herd that came down with the novel swine flu had not been inoculated, and that the evidence therefore leans toward inoculation as the reason North American pigs are disease free. That, in turn, would support a theory, according to Gibbs, that "the virus in the vaccine may be the immediate progenitor of the new human virus. " Gibbs said he would have been more satisfied if scientists at the WHO had examined the lists of all the vaccines licensed for production in the United States and Mexico and determined that none of them harbored strains from which the swine flu could have descended. He said he had been unable to locate such lists to make the determination himself. Gibbs spells out fairly clearly how he thinks the new virus might have emerged due to a laboratory error. In manufacturing a vaccine, each of the viruses to be protected against must first be bred and then sterilized to prevent their further multiplication. When a subject is inoculated, the body reacts to the “killed” viral fragments and produces antibodies that provide protection against the live virus. Gibbs said that if the sterilization process was not carried out properly, pigs could end up being given live viruses, and instead of being protected, would contract the disease. The live viruses would then have a chance to multiply and exchange genetic material within the infected pig in a process known as reassortment, and a new virus could emerge and spread to humans as a “swine flu.” The study of viruses is overlaid with a complex nomenclature and labyrinthine concepts and arguments in the field of genetics that are unfamiliar to the average layman. But the implications are far reaching, a fact not lost on the general public or on Gibbs. Early this year, the Deerfield, Ill. based drug firm Baxter International Inc. shipped experimental vaccines for human flu that were contaminated with the bird flu. The cocktail of influenzas, if it had not been discovered by alert laboratory specialists in the Czech Republic in February, could have been administered to subjects, after which, some experts feared, the two viruses could have undergone reassortment, producing a new virus that possessed the lethality of bird flu and the communicability of human flu. Bird flu is a deadly disease that kills close to half its victims, but resists spread from human to human. Human flu, on the other hand, is far more benign, but is easily spread through human contact. A recombined virus with the characteristics of each of the two could conceivably wipe out almost half the world’s population. Gibbs steers clear of elaborate intrigues that some believe are behind the new flu’s emergence. “Whenever I’ve thought something has resulted from a conspiracy, it usually turns out to be from a ‘cock-up,’” he said. The importance of establishing whether or not the flu emerged from a laboratory, he emphasized, is “to try to avoid a recurrence.” He did admit, however, that there was a definite risk to the public of escaping pathogens held in government and private facilities. “There are many historical precedents that are conveniently forgotten,” said Gibbs. “The recent Baxter incident seems to have been one.” “The reappearance in 1977 of the H1N1 (virus) last seen in 1950 after a period of non-evolution,” which he speculated could represent “suspended animation in a freezer,” was another instance in which pathogens might have escaped from a laboratory. Gibbs also cited the escape of foot-and-mouth disease from a British government laboratory facility in 2007. Asked if the resurrection of the viral agent for the deadly 1918 “Spanish” flu, which was reconstituted in 2005 by scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for research purposes, was a safe proposition, he answered, “No, definitely not.” “It’s exactly the same principle as should apply to all high security labs,” said Gibbs. “If it ain’t ‘there’ it can’t get out, whereas if it is, then there is always the possibility, however remote, that it might get out.” The 1918 flu, which spread to every corner of the globe in the two years immediately following World War I, had a rate of lethality some 30 to 50 times greater than other strains of human flu. Tens of millions of people died in the pandemic worldwide. While some aspects of his presentation have been updated, Gibbs said his basic premise remains unchanged, and has, in fact, been reinforced by recent additions to the scientific literature. And while the WHO gave the appearance of having put the final nail in the coffin of Gibbs’s theory, in a rare show of scientific honesty for a public institution, it affixed the lid rather loosely, leaving itself room to revisit Gibbs’s hypothesis once it is published. In the mid-May press conference in which the WHO addressed Gibbs’s analysis, which by that time has spread far and wide throughout the mainstream media, Assistant Director Keiji Fukuda praised the virologist who had contributed to the field for more than fifty years of professional work, calling Gibbs “a credible scientist, a credible virologist.” In answer to a reporter’s question about whether Gibbs’s theory had been refuted, Fukuda said: “I think that it is fair to say that in the world of science, nothing is ever totally excluded, nothing is ever ended.” On the issue of whether Gibbs’s theory may actually prove true or not, he said: “We feel very comfortable based on the analyses which have been done, based on the rigor in which it has been looked at, that we are not dealing with a laboratory-created virus. However, I do not expect that the debate itself will stop.” The world awaits Gibbs’s response.

