ATS: US Reluctant To Share Important Flu Samples

Crow, the post beforehand indicates you understand what I am saying. You do not have to try and play stupid, nor do you have torespond to what I am telling you, you may, at this time, redirect your attention to the topic.

.


This thread's topic is about the US hoarding data needed to deal with the bird flu pandemic. The fact is, there is a related history - of the US hoarding data, silencing US scientists, and preventing scientific collaboration that would help ordinary people deal with the numerous -and related- epidemic diseases in the world today.

The point is, after creating the "Bioterrorism Preparedness" legislation, the US has used the "select agent" designation to obstruct much-needed scientific research and collaboration. The 1918 flu virus being just the latest example.

Several posts back, I posted links to some of the historical information. It is all well worth considering - and extremely relevant to this topic.

Alrighty then, I was wondering when we would sojourn down Prion lane. Congrats to getting to the third page of this OP/ED before we got treated to another post on the subject.



So despite the oh so false title in this OP/ED and its erroneous conclusions (BTW in a debate, this type of post would be at best considered "Non-Support" or a use of "Prejudicial Language" thus a fallacy of logic, or at worst as I pointed about above 'Yellow Journalism") you are attempting to try to move the point to a more broad based discussion about Prions? Yeah yeah I know, you trying to construct some sort of "evidence" since you have failed to prove your allegations made in your initial statement.

So I Ask Again From my previous post that have as of yet gone unanswered...................

Originally posted by soficrow
and the article placed in a non-controversial category. So what? It's still out there. Floating around the net for all to see, just like all the other dissed, deleted, and otherwise manipulated media.

So are you saying that you deliberately misrepresented the post with its content and title and placed in a category it was not suited to simply generate controversy? While Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst would recognize this style, the rest of us would see it as another case of "Yellow" Journalism
.

Originally posted by soficrow
I just write news.

Yes I have to agree here 100% in this case, you did write the news. But you failed to Report the news as you would expect from an ATSNN Expert submitter. The Bias was there from the title to the cut an paste article (trying to support you conclusions and was total unrelated) that many in this thread pointed out. :shk:

Originally posted by soficrow
The news is - the USA is blocking access to critical data (although granted it's an old story) - and obstructing international efforts to respond to the bird flu epidemic - also an old story, but with new details.

Again the only evidence for this has come from the two OP/ED's (lets call them what they are this one and Flu Researchers Slam US for Hoarding Data. Where else has this been covered? Where is the WHO complaint that the US is withholding data? Where the outraged statements from Europe? Where Where Where? No can I find the nature article that you based the other OP/ED on at this time (If you can point me in the correct direction Id be much obliged, but a search of the nature site reveals nothing?)



You have failed to cite any sources within the US nor the world that have stated that samples have been denied. Nor have you shown me ANY federal regulation that states it will not be done. Can you please show me where a request for the 1918 flu has been denied other than you assertions of course which now I must treat with a healthy dose of skepticism.

And why the issue with the CDC making sure the agent is safe when being used for research? I can see you next OP/ED guised as a news submission "Bush lets deadly flu sample escape" or other such nonsense. Even the Journal of Nature is concerned so much as to say this:

But the studies have sparked fears among other researchers. "There most definitely is reason for concern," says Richard Ebright, a bacteriologist at Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey, who serves on biosecurity panels. "Tumpey et al. have constructed, and provided procedures for others to construct, a virus that represents perhaps the most effective bioweapons agent now known."

"This would be extremely dangerous should it escape, and there is a long history of things escaping," says Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, a molecular biologist and member of the Federation of American Scientists' Working Group on Biological Weapons. "What advantage is so much greater than that risk?"
www.nature.com...

So again where is the long list of countries that have been so denied, or was all this an exercise to generate controversy for the sake of doing so in one submitted article :shk:

Originally posted by FredT
Alrighty then, I was wondering when we would sojourn down Prion lane. Congrats to getting to the third page of this OP/ED before we got treated to another post on the subject.

Bird flu was discovered in 1957 - and the warnings first sent out. Also read "Mirage of Health" - published in 1959, written by Rene Dubos. Its one of the many works that predicted bird flu, as well as the chronic disease pandemic - and the swing to eugenics and euthanasia as the preferred solution.

...If you are having trouble seeing the connections, you might take a quick refresher in molecular biology.

