Airborne Prions Prove Lethal In Mouse Studies 116
sgunhouse writes "Wired has a story up on the lethality of airborne prions. It should be noted that prions (which cause 'mad cow disease' and similar disorders) are not normally airborne, and take a long time to kill the infected animal, but so far are 100% lethal if something else doesn't kill the animal first. So, they are not likely to be useful as a biological weapon (my first thought when reading their headline), but they present another safety precaution to consider."
In other words (Score:5, Funny)
pause, and think a moment before you run that cow through the wood chipper.
Re:In other words (Score:5, Funny)
I have paused to think. And now I can't get this question out of my head: How many cows would a woodchuck chip if a woodchuck would chip cows?
Re:In other words (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Dirty Jobs already covered this in S4e14. Here's part of the episode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSARE05ec5g [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Near your immuno-compromised mice. At least according to the tagline for the article.
Tagline is wrong (Score:5, Informative)
I am not a biologist, but based on my reading of TFA, the scientists successfully infected immunodeficient and immunocompetent mice. It's counterintuitive, but the fact that the disease incubated in the immunodeficient mice at the same rate as the immunocompetent mice is what makes the research significant.
The immune system actually seems to play some kind of a role in prion diseases, acting as a kind of Trojan horse mechanism to spread the infection. It's not totally clear how this works, but the research supports that it happens. So what these scientists did is they inoculated immunodeficient mice with prions and observed them coming down with the prion disease in pretty much the exact same way as the immunocompetent ones. This establishes that a functioning immune system is not actually necessary for infection via aerosol. This means that an immunodeficient mouse, even when kept in semi-isolation, can potentially come down with a prion disease from an aerosol source even when it doesn't come in direct contact with any infected tissues.
That's a pretty big deal when you consider a lot of scientists in research laboratories might be working with immunodeficient mice, in the mistaken assumption that the mice will be safe from prion infection. The recommendation of this paper is that research lab safety guidelines note aerosols as a possible vector for prion infections, which they do not do now. I don't think this is really a warning aimed at keeping people from being infected. For the time being, at least, it's more about keeping research from being spoiled when lab animals come down with infections from unforeseen aerosol sources.
Re: (Score:3)
From one of TFA:
Here we tested the cellular and molecular characteristics of prion propagation after aerosol exposure and after intranasal instillation. We found both inoculation routes to be largely independent of the immune system
Admittedly quoted out of context. But it does mean that no, having an immune system that works properly is not in and of itself enough to protect you from aerosol prions.
And despite what TFS says, I can see uses for this in biological warfare. A person exposed to airborne prions cannot transmit the disease to another human being, as person-to-person transmission has only been observed to occur via ingestion of tissue. So, unlike a viral or bacterial agent, there's no risk of a bioweapon a
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Bioweaponry must be banned and banned hard.
Re:In other words (Score:4, Insightful)
I did cover that with the second paragraph of my post. Prion bioweapons wouldn't be person-to-person contagious the way that viral or bacterial bioweapons are. Hence the comparison between prion weapons and chemical weapons, where in both cases only the people initially exposed will be affected. I should also clarify that I find the notion of actually using bioweapons to be a crime against humanity, but I have no problem hypothesizing about their use.
Also, the comparison to land mines is inept. Land mines last a long time, but only kill or maim one person per mine. Bioweapons don't last a long time, but can kill or main many people per deployment.
you can never clear an area. You could nuke the area, but the biological agents could return, carried by insects or water or birds.
No, this is demonstrably wrong.
Some, not all, pathogens are transmissible through animal vectors. If you were to weaponize bubonic plague then there could still be rodent carriers inside the exposed area after all human beings have been evacuated or died. Not every bioweapon has an animal vector available to it however, and even the ones that do, the animal must be at least partially asymptomatic in order to remain a threat, or it's going to die in short order. The "worst case" would be a disease that can jump species to something ubiquitous, like rats or mosquitoes, and can infect those species without killing them.
If you'd stated that some bioweapons remain a threat in a region after deployment, I would have accepted your argument as valid, but the way your post is written suggests that you think all bioweapons can, which is wrong.
Also, you listed "insects water and birds". Insects and birds belong on that list, and you didn't mention any other animals like rats, but water is another matter entirely. Waterborne transmission due to contamination is temporary. Water itself cannot act as a host. When a disease is waterborne, it either spends part of it's life-cycle in water, like the Guinea Worm, or it's the result of contamination via feces or dead organisms, like cholera.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
dont' discount the possibility of genetically engineering a bioweapon that is more effective against ethnicity of likely enemy than home population
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
More importantly, take more precautions if you work with slaughtered pigs and cows in a meat packing facility/slaughterhouse.
Re:In other words (Score:5, Informative)
More importantly, take more precautions if you work with slaughtered pigs and cows in a meat packing facility/slaughterhouse.
