Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

'Safe Ebola' Created for Research

Posted by Zonk on Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:02 AM
from the makes-me-so-happy-to-be-living-in-the-same-city dept.
Nephrite writes "By removing a gene from the virus Ebola, UW-Madison scientists have managed to stop the deadly pathogen from replicating. This first step may be a start down the path to a vaccine or drug screening. 'The scientists still want the virus to replicate in order to study it, so they developed monkey kidney cells which contained the protein needed. Because the cell was providing the protein, and not the virus itself, it could only replicate within those cells, and even if transferred into a human, would be harmless.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • This is outbreak waiting to happen! Find me patient zero!
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Do not worry, George W. Bush has announced a plan to invade Wisconsin claiming that they are developing weapons of mass destruction and biological weapons against his kidney.

      The university tried to open a line of communication with the president to reason with him but was met with difficulty when he retired to the war room to pout and 'play with his toys.'
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        It amazes me how there are so many people who, in one breath, will argue that we desperately need more funding to the basic sciences, and in the next will claim that any actual research should be halted because of the couldbe's.

        Look, the people studying ebola are smart and they are safe. The people at the CDC and elsewhere have, I'm sure, explored the full spectrum of Michael Crichton related disasters. They may even have considered some other pulp fiction horrors, as well as actual real life threats.

        Vira
  • by Laughing Pigeon (1166013) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:04AM (#22137720)
    Grisoft Antivirus has detected a dangerous virus and has blocked access to TFA.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      'Safe Ebola' created for research
      Scientists have made the lethal virus Ebola harmless in the lab, potentially aiding research into a vaccine or cure.

      Taking a single gene from the virus stops it replicating, US scientists wrote in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal.

      Ebola, currently handled in highly secure labs, kills up to 80% of those it infects.

      However, one expert said the new method may not yet be a fail-safe way of dealing with the virus.

      We wanted to
  • Hmmm.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by BlueStrat (756137) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:07AM (#22137752)
    Does anyone else hear that quote from that movie Jurassic Park "Life always finds a way" when they see this? I mean, what could possibly go wrong, huh? Other than a little hemorrhagic(sp?) fever?

    Cheers!

    Strat
    • Before you panic (Score:5, Informative)

      by TheMeuge (645043) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:18AM (#22137878) Homepage
      Before everyone panics, just think for a second. Ebola is NOT AIRBORNE. It is transmitted by direct contact and bodily fluids. It's classified as BSL4 because it's so deadly once you actually get it, not due to its ease of transmission.

      Currently, only a few groups have access to BSL4 laboratories, and this has been severely hampering Ebola research. If by taking out the VP30 gene they have reduced the pathogenicity of the virus enough to get the authorities to apply the more appropriate BSL3 tag to the mutant strain, they've succeeded in making an important stride towards expanding the field, while introducing a very minimal risk of an outbreak.

      I don't think anyone is talking about drinking the recombinant virus, but merely making it BSL3 instead of BSL4... or even just reducing the risk of working with Ebola under BSL4 conditions.
      • From Slashdot's favorite reference authority

        Although airborne transmission between monkeys has been demonstrated by an accidental outbreak in a laboratory located in Virginia, USA, there is very limited evidence for human-to-human airborne transmission in any reported epidemics. Nurse Mayinga might represent the only possible case. The means by which she contracted the virus remains uncertain.

        No citations, but it's about what I remember from reading The Hot Zone.

      • by monoqlith (610041) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:33AM (#22138100)
        You would be right, and +1 Informative, if only from TFA:

        ""We wanted to make biologically contained Ebola virus so that we can drink it," said Yoshihiro Kawaoka.

        And if you're going to point out that I simply added the part in bold myself, then I can onlly say in my defense that it is probably what Yoshihiro Kawoaka is thinking anyway.
      • Re:Before you panic (Score:5, Interesting)

        by BigGar' (411008) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:54AM (#22138398) Homepage
        Not that entirely correct.
        The strain Ebola-Reston is airborne, fortunately, it appears, the air-borne mutation also makes it non-lethal to humans.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_Reston/ [wikipedia.org]
      • Before everyone panics, just think for a second. Ebola is NOT AIRBORNE. It is transmitted by direct contact and bodily fluids.