So I Ask Again From my previous post that have as of yet gone unanswered...................

Originally posted by soficrow
and the article placed in a non-controversial category. So what? It's still out there. Floating around the net for all to see, just like all the other dissed, deleted, and otherwise manipulated media.

So are you saying that you deliberately misrepresented the post with its content and title and placed in a category it was not suited to simply generate controversy?

No. The US government defined this topic as a ""War on Terrorism" topic by designating the 1918 bird flu samples as "select agents" under the "Bioterrorism Act." ..I simply reflected the status quo.

You have failed to cite any sources within the US nor the world that have stated that samples have been denied.

The Act stipulates oversight in the United States. No further sources required - although I did itemize examples where the "select agent" dodge was used previously to avoid sharing scientific information, and as well, documented the history of this administration's silencing US scientists, and withholding pertinent scientific information from the world's scientific community.

Nor have you shown me ANY federal regulation that states it will not be done.

Again:

www.cdc.gov...

The HHS Secretary has delegated the responsibility for promulgating and implementing regulations under the "Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act" to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). At CDC, the Division of Select Agents and Toxins (DSAT) in the Coordinating Office of Terrorism Preparedness and Emergency Response oversees these activities and registers all laboratories and other entities in the United States that possess, use, or transfer a HHS or "overlap" select agent or toxin.

www.research.dfci.harvard.edu...

Key phrase that - in the United States. It means, "in the United States."

Again:

If you have information that the USA is sharing it's 1918 bird flu samples with scientists in other nations, please do post your links here. A quote from President Bush would be nice.

Can you please show me where a request for the 1918 flu has been denied

Can you please show me a country - any country - with whom the US has shared samples?

"This would be extremely dangerous should it escape, and there is a long history of things escaping," says Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, a molecular biologist and member of the Federation of American Scientists' Working Group on Biological Weapons. "What advantage is so much greater than that risk?"
www.nature.com...

I am particularly interested in this "long history of things escaping" - and can't help wondering if that's why the US won't share their info...

So again where is the long list of countries that have been so denied,

The legislation is all about keeping samples and related "intellectual property" in the USA - to protect the nation from bioterrorists.

Again: You show me where the legislation was breached, and samples sent out of the country.

or was all this an exercise to generate controversy for the sake of doing so in one submitted article :shk:

IMO - there is a great deal of injustice, immorality, and illegality in our world that is routinely swept under the carpet. This is the stuff that interests me.

The fact that my spotlighting such information is considered suspect and "controversial" is itself sad commentary on the state of our nation.



.

Originally posted by soficrow

If you have information that the USA is sharing it's 1918 bird flu samples with scientists in other nations, please do post your links here. A quote from President Bush would be nice.

Sofi, in all honesty, the burden of proof is usually on the accuser. You made accusations in this thread that others are challenging. Do you honestly think with the current state of affairs in the world that the US should just let this thing fly?

Seems to me the US is just taking precautions. Heaven forbid they were sloppy with letting these samples out.

P.S. Why do you always put those dots in your posts?

[edit on 10/23/2005 by Relentless]

Originally posted by Relentless
Do you honestly think with the current state of affairs in the world that the US should just let this thing fly?

Seems to me the US is just taking precautions. Heaven forbid they were sloppy with letting these samples out.

That is a good point, but I wonder about how much control our government have over other countries rights to find cures all on their own and have help from the US while trying, taking in consideration that most of the countries affected by the bird virus are outside US.

I also wonder how much influences the private sector in the pharmaceuticals business has to do with US control.

I am also very sad to see how other countries struggle with this epidemic and their food supplies, many of the countries affected food chain can be impacted and populations may have problems feeding their own.

Its not a good picture, hungry, sickness and not cure.

Originally posted by Relentless

Originally posted by soficrow

If you have information that the USA is sharing it's 1918 bird flu samples with scientists in other nations, please do post your links here. A quote from President Bush would be nice.

Sofi, in all honesty, the burden of proof is usually on the accuser. You made accusations in this thread that others are challenging.

BIRD FLU IS DESIGNATED AS A "SELECT AGENT" UNDER BIOTERRORIST LEGISLATION THAT SPECIFIES THAT OVERSIGHT OF SUCH AGENTS OCCURS IN THE UNITED STATES.

Re: claims that this very specific legal constraint will be waived in this particular instance - the burden of proof is on those people who insist that this waiver will occur.

