zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. sunder+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-12-31 00:47:49
I'm not convinced anyone has good evidence for this particular claim at this time, but labeling it "batshit crazy" is premature. Michael Osterholm, a respected epidemiologist, explains in his book "Deadliest Enemy" his belief ("no doubt in his mind") that the 1977 Russian flu was released from a bioweapons lab. If it happened before there isn't any reason it couldn't happen now.

EDIT: I misspoke slightly by referring to "bioweapons," so I decided to post the full quote here:

> It turned out that the Soviets were conducting vaccine studies using live, attenuated H1N1 influenza viruses in the very area where the new H1N1 was first detected. During our research, we uncovered a letter from the Soviets to the US government requesting that we share with them the 1976 Fort Dix strain of H1N1 for their vaccine studies. I have little doubt that the appearance of the 1977 H1N1 virus and its rapid global transmission in just several months was the result of a release of the virus in the course of the Soviet vaccine studies. We don’t know exactly what they were doing with the virus. What we do know is that it got out, either accidentally or on purpose, causing a local outbreak in lab workers that subsequently spread around the world. Either way, the powerful lesson here is that if an influenza virus accidentally escapes or is intentionally released, expect that it will spread around the world in short order. This is the proverbial single match being able to light a global forest fire. The possibility for a DURC research study using a potentially dangerous influenza virus should scare the hell out of everyone.

replies(1): >>nobody+9i
2. nobody+9i[view] [source] 2020-12-31 03:43:04
>>sunder+(OP)
You didn’t misspeak “slightly”. At least in intent, there’s a world of difference between a vaccine study and bioweapon study.
[go to top]