        So we're safe as long as we don't touch or have sex with any UW-Madison scientists, or their monkeys.

        • by innerweb (721995) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @11:43AM (#22139086)

          Just a guess, but for some people, a cure to this miserable disease, and for others, one heck of a biological weapon. It is so limited in transmission that one might feel safe using it in certain situations to cripple an enemy. It is so incredibly debilitating while one has it that it would render combatants or other individuals incapacitated and too weak once they recovered, though they probably would not recover.

          Ebola is just another tool in this case.

          InnerWeb

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      That's what I thought to begin with, but then again, it's not as if kids will be snorting lines of this stuff for fun, it will be used in sealed laboritories with extreme care. If ebola must be studied in more flexible environments than BSL4 for it to be understood as the article claims, then a mutant virus that probably is harmless is probably a better choice to a natural virus that brings hemorrhagic fever to all it infects. Sure, don't give it to fresher biology classes, don't play with it without seriou
    • Consider how reactionary and outright Luddite Slashdot is, this is pretty much the reaction I'd expect here.
  • ...air pressure in the room is less than the pressure outside, so any leak would mean air flowing inwards rather than outwards. ...

    OK, I'm not an expert in biosecurity, but wouldn't the reduced air pressure in the room be accomplished by pumping air out of the room?

    • Re:From TFA (Score:4, Informative)

      by TheMeuge (645043) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:14AM (#22137826) Homepage

      OK, I'm not an expert in biosecurity, but wouldn't the reduced air pressure in the room be accomplished by pumping air out of the room?
      Through a controlled path that includes multiple
      The idea is that when you take air out of the room, you control the path of the outflow, and thus you can filter the particulates, including viruses. Otherwise, when you open the door, they just tend to diffuse out.
    • ...air pressure in the room is less than the pressure outside, so any leak would mean air flowing inwards rather than outwards. ...

      OK, I'm not an expert in biosecurity, but wouldn't the reduced air pressure in the room be accomplished by pumping air out of the room?

      Off course the experts have thought of that and put the exhaust of the pumps right next to the leaks so the air will get sucked in again immediately.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      OK, I'm not an expert in biosecurity, but wouldn't the reduced air pressure in the room be accomplished by pumping air out of the room?

      If the secure research facility is air-tight, pumping a little bit of air out would produce a vacuum / differential pressure (compared to the positive pressure suit systems) that would could be maintained without pumping out any more air.

      Furthermore, the little bit of air that does get pumped out can be processed to eliminate or kill viruses -- it can be filtered, passe
      • Re:From TFA (Score:4, Insightful)

        by bcattwoo (737354) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @11:15AM (#22138690)

        But apparently level 4 is just a large scale level 3. It doesn't put my mind at ease that the filter that keeps the Ebola Virus from escaping the CDC is the same kind that's on my vacuum cleaner.
        HEPA is a type of filter that removes least 99.97% of airborne particles 0.3 microns in diameter. Particles approximately 0.3 microns are typically the hardest to capture and the efficiency for larger and smaller particles is even greater than 99.97%. While these filters and your vacuum cleaner filter are classed the same way, they are likely world's apart in terms of capacity and durability.
  • cancer and vaccines (Score:4, Interesting)

    by wizardforce (1005805) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:12AM (#22137794) Journal

    The scientists still want the virus to replicate in order to study it, so they developed monkey kidney cells which contained the protein needed. Because the cell was providing the protein, and not the virus itself, it could only replicate within those cells, and even if transferred into a human, would be harmless.'"
    apparently this is also an area of cancer research as well. cripple a virus so that it can only live in cancer cells and let it destroy the party. vaccines are created from deactivated viruses, breeding the viruses in an environment where their ability to infect human cells is no longer an advantage eventually leads to a weakened form of the virus, specifically crippling viruses OTOH may be far more useful in this regard. it's also a way to make sure the virus stays confined, if it needs a certain component only found in a lab setting [GMed cells with a particular enzyme for example] it would be that much harder to do any real damage even if it did escape.
    • Man, I just keep thinking of MI:2 where they make a super virus because they where trying to make a super vaccine.