Do you honestly think with the current state of affairs in the world that the US should just let this thing fly?

There is a world wide bird flu epidemic - and H5N1 bird flu has been in the USA since 2001, at least. We have far, far more to fear from nature than terrorists, IMO.

Diseases do NOT respect borders, or this case, species barriers either.

Bracing for worldwide bird flu

(Because H5N1) can now infect more species - including wild and domestic cats, civet cats, tigers, mice, ferrets and humans - the likelihood for more lethal mutations to appear rises even as its geographical reach grows. Also not generally appreciated is the fact that since H5N1 is being spread by long-range migratory birds, culling infected poultry on the ground - which may help in particular nations - will do little to stop its dramatic cross-border spread.

...the wild bird strain now circulating globally carries specific mutations first found in birds at the Qinghai nature reserve, making it significantly different from the H5N1 strain circulating in Vietnam. Yet the worldwide effort to create a vaccine by the drugmakers summoned to the White House is based on a 2004 strain isolated from victims of the illness in Vietnam. Their vaccines, even if produced in sufficient quantities and on time, are unlikely to be effective against the wild bird sequences.

Infected birds can travel very far - some geese, for example, can fly 1,500 kilometers in 24 hours - and, because their migratory paths intersect, the H5N1 virus may also spread very widely.

So do I think all the world's nations should work together to get a handle on this thing? Yes. Absolutely.

Do I think they should share dangerous information and samples? Yes. Obviously, appropriate care should be taken - but I also think a great deal of damage already has been done, and still is being done. The only way to sort out the whole mess is for everyone to put their information and heads together.

P.S. Why do you always put those dots in your posts?

Probably the same reason I write about things I care about - I am just looking for points and attention from the world's greatest conspiracy site.


.(Really it's because I have trouble reading the bottom lines when I'm writing.)



Ed to fix link

[edit on 23-10-2005 by soficrow]

Soficrow I don't think many will argue that declaring the 1918 Flu Virus as a select agent restricts access to the virus, but I believe most believe that to be a wise precaution. You make it sound like a deliberate attempt to prevent legitimate researchers from working with the virus and I don't think that is the case at all.

To some extent I will agree the government seems to be discouraging researchers from speaking freely about their research and this disturbs me when the research subject is not national defense related. With some exceptions, scientists should feel free to speak freely. I've also noticed the attempts by some corporations to do the same thing, or to hire different scientists to perform similar (or the same) research and then publish results that completely disagree with the prior research--and this also disturbs me. The tobacco industry was noted for that last tactic and the chemical industry isn't far behind. These types of tactics whether by corporations or governments slow progress and hamper research in general. I'm a strong advocate of the peer review process and think any research results that have gone through the peer review process should be published and discussed by all that are interested. Sometimes though I see researchers publish results that have not been peer reviewed and, in general, these published results tend to be less reliable and more political and/or contentious.

The tactic the government is most noted for is studying some particular topic to death. When politicians disagree with the results of some particular research result they quite often fund another study in the same area, not to refute the first study or expand it, but to delay having to take any action based on the results.

[edit on 23-10-2005 by Astronomer68]

Originally posted by Astronomer68
Soficrow I don't think many will argue that declaring the 1918 Flu Virus as a select agent restricts access to the virus,

That is exactly what many are arguing - they say the samples will be sent out of the USA. In fact - if you review the history provided, you will see that access to "select agents" in the USA is restricted - while access from outside the USA in non-existent.

but I believe most believe that to be a wise precaution.

I too believe caution is wise. But that does not seem to be the fundamental issue here.

You make it sound like a deliberate attempt to prevent legitimate researchers from working with the virus and I don't think that is the case at all.

That has been the effect of using "select agent" designation in the past. Us researchers are controlled, and other nations are out of the picture totally.

My fear is that the "select agent" designation is being used in this circumstance to purposefully obstruct international cooperation - but whether or not it's purposeful, it still is an obstruction.

These types of tactics whether by corporations or governments slow progress and hamper research in general.

I agree. And we're on the wire with bird flu.

Originally posted by soficrow

That is exactly what many are arguing - they say the samples will be sent out of the USA. In fact - if you review the history provided, you will see that access to "select agents" in the USA is restricted - while access from outside the USA in non-existent.