STUDY SHOWS DANGEROUS BACTERIAL TOXIN TRANSFER HAS IMPLICATION TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY AND GE RESEARCH

How can unregulated genetically engineering research lead to dangerous public health repercussions?

A recent study found that common viral parasites can act as secret conduits to transfer toxic and disease-causing genes from one bacteria species to an unrelated bacteria species. One serious public health concern from this discovery is the possibility that new emerging disease could develop through this viral method of DNA exchange between bacterial species. It also raises a red flag regarding public health and safety in genetic engineering (GE) research where all kinds of toxic and disease genes are cloned into bacteria used in plant and animal research. These GE genes could then possibly be transferred to other bacteria via a natural virus causing new emerging disease to humans and animals.

In the study noted above, scientists found that Staph aureus, a bacteria which is often associated with community and hospital acquired methicillin resistant staph aureus (MRSA) transferred its toxic shock genes to an unrelated bacterium, Listeria monocytogenes via a common virus called a bacteriophage. Listeria, itself, can cause a potentially deadly form of food poisoning while Staph can cause life-threatening diseases such as pneumonia, meningitis, osteomyelitis, endocarditis, toxic shock syndrome and septicemia. The relatively high DNA transfer efficiency from Staph to Listeria suggests that other cases may very well exist in nature. This can have a major impact on human pathogenicity and new emerging disease. It also carries implications to tighten safety regulations upon the genetic engineering industry.

As mysterious chronic illness rises in our population, scientists and private industry remain to be unregulated in performing dangerous genetically engineered research. This unregulated research carries serious public health consequences and can create new emerging disease. The public should become better informed about this dangerous research, the unsafe work practices, and the lack of rights to scientists to file safety complaints.

MAN BECOMES INFECTED WHILE WORKING AT BIOTECH, AGRAQUEST.

See the horrific story of David Bell and the illness he acquired after biological exposures at work at a biotech company.

This story documents unsafe biological practices at a company called Agraquest which develops microoganisms as pesticides. It is a story of the continued cover-up by the biotech industry and the inadequacy of our legal system to handle public health and safety issues from companies working with biological agents. It tells another continued failure of our workers compensation system and the inability of workers to obtain healthcare from exposures at work. It is a story of the unethical biotech industry and how monetary profits supersede human rights and workers rights.

Biotech Lab workers are becoming ill. They are being abused, terminated and abandoned. The public heath and safety dangers from the biotech industry are being silenced by our legal, media and corporate system. Conflicts of interest, greed and power have created a dangerous working environment within the biomedical and biotech communities. It is a public health threat with no remedy in sight.

Dangerous Lab Built in Hurricane Alley

Bio Lab in Galveston Raises Concerns
By JAMES C. McKINLEY JR

GALVESTON, Tex. — Much of the University of Texas medical school on this island suffered flood damage during Hurricane Ike, except for one gleaming new building, a national biological defense laboratory that will soon house some of the most deadly diseases in the world.
How a laboratory where scientists plan to study viruses like Ebola and Marburg ended up on a barrier island where hurricanes regularly wreak havoc puzzles some environmentalists and community leaders.

“It’s crazy, in my mind,” said Jim Blackburn, an environmental lawyer in Houston. “I just find an amazing willingness among the people on the Texas coast to accept risks that a lot of people in the country would not accept.”

For more on this story......
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/us/29lab.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

NIH's Role in Undiagnosed Illness

It is due time that the NIH took some interest toward the increasing presence of undiagnosed mystery illnesses, since it may in fact have had a direct role in causing it. The NIH has supported and allowed dangerous BL2 (Biosafety Level 2) research to be performed essentially unregulated here in the United States, a type of research, which in fact, can cause and contribute to the increase prevalence of mystery illness.

Uunregulated BL2 recombinant DNA research is currently being performed in every major academic, biomedical and pharmaceutical research facility in the United States. This dangerous biological research involves creating genetically engineered human infectious agents that can cause a plethora of new uncharacterized genetic and metabolic diseases in humans and animals. If used unsafely and subsequently released, it can leave exposed persons suffering a debilitating illness without adequate medical care or any hope of a diagnosis.