      We keep washing 99.9999% of germs and bacteria off ourselves and we seem to be getting sicker and the germs seems to be getting tougher (MRSA [wikipedia.org]). When I was a kid was played in dirt then came in and grabbed a sammich and went out to play more... Damn life was sweet... Most of us are fine! It's not until we get into the "bacterial hand lotion" kicks that I see my peers dropping like flies...
      • Most of us are fine! It's not until we get into the "bacterial hand lotion" kicks that I see my peers dropping like flies...

        sigh.. the most common active compound in antibacterial soaps, lotions etc. is Triclosan. It is rather disturbing to see it used as widely as it is because of the risk of selecting for triclosan resistance. it's a never ending arms race, we make new antibiotics, they develop a way to inactivate or efficiently pump the drug out of their cells. the only thing that has a real chance a

      • Ummmm

        "Man, I just keep thinking of MI:2 where they make a super virus because they where trying to make a super vaccine."

        No they were making a super virus as a weapon they just developed the vaccine first..

        "The plot (or more accurately, the excuse for the movie) revolves around a manmade biological weapon called "Chimera" that's been seized by rogue agent Sean Ambrose (a lightweight Dougray Scott). Now Ambrose and his band of generic thugs need to get their hands on the bug's antidote in order to execute th
  • How much do we know about virii to safely declare legally that this ebola virus would not leap from monkeys to humans.
    Don't the scientists know that the original virus leapt from monkeys to humans just like HIV.
    Hell we can't even classify virus as a living or non-living thing.

    And now our irrational scientists like John Hammond think they can tinker...

    Although on one hand i support them, ebola is tooo dangerous to escape from the funny farm. if it had been smallpox or something it would be understandable.

    Thi
    • Re:Genetics.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TheMeuge (645043) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:27AM (#22138000) Homepage
      I hope that this was a sarcastic post, given the amount of ignorance it contained.

      We would like to study ebola, so that we can save your sorry ass if you get it. To do that, we've modified it to weaken it, so we don't kill ourselves studying it. We're not really going to put it in your food and air supply!

      As far as why Bush hates funding genetic engineering as a whole you're correct. Your post illustrates PRECISELY why people hate funding it - they are ignorant, scared sheet, and content remaining such.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Although on one hand i support them, ebola is tooo dangerous to escape from the funny farm. if it had been smallpox or something it would be understandable.

      Smallpox is far more dangerous and has killed more than a thousand times as many people as Ebola. Ebola is actually relatively easy to contain, though quite deadly. Smallpox is deadly and far more easily spread. And most people under 40 in the developed world are not vaccinated against smallpox. So a smallpox release has a far greater potential danger.

      How much do we know about virii to safely declare legally that this ebola virus would not leap from monkeys to humans.

      First, the standard English plural of virus is viruses. Second, I don't think the courts have anything to do with whether or not a crippled virus is safe an

  • The Sky is falling (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MosesJones (55544) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:17AM (#22137874) Homepage
    Why is it on Slashdot that any thing that restricts any sort of digital rights is a massively bad thing and any research that breaks those elements (even if they are used for nefarious purposes) are good, physics and astronomy research is also always "good", meanwhile massive advances in bio-tech are always "think of the children" topics.

    Sure Ebola is dangerous, but labs are working around the world with massively dangerous pathogens. Britain's numpties in the bio-farming area managed to release Foot and Mouth into the wild (genius) so of course there is a risk. The question is whether it is safe and what can be achieved by doing this, not simply thinking about the Horror flick that played a ridiculous story line out. Bio-shock story lines are just as realistic as techno-shock ones, i.e. about as realistic as a George Bush explanation on Iraqi WMD.