I don't know how many items are on the "select agents" list. If you have knowledge of this please provide the list, or a link to it. Further, if you can, please provide links or information that shows no "select agent" has ever been provided to researchers outside the U.S.

Originally posted by Astronomer68
I don't know how many items are on the "select agents" list. If you have knowledge of this please provide the list, or a link to it. Further, if you can, please provide links or information that shows no "select agent" has ever been provided to researchers outside the U.S.

The links all are posted above - including the relevant paragraph indicating that CDC oversight of "select agents" occurs in the United States.


.

Soficrow while I haven't exhausted anywhere near all of your links I extracted the following from the 1st one:

The complete coding sequence for the 1918 pandemic influenza A H1N1 virus has been recently identified (Taubenberger et al. 2005, Nature, vol. 437, pp. 889-893). Scientists from the CDC together with collaborators at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, NY, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, MD, and Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory, USDA, GA, reconstructed the 1918 pandemic influenza virus by using reverse genetics to study the properties associated with its extraordinary virulence (Tumpey et al., Characterization of the Reconstructed 1918 Spanish Influenza Pandemic Virus, Science 2005 310: 77-80). With the publication of the complete coding sequence, it will be possible for other scientists with knowledge of reverse genetics technology to reconstruct the 1918 pandemic influenza virus at other institutions.

Note the last line of that extract and then remember that the coding sequence they are talking about was published in open literature available all over the world.

Next, I went to the actual Public Law and followed the references concerning import & export of "special agents" as far as I could and found that the agents can be exported, but the red tape to do so is horrendous and entails a lot of time, unless the HHS Secretary, or the CDC Director, or several other people on a very short list grants an exception.

Therefore, your blanket statement that "access outside the U.S. is non existant" is inaccurate--its just damn hard.

[edit on 23-10-2005 by Astronomer68]

Originally posted by soficrow

The HHS Secretary has delegated the responsibility for promulgating and implementing regulations under the "Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act" to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). At CDC, the Division of Select Agents and Toxins (DSAT) in the Coordinating Office of Terrorism Preparedness and Emergency Response oversees these activities and registers all laboratories and other entities in the United States that possess, use, or transfer a HHS or "overlap" select agent or toxin.

Key phrase that - in the United States. It means, "in the United States."

No the key phrase of what you quoted would be......

oversees these activities and registers all laboratories and other entities in the United States that possess, use, or transfer a HHS or "overlap" select agent or toxin.

Why you ask? Because that agency only controls labs and entities that possess use and transfer within the U.S.

The law that this oversight comes from(42 C.F.R. part 73) gives control of exportation to the Dept of Commerce.

Sorry for the extensive quote but the whole thing is applicable, not just the few words sofi is trying to use.....

§73.2 Purpose and scope.

(a) This part sets forth requirements regarding the possession or use in the United States, receipt from outside the United States, or transfer within the United States, of select agents and toxins. The requirements are designed to implement provisions of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (Public Law 107–188). The Act was designed to provide protection against the effects of misuse of select agents and toxins whether inadvertent or the result of terrorist acts against the United States homeland or other criminal acts. The agents and toxins subject to requirements under this part are those that have the potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety. They are further identified as either HHS select agents and toxins or overlap select agents and toxins. The term HHS select agents and toxins refers to those select agents and toxins subject to these regulations but not subject to USDA requirements at 9 CFR part 121. The overlap group consists of those select agents and toxins subject to requirements promulgated by the HHS Secretary under this part and also subject to corresponding requirements promulgated by USDA at 9 CFR part 121.

(b) This part does not set requirements for the exportation of select agents or toxins. The Department of Commerce has primary responsibility for regulating the exportation of microorganisms and toxins in Title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

(c) This part does not set requirements for the transportation in commerce of select agents or toxins. The Department of Transportation has primary responsibility for regulating the transportation of such select agents and toxins as hazardous materials under 49 CFR parts 171 through 180.

www.washingtonwatchdog.org...

So basically HHS controls what goes on with labs within the U.S., they do not control export.

It appears all you need is a export license that covers that category of exports.


I'm not exactly seeing a conspiracy in this, just a lot of wing flapping.

Originally posted by soficrow
The fact that my spotlighting such information is considered suspect and "controversial" is itself sad commentary on the state of our nation.