Hazardous BL2 research is now so common that, more than likely, it is being performed “directly in your own back yard” at your local research facility. Biomedical research should be of grave concern to the public since it remains essentially unregulated with no effective oversight to ensure worker or public health and safety.

The NIH has been far from responsible in taking strides to protect the American people against the dangers of recombinant DNA research. They have not supported effective oversight to enforce safety standards using BL2 infectious agents in academic laboratories. More threatening is that there exist no safety laws which govern private research centers working with BL2 infectious agents. Biotech workers have no rights to a safety forum to address safety issues.

Moreover, the NIH does not support the release of identity and exposure records in order for biotech workers to obtain proper medical care from an exposure. Accidents in the labs and biological releases are being hidden from the public. In fact, the culture of the scientific community has become so unprincipled that it supports “trade secret” rights over the rights and safety of the American people and health of biotech workers.

There is no doubt that a population of “undiagnosed” diseases, could have been caused by unsafe practices in BL2 research laboratories. The NIH by their own volition and lack of responsibility for worker’s rights and public health and safety has played a major role in supporting this dangerous unregulated research...all in the name to promote science.

It is about time the NIH pulled their "head out of the sand" and began looking into these mystery- undiagnosed illness which has left millions of people suffering. But that is only part of the solution. The NIH should not only investigate undiagnosed mystery illness, but also attempt to prevent the disease itself. It time to place adequate controls and oversight on BL2 research institutes around the country.

Biological Dangers in Your Own Backyard

Release of Foot and Mouth Virus from Laboratory in UK and Dangers in Your Own Backyard

If the accidentlal biological release of a Foot-and-Mouth Virus came from a laboratory which has regulations in place, you can imagine how unsafe the UNREGULATED laboratories are around the world.

Laboratories in every major research center and private pharmaceutical company in the United States are developing dangerous infectious genetically engineered (GE) microbes for research purposes. These laboratories are essentially unregulated and are not legally responsible to safely contain GE agents nor report that they are working with them. Don’t be surprised if one of these unregulated biological research laboratories operates near your home or your community without your knowledge.

Dangerous GE microbes that are created in the lab do not have to be communicable to cause disease. If you see increases in the prevalence of mystery illnesses, neurological disorders or cancers in your community, don’t discount a potential biological releases from your favorite major research institute as the cause. Laboratories which work on embryonic stem cell technologies can be especially precarious. Embryonic stem cell labs are frequently involved in developing dangerous genetic technologies to make disease-state cellular and animal models without appropriate oversight and safety controls.

You would shake in your boots if you really knew what type of GE organisms scientists are creating in test tubes these days without appropriate regulations or ethical responsibility. And they essentially are right in your own backyard.

UNREPORTED BIOLOGICAL ACCIDENTS

The article "U.S. Mishandling Dirty Germs" points to biological accidents and releases from labs that are only under stringent regulatory control since they are under biolevel-3 containment practices. The majority of research institutes, however, also work with other dangerous genetically engineered (GE) microbes that fall under biolevel-2 containment practices. BL-2 laboratories are not under the same stringent reporting practices or regulatory oversight even though these agents are capable of causing disease. Accidents in these labs are kept from the public’s eye since it is not in the best interest of the research institute to report them and they in fact are not mandated to do so.

In addition, since there is no specific safety training required to work with these BL2 agents, many scientists and technicians are handling dangerous biologics without knowledge of proper biocontainment and decontamination. This unfortunately could lead to an exposure to an unsuspecting and unprotected person or to the public resulting in no knowledge of an exposure but coming down with an illness. Since these GE microbes are man-made and their pathogenicity uncharacterized, their presence will be impossible to detect without appropriate exposure records and genetic sequence from the research institute. Unfortunately, even if one did know he had been exposed to a biological agent from a lab, the laws are so slanted toward biotech, that he would have no rights to exposure records for healthcare. This unfortunate scenario of inadequate regulations and oversight and no rights to exposure records continues to perpetuate the façade that biotech is safe. It creates ignorance such as that stated by Mr. Raleigh above.

Although the article, "U.S. Mishandling Dirty Germs" makes gain in reporting the serious safety problems in the biotech industry, the majority of biological accidents will continue to not be reported. We, therefore, will have to look to other indicators to assess the harm done by the biotech industry from the release of biological hazards. Two such “harm” indicators will be an increase in the rate of evolution and an increase in the numbers of new emerging diseases in individuals and in small populations. And of course, an epidemic may eventually occur if these issues are not addressed.