    Bio-science is one of the most real frontiers in science today and its simply stunning what is being done. Sure there need to be controls, but educated people need to stop behaving like Fox News Anchors.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Bad, no.. Interesting.. Yes..
      Worrisome, most certainly.
      Out of all the techs we've yet produced as a race, all of them (with the possible exception of the nascent self-replicating nanotechnology field) have been firmly controlled by humanity.
      Biotech on the other hand, we create something, and when it leaves (and sometimes before it leaves) the 'home', it gets all grown up, with the possibility of getting a serious attitude of it's own and some seriously big boots to come back kicking with.
      With all our machin
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Biotech on the other hand, we create something, and when it leaves (and sometimes before it leaves) the 'home', it gets all grown up, with the possibility of getting a serious attitude of it's own and some seriously big boots to come back kicking with.

        You're right. If those evil scientists keep tinkering around with Ebola like this, it might end up turning into something really bad.

        All sarcasm aside, creating less-pathogenic versions of deadly viruses is one of the best techniques available to provide h

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      "Why is it on Slashdot that any thing that restricts any sort of digital rights is a massively bad thing and any research that breaks those elements (even if they are used for nefarious purposes) are good, physics and astronomy research is also always "good", meanwhile massive advances in bio-tech are always "think of the children" topics."

      That is a bit simplistic. The story summary is pretty neutral, and the "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag is a humorous tag used for many stories. Actually, reading the list [slashdot.org]
  • Um.... (Score:2, Informative)

    Has anyone ever read Demon in the Freezer (about smallpox) or The Hot Zone (about Ebola)? (both of which are very good books) All I know is that any biological agent like Ebola or smallpox scares the hell out of me. I think it was in The Hot Zone (could be another book, I was reading all I could find about Ebola for a while) where there WAS an Ebola outbreak in the US that WAS airborne. Monkeys were dying in a lab and the best explanation for this was that the strain (Reston) was airborne. Luckily this
  • by ifknot (811127) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:26AM (#22137988) Homepage
    As Strat noted in Hmmm..

    "Life always finds a way"

    Which is why imho vaccine efforts should be directed at the animal host pool in order to eradicate the filovirus, ie make it extinct.

    The host is widely considered to be bats http://www.emedicine.com/MED/topic626.htm [emedicine.com] and if only a tiny portion of the grant money spent on dna twiddling was spent establishing this and looking at either eradicating the bats or vaccinating them then, perhaps, the whole filovirus family could be eradicated.

    Before all the bat-lovers start crying foul I would like to point out that it is only ebola's high mortality rate that keeps it contained. If mother nature dose a bit of her own dna twiddling and hits the sweet spot for mortality versus infectivity then haemorrhagic fever will reach Hollywood proportions.

    But, call me cynical, this would leave no recurring income for vaccine makers.

    • Before all the bat-lovers start crying foul ...

      Too late.

      IANABE, but bats have been known to eat flying insects on occasion. Seems to me that this kind of tinkering has been shown repeatedly to produce unintended consquences. In this case, I'd wager the end result would be something along the lines of less bats -> more mosquitos -> more mosquito problems -> more malaria. Or, from the malaria tinkerers perspective, more bats -> less malaria -> more ebola. Given that malaria is a greater p
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      But, call me cynical, this would leave no recurring income for vaccine makers.

      Um, cynical wasn't exactly the word I was thinking of. Though since you can't seem to afford a clue, I'll give you one. Vaccine research is a money-loser unless you come up with an effective vaccine for western diseases - and even then its risky. At best vaccines generate $6 billion annually - that's about 1.5% of the annual pharmaceutical market worldwide. The problem is, an effective vaccine is used only a few times, and is highly cost effective. So there is not so much profit to be made. Moreover, you w

  • Talk about an iron constitution; there is no way I'd walk into a room and work for hours with a virus that violently kills almost everyone it infects, should "something go wrong".

    • Re:Nerves of steel (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ajs (35943) <ajsNO@SPAMajs.com> on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:38AM (#22138144) Homepage Journal

      there is no way I'd walk into a room and work for hours with a virus that violently kills almost everyone it infects, should "something go wrong".
      What do you think happens should "something go wrong" when you're working with a vat of fry grease that can melt off skin at McDonalds? The risk there is much more serious, since training is much less strict and controls are not federally monitored.

