As Russia’s invasion progresses, I was reminded of our conversation in class about the only remaining smallpox vials. We discussed how (to our knowledge) the only remaining vials of the deadly smallpox virus exist in the United States and in Russia. In our homework, we were asked to take a side on the debate as to whether or not these vials should be destroyed.
It made me think about the possibility of an actual bioterrorist attack. I started listening to the audiobook of Richard Preston’s Demon in the Freezer this past weekend and realized how real and terrifying the anthrax bioterrorism attack of the early 2000s was. I think we take it for granted today that we have not yet had a purposeful, targeted bioterrorist attack in recent years. In some of the other problems from this week’s problem set, there were questions about the ethics of gain-of-function experiments and whether they should be allowed. It made me realize how in science curiosity is often tied with terror. Scientists seek to push the bounds of what we can observe and create something that is stronger or more interesting. They are curious to explore things, especially dangerous things that people don’t know too much about. But with that exploration and experimentation comes a responsibility of ensuring that the knowledge of and access to these dangerous viruses does not get into the wrong hands.
I wonder what the US government’s rationale is for keeping the smallpox vials. Do they really want to do more research on it? Or is it more of a symbol of equal power for destruction against Russia? If Russia does release their smallpox into the population, it’s not like releasing ours will do any good in stopping the bioterrorist attack. So, what is the purpose? Does Russia’s recent invasion of Ukraine change their minds in any way? I have recently started to find biosecurity very interesting and would like to explore this more.
No comments:
Post a Comment