:shk: that here is what we call a argumentum ad misercordiam or an "Appeal to Pity"

The truly sad thing here is this bit of Yellow Journalism, Yes Yellow Journalism is ALWAYS suspect. Your initial title that the US is not sharing information was bogus. That is always suspect in my book. And the above quoted statement :shk: To quote President Reagan "There you go again"

Nor have you proven it in any way shape or form. You keep asking for a list of countries that have been given the virus to study all the while decrying the US FOR not sharing yet have not provided Any proof of denials from any country, organization or world body :shk:

You can attempt to weave a convoluted web here, but the bottom line is this. You all but admitted you placed the story AND the created the title to generate controversy. You cut and pasted an article that dealt ONLY with the CDC's classification of the DANGEROUS virus (And the increased security such a classification carried) and tried to SPIN it as your version. In poker parlace here your bluff has been called.

The ONLY two stories I have seen here or out in the press about the US not sharing information have been from YOU!

Again, please supply a list of countries that have been denied access to the virus and/or the information that the CDC has generated from it.

Astronomer68
Next, I went to the actual Public Law and followed the references concerning import & export of "special agents" as far as I could and found that the agents can be exported, but the red tape to do so is horrendous and entails a lot of time, unless the HHS Secretary, or the CDC Director, or several other people on a very short list grants an exception.

Thanks Astronomere.

Your reference brings the two key issues into focus:

1. The "select agent" designation under the Bioterrorism Act effectively mandates that any determinations regarding the use of such agents are political, not scientific or medical. In fact, the 2002 Bioterrorism Act was created for the purposes of: 1) Preventing US scientists from collaborating and sharing their data with colleagues in other nations; 2) Controlling access to scientific data within the USA; and 3) Preventing US scientists from sharing scientific data, general results, and any resulting concerns with the American public. Supposedly to protect Americans from bioterrorist threats.

But in practise, the reality is panning out quite differently:

"...an April 2004 General Accounting Office report (PDF) ...said some departments have appointed members of industry and stakeholder groups, persons who are exempt from conflict-of-interest rules. Industry leaders may therefore theoretically be profiting from their own advice."

U.S. Charged With Silencing Scientists

Fighting for integrity: Delegates at a CSPI meeting dismayed at corporate influence, politicization of science

"Science is being altered to suit (political and economic) objectives."


2. Political determinations require time for negotiation - but the crisis is already upon us. There is no time for negotiation or other political games - if the goal is to save the world from a devastating pandemic. In fact, speed is of the essence now: "Speed is life," said a Health and Human Services Department official.

Nations meet to prepare bird flu response

Everyone at the international meeting, sponsored by the U.S. State Department, has agreed in principle to share the information, quickly, that could allow health experts to contain the virus if it makes the jump to easily infect people. ...Now, said officials, it is critical to make sure they actually do so.

"Speed is life," said a Health and Human Services Department official, who asked not to be named. ..."With proper coordination, we might be able to intervene in time."

Also see: Bird flu needs fast, transparent response

Skibum

(The CDC) oversees these activities and registers all laboratories and other entities in the United States that possess, use, or transfer a HHS or "overlap" select agent or toxin. ...Why you ask? Because that agency only controls labs and entities that possess use and transfer within the U.S. ...The law that this oversight comes from(42 C.F.R. part 73) gives control of exportation to the Dept of Commerce. ...So basically HHS controls what goes on with labs within the U.S., they do not control export.

While the Dept of Commerce may control the physical aspects of export, I can assure you absolutely that the decision-making process to determine what samples might be shared with whom is not primarily a "transportation" issue.

...That decision-making process is political and economic, not scientific or medical. [See above.]

Skibum
It appears all you need is a export license...

Ahh. No. It's more complicated than that.

Skibum

that covers that category of exports.

Hmmm. Meaning scientific and medical knowledge is a trade commodity? I think you may have something there. ...Let me backtrack a bit.

Skibum

...I'm not exactly seeing a conspiracy in this, just a lot of wing flapping.

Originally, I did not see a conspiracy either. My concern was that this administration's paranoia about bioterrorism was misplaced - and that designating the 1918 bird flu samples as a "select agent" would wrongly and dangerously obstruct international collaboration, cooperation, and ability to deal with the bird flu crisis.