      What do you think happens should "something go wrong" when you're assembling a skyscraper? Pouring molten steel? Flying a plane? Heck, just driving a car can kill you in the most horrible ways.

      If you want safe, you're pretty much hosed.

      If you want to balance risk with precaution, work in an industry where the life and death of not just you, but lots of others are on the line. You'll quickly find that the level of precaution taken is burdensome, but quite reassuring.

      PS: It doesn't kill everyone. To quote Wikipedia:

      Mortality rates are extremely high, with the human case-fatality rate ranging from 50% - 89%, according to viral subtype.[3] The cause of death is usually due to hypovolemic shock or organ failure.

      -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola [wikipedia.org] (citation from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol11no02/04-0533.htm [cdc.gov])
  • Can be a vaccine... After all it would attach to the sites on a cell where a non modified virus of the same type would attach (presumably) thus robbing denying any other viruses that site...
  • Its currently in human trials and has 100% efficacy. They don't even need the virus on hand to R&D the vaccine, and only conduct actual FDA trials at a BSL 4 site
  • On the other hand, hyperventilation and mass Sterno consumption are known to counteract its ability to replicate.

    Now they won't need to activate that laboratory self-destruct!

  • by HangingChad (677530) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @11:02AM (#22138514) Homepage

    The scientists still want the virus to replicate in order to study it, so they developed monkey kidney cells which contained the protein needed.

    Hey, isn't that how the Rage virus got started? Pretty soon those monkeys will develop a taste for human brains, the military will see this as a promising new bio-weapon and, 28 days later, Milla Jovovich is naked on your shower floor washing away the zombie blood...again.

    Do these people NEVER learn?

  • Only eight genes? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by RandoX (828285) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @11:32AM (#22138888)
    If there are only eight genes, why is this specific one called VP30? Why not VP1-8? (Or VP0-7?)
    • Re:oops (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TheMeuge (645043) on Tuesday January 22 2008, @10:22AM (#22137924) Homepage
      I don't think Ebola has ever had a vital component of the transcription machinery removed before. It's not a very large virus, and I don't think it can find another gene to replace it. Furthermore, I don't think anyone is talking about releasing this virus into the wild, merely making it easier to work with in the lab, as well as safer.

      Why wouldn't you support that?
    • They developed a monkey kidney cell line so that they produced a protein that is foreign to primates, and otherwise wouldn't ever be found in a monkey or human cell. So unless you've been genetically engineered to make an Ebola virus protein in your kidneys, I think you'll be safe.
    • Nothing is truly safe... It is all a question of odds. The real question is which you'd rather do, swallow a beaker of this crippled Ebola or have a seatmate on a plane flight with EDRTB? Swallow a beaker of crippled Ebola or be on the Bay Bridge in a 6.0 earthquake centered in the bay area? Swallow a beaker of Ebola or go a month without wearing a seatbelt? If TFA accurately portrays the research done, I'd pick the former each time.
    • As much as I'd like to find a treatment/vaccine for something as nasty as Ebola, I'm not so sure tinkering around with its genetic code like this is such a good idea.

      Well, then pretty much most of biomedical research on infectious agents is shit outta luck. How do you think he get live attenuated vaccines? How do you think a lot of HIV research is done?

      Like others, I can't help but think about the paraphrased quote from Jurassic Park, "Life will find a way"; if that ever happens and that modified Ebola mutates and gets out of isolation, we are in a world of shit.

      Like others I can't help but hope that research decision-makers and funders don't get their ideas about what research should be undertaken from bad science fiction.

      (Note I said 'bad science fiction'. That does not imply that the fed shouldn't fund research into making a holodeck. That would be cool.)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Except that the modified virus doesn't spread WITHIN a host either. So nobody gets sick.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        You could inject every enemy soldier with 500ml of Ebola solution. Of course then you could also inject them with 500ml of Coca Cola, which would be far more cost effective and just as deadly. Or just inject them with a combat knife, which already is popular with the military.

        But still, if you get every enemy soldier to line up for the biggest shot of their life you could easily wipe them all out with this strain.