NEW CLOSTRIDIUM BOTULINUM and terrorism

Michael Rivero rivero at accessone.com
Mon May 13 13:10:33 EST 1996


In article <4msvcu$28p at oban.cc.ic.ac.uk>,
Mark Pallen  <m.pallen at ic.ac.uk> wrote:
>OK, so, in this case, we are not seeing a terrorist fishing for info!;-) 
>

  Or the FBI/BATF up to their usual trolls.


>
>Is this scenario plausible? If it is at all plausible (leaving aside the 
>costs--50K dollars say for the oligos), then isn't it irresponsible 
>having this stuff in the databases  (the same argument applies to 
>bacterial toxin sequences)? Are attempts to download the Marburg 
>sequence monitored? If not, why not?

  Just having the RNA doesn't do much without the associated proteins,
most of which cannot be synthesised.



>And how come the US government worries so much about exporting PGP etc. 
>when anyone can download the sequences of Marburg, botulin toxin 
>etc.from a US server?! Shouldn't that count as a munitions export? :-)

  Are we sure it doesn't? I thought botulin toxin was classed as a
biological weapon.




-- 
PIXELODEON PRODUCTIONS | Hand Hammered Special Effects
Mike & Claire - The Rancho Runnamukka http://www.accessone.com/~rivero 
GUN CONTROL:BLACKS WILL BE SAFER IF ONLY MARK FUHRMAN HAS A GUN.



More information about the Virology mailing list