Which is why I filed my article in the "War on Terrorism" category. But, due to the wing flapping of our local agitators, the ATS administration moved this article/thread to "Conspiracy Related News Topics" without consulting me

However, given the wing flapping agitators' continued efforts to derail this thread, and prevent legitimate discourse that might lead to any clear understanding of the issues - I now am beginning to suspect a conspiracy, and to consider the possibility that once again, I have hit the nail too close to the head.

FredT

Originally posted by soficrow

The fact that my spotlighting such information is considered suspect and "controversial" is itself sad commentary on the state of our nation.

that here is what we call a argumentum ad misercordiam or an "Appeal to Pity"

No FredT. It's an observation - and an appeal for awareness, education, and a call to "Deny Ignorance."

FredT

The truly sad thing here is this bit of Yellow Journalism,

Interesting that as a Moderator you consider yourself to be above ATS rules against name-calling and spurious, unsubstantiated personal attacks.

Your initial title that the US is not sharing information was bogus. ...Nor have you proven it in any way shape or form.

I have proved that the CDC does not share critical scientific and medical information - you just choose to ignore the evidence, and the international documentation.

You all but admitted you placed the story AND the created the title to generate controversy.

I certainly did NOT admit any such thing, nor did I imply it.

You cut and pasted an article that dealt ONLY with the CDC's classification of the DANGEROUS virus (And the increased security such a classification carried) and tried to SPIN it as your version. In poker parlace here your bluff has been called.

The "select agent" designation is the key - and the terms of the 2002 Bioterrorism Act make the issue "political," as opposed to scientific or medical. No bluff. No misrepresentation.

FredT

The ONLY two stories I have seen here or out in the press about the US not sharing information have been from YOU!

You need to get past the White House Press Releases and Internal Memos written for low level employees. There's plenty out there: "Web Results 1 - 10 of about 527,000 for +US OR USA OR "United States" +flu +hoarding OR blocking +data OR information OR samples." For example:

Citizens for Legitimate Government: Flu 'Oddities'; CDC locks up flu data

Amid growing concerns that avian influenza will develop into a deadly pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is under fire by some in the scientific community for hoarding data crucial for vaccine development. The allegations come as CDC has issued new and controversial rules on what data, documents and other information it will - and will not - share with the public. Open government advocates are critical of the CDC's "Information Security" manual, the 34-page document that gives officials 19 categories to shield data from public scrutiny without obtaining a "secret" classification.

Also see:

Nature: Flu researchers slam US agency for hoarding data

US National Institutes of Health PubMed Database: Flu researchers slam US agency for hoarding data.

CDC slammed for hoarding data; Better sharing of information would help vaccine design.

Atlanta Journal-Constitution: CDC locks up flu data; Critics call policy too restrictive

PDF. Nature article: Flu researchers slam US agency for hoarding data

Reuters reports: "Scientists who are researching influenza say their work is being hindered by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which is withholding data on most of the flu strains that scientists sequence."

Yahoo: Flu researchers slam US for hoarding data

Dr. Bob Martin: Flu researchers slam US for hoarding data

Also of interest:

More Anti-Virals in the Hands of the Politicians

Assessing the Bird Flu Crisis

No honest investigation into accidental global release of Spanish Flu virus

In one Louisiana parish, flexibility trumps bureaucracy

FredT

Again, please supply a list of countries that have been denied access to the virus and/or the information that the CDC has generated from it.

That question has been addressed, and re-addressed, ad nauseum. Please stay on topic, and quit trying to derail this thread.


Is it all about money? Holding Intellectual Property Rights? Getting there first? Cornering the market?

Most certainly, scientists and politicians/corporations are polarized - responsible scientists say scientific information should be Open Access (Open Source), and that sharing research is critical - on the other hand, the business community wants research results to remain privately owned, and thereby, profitable.

First Ever Large Scale Sequencing of Influenza Genome.

...senior author Steven Salzberg, professor and director of the Center for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology at the University of Maryland, and his co-authors report the first-ever large-scale sequencing of 209 complete genomes of influenza A, the ever-changing virus that makes humans sick with the “flu.”

One unusual aspect of the project was that the authors released all of the sequence data immediately. A September 22 article in Nature criticized the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), for “hoarding” influenza data, not making it generally available to researchers.

“All of the sequences described in the NIAID project are rapidly being deposited in public sequence databases,” Salzberg said. “We realize there is a chance that other scientists could ‘scoop’ us on our own data, but this data is too valuable for anyone to sit on."

***

VIRA 38 Fraction (v38 AMF-1) Inhibits Bird Flu Virus (H5N1) Infections by Blocking Viral Attachment

LOS ANGELES, Oct. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- PRB Pharmaceuticals (www.prbpharmaceuticals.com...) and Lee's Pharmaceuticals (www.leespharm.com...) announced today the discovery that v38 AMF-1 inhibits H5N1 infection by blocking the ability of the virus to attach to cells. Three fractions of v38 AMF-1 were tested against H5N1, the virus
responsible for causing avian influenza (bird flu), and all showed excellent potency and selectivity at inhibiting H5N1 uptake and viral infections.
The results come from the U.S. arm of an ongoing, multi-national, anti-viral project jointly sponsored by PRB Pharmaceuticals and Lee's Pharmaceuticals.

H5N1 Bird flu has been in the USA since 2001, at least - and while that strain has low pathogenicity, "bird flus that appear at first to be low pathogenic can evolve suddenly into a more deadly strain."

Remember, Reuters reports: "Scientists who are researching influenza say their work is being hindered by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which is withholding data on most of the flu strains that scientists sequence."

So given that the CDC does not share critical data, or release information to the public - we do not know what's happening to H5N1 here in America.


If there is a conspiracy, this is it: The CDC is hoarding critical scientific information necessary for developing bird flu vaccines, NOT to protect Americans from bioterrorist threats, but in order to facilitate profiteering.

If so, this administration's primary objective is NOT to stop the pandemic and save American or any other lives, but rather, to allow the pandemic to materialize unhindered, take its course, and profit from the death, disaster, and devastation.


So is that defensible? Given that the USA is all about business, and profit? Or is it an unconscionable crime against humanity?




.

Originally posted by soficrow
Interesting that as a Moderator you consider yourself to be above ATS rules against name-calling and spurious, unsubstantiated personal attacks.

*snipped - rudeness and namecalling*

Except, the key word to your statement is “unsubstantiated.” I’d bet most would agree you earned that moniker quite handily.

You disgust me. At this point, you've been refuted at every turn and you refuse to acknowledge it. Instead of "getting the word out" about your prions-in-disguise causé du jour, you just gotten out the word that you have no credibility.

I'd expect you to be ashamed of yourself, but your continued refusal to back off this nonsense and acknowledge those who have more experience, knowledge, and sense on this than you, shows me that you have no shame.

Originally posted by soficrow
I have proved that the CDC does not share critical scientific and medical information - you just choose to ignore the evidence, and the international documentation.

You’ve proved nothing other than your poor reading skills. You’ve been told numerous times what the Select Agent program does. You just ignore it. Then you lie. That’s what you do. You’ve proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt. Congratulations.

Originally posted by soficrow
The "select agent" designation is the key - and the terms of the 2002 Bioterrorism Act make the issue "political," as opposed to scientific or medical. No bluff. No misrepresentation.

*snip - namecalling*

By the way mods, as my defense, I plead that the above is NOT an unsubstantiated personal attack. She earned every bit of it.

If you want to say that the U.S. may have hoarded flu data before, fine. Go ahead. But don’t pretend that’s all you’ve been saying. You are trying to turn an innocuous program, designed to keep laboratories secure and safe and minimize the risk of the theft or improper release of dangerous pathogens, and turn it into that movie Outbreak. Grow up.

You can keep putting up 4-meter long posts, filling them with google hits you haven’t even read, and switching to different subtopics that are only tangentially related to this one until you are blue in the face. That won’t make you right, and that won’t make anymore people believe your tripe. You’re busted, your bluff has been called, you’ve been called out. Call it whatever you like, just stop before you lose any shred of credibility you may have once had.

*snip - additional rudeness*

I am deleting this thread from my favorites, and will no longer help you get points by ignoring everything. I hope others follow suit.

*snip - more rudeness*

[edit on 24-10-2005 by ZeddicusZulZorander]

The original article above suggested that the US administration erred in defining the 1918 bird flu as a "select agent," which prohibited access to the samples by other nations. The premise was that the risk from a global bird flu pandemic was far, far greater than any risk of bird flu bioterrorism - and that the "select agent" designation was a poor judgment call, which would obstruct international ability to deal with the crisis.

However, based on the information reviewed above (page 3, post 24-10-2005 at 11:21 AM), and a secondary analysis, we now have a new hypothesis:

The US government is using the 2002 Bioterrorism Act to obstruct access to scientific data about bird flu so that the information will remain privately owned and controlled, and can be used for profiteering.

In order for international corporate industries to profiteer, and profit from the death, disaster, and devastation of the bird flu pandemic, the following criteria must be met:

1) The pandemic must materialize unhindered, and

2) Take its course, while

3) Critical scientific information remains privately owned as Intellectual Property for "trade" purposes, and protected under the 2002 Bioterrorism Act.


This is a business strategy, at odds with humanitarian principles. And the real issue is about Open Source versus private Intellectual Property Rights. People versus profits.

The US administration is camouflaging its actions and intent by pointing its finger at China, claiming that 1) bird flu originated in China, 2) China is not monitoring bird flu effectively, and 3) is hiding evidence of outbreaks.

In fact: 1) bird flu did not originate in China; 2) no nation is monitoring bird flu effectively because no one is using molecular diagnostics; and 3) all poorer rural nations face significant obstacles to monitoring outbreaks.

In fact, the CDC is not sharing critical flu data that could help the world's nations stop the bird flu pandemic from emerging.

Hopefully, the emergency international bird flu meeting in Ottawa, being held today and tomorrow, will shed more light on these issues - and find a way for the world's nations to deal with the bird flu crisis without critical support from the current US administration.



.

Originally posted by Hamburglar

*snipped - rudeness and namecalling*


*snip - namecalling*


*snip - additional rudeness*


*snip - more rudeness*

[edit on 24-10-2005 by ZeddicusZulZorander]

Excuse me Mr. Moderator, perhaps a refresher is needed. I have not harasses or threatened. I have not abused.

I have been rude, but rudeness IS NOT PROHIBITED BY THE TOC.

Furthermore, ZZZ, how do you warn someone twice for a single post?

Why did you delete my subsequent post apologizing for my rudeness?

Finally, if I am to be warned for what can only be your LOOSE interpretation of the TOC (I'm assuming you'd suggest I somehow "attacked"), then why hasn't this thread's author been warned for the egregious and much pointed out violation of the...

NUMBER 1 RULE IN THE TOC

In case you forgot in your warn-happy daze, here is a refresher for you.

Originally posted in what should be required reading for Mods
1.) You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.

If you have even a shred of intellectual honesty, sense of fair play, or backbone, I expect to see some warn stickers up on soficrow's avatar in the very near future.

But, I won't hold my breath.

Hamburglar - my information is GOOD - and the ATS collaborative process has brought to light a new and extremely important consideration - and caused me to change my original position.


The original article above suggested that the US administration erred in defining the 1918 bird flu as a "select agent," which prohibited access to the samples by other nations. The premise was that the risk from a global bird flu pandemic was far, far greater than any risk of bird flu bioterrorism - and that the "select agent" designation was a poor judgment call, which would obstruct international ability to deal with the crisis.

However, based on the information reviewed above (page 3, post 24-10-2005 at 11:21 AM), and a secondary analysis, we now have a new hypothesis:

The US government is using the 2002 Bioterrorism Act to obstruct access to scientific data about bird flu so that the information will remain privately owned and controlled, and can be used for profiteering.

In order for international industries to profiteer, and profit from the death, disaster, and devastation of the bird flu pandemic, the following criteria must be met: 1) The pandemic must materialize unhindered, and 2) take its course, 3) while critical scientific information remains privately owned as Intellectual Property for "trade" purposes - and 4) protected under the 2002 Bioterrorism Act.

This is a business strategy, at odds with humanitarian principles. And the real issue is about Open Source versus private Intellectual Property Rights. People versus profits.

The US administration is camouflaging its actions and intent by pointing its finger at China, claiming that 1) bird flu originated in China, 2) China is not monitoring bird flu effectively, and 3) is hiding evidence of outbreaks.

In fact: 1) bird flu did not originate in China; 2) no nation is monitoring bird flu effectively because no one is using molecular diagnostics; and 3) all poorer rural nations face significant obstacles to monitoring outbreaks.

Hopefully, the emergency international bird flu meeting in Ottawa, being held today and tomorrow, will shed more light on these issues - and find a way for the world's nations to deal with the bird flu crisis without critical support from the current US administration.


.

More backpedalling than a BMX rally.

It stinks.