Indeed, just below TFA was this [wired.com] little blurb pointing out exactly that - workers on a pig brain processing line came down with a serious autoimmune disorder linked to heavy exposure to pig brain pieces. Not prion linked apparently, but certainly a potential occupational hazard to all you Zombies out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Pig brains do make good tacos though.
Re: (Score:2)
Pig brains do make good tacos though.
Provided taco does not bitch slap you.
Eeeew. (Score:2)
Seems like it'd be sort of unnatural if it WASN'T unhealthy to blow brains out of a pig with compressed air.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why we need thermite pits.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
However, I've previously read that cows infected with Mad Cow Disease are disposed of by dissolving them in lye, not burning, precisely due to the risk that prions could survive the fire and become airborne.
Re: (Score:2)
However, I've previously read that cows infected with Mad Cow Disease are disposed of by dissolving them in lye, not burning, precisely due to the risk that prions could survive the fire and become airborne.
And become prion airs.
If something else doesn't kill first? (Score:5, Funny)
Birth is 100% lethal.
Well 99.9999% if you count that Jesus guy, Mary and Elisha.
Re: (Score:2)
A recent study showed that 100% of mass murderers ingested some form of dihydrogen monoxide within 48 hours of killing their victims. Warn your children about the dangerous effects of dihydrogen monoxide today!
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I heard some guy talking about this big tournament, saying "there can only be one". I assume he meant winner, but, whatever, I wasn't really paying attention. His hair was too long for me to take him seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not dead yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't mean birth isn't lethal.
That's like saying a Car Crash isn't lethal if you survive the impact, or that AIDS isn't lethal if you live for 5 years.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that it does look like birth is pretty lethal, but there are billions of us still alive, so saying that birth is 100% lethal isn't accurate. It's likely it is accurate for every one of us alive here today, but we can't be sure they won't come up with an immortality spell tomorrow, so birth has been shown to be lethal in a much lesser percentage than 100 of observed cases so far.
Cool! (Score:2)
You must have the secret of immortality! Watch out for people with swords.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Birth is 100% lethal.
I got 6 billion people say you're wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Ask them again in about 200 years. I betcha, none of them will still be alive.
Re: (Score:2)
But I betcha none of them will say it was their births that killed them.
Re: (Score:2)
Just 'cause people don't know what killed them doesn't make it not so.
Re: (Score:2)
Not all.
Some were delivered by Cesarean section.
That's an extraction, not a birth, no matter what the doctors say on the forms.
99.8% of their DNA is in common. That's pretty deadly too, huh. But DNA can be immortal [ambericawest.com]. So maybe we're just being used by it and then discarded.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's an account of him being taken up in Genesis, so the book of Enoch shouldn't even need to be considered. Plus, responding to AC, birth was lethal for Jesus as well. He just came back afterwards.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Birth is 100% lethal.
Well 99.9999% if you count that Jesus guy, Mary and Elisha.
They still have to survive the Big Rip [wikipedia.org]. If they pull that off, I'll truly be impressed and dedicate my life to helping others. Otherwise I'll stay an asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
You're making a semantic argument or what? Because I'd argue that there is a big difference between "Uninfected lifespan: indefinite" to "Infected lifespan: finite." At least, to the infected person. To argue "Everyone is going to die, so if it's not immediate it doesn't matter" is idiotic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
93%.
In the world there has ever only been 100Billion people.
Out of those, 7Billion are still alive today. So how can you form your thesis like that?
Re: (Score:2)
The Jesus guy died, too. Never thought about it that way, but from a Biblical standpoint, only Mary and Elisha have ascended without death.
Re: (Score:1)
Life: a fatal sexually transmitted condition.
Thanks for the laugh (Score:2, Funny)
"100% lethal if something else doesn't kill the animal first."
In other news, 100% of people are struck by lightning if they don't die before it happens.
Re: (Score:2)
death by inhaling marbles- 100% lethal if something else doesn't kill you first
Facepalmed (Score:2)
and take a long time to kill the infected animal, but so far are 100% lethal if something else doesn't kill the animal first
So does breathing air...
You know what else (Score:2, Insightful)
You know what else is eventually lethal if something else doesn't kill you first? Being human, or in fact just being alive*.
*Unless you're a bacteria hibernating in a salt crystal, apparently.
Re: (Score:2)
lifespan (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Not so much... Mobsters usually follow recognised safety procedures, and forensic scientists sometimes do.
Come to think about it... (Score:2)
OK, I'm outta here...
Re: (Score:2)
100% lethal unless something else kills you first? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Says who? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, they are not likely to be useful as a biological weapon
A weapon that destroys your enemy's economy in a matter of years is still a viable weapon. Especially if it's hard to detect (ie by the time everyone shows signs of being sick, you are no longer deploying the weapon). This is scary stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
100% lethal, non-communicable (so you don't have to worry about travelers spreading it back to "your people"), virtually impossible to detect and a long enough incubation period to make it impossible to quarantine or trace back to the source. Like you said, so what if people don't start dropping dead for a couple of years? That's a *
Re: (Score:2)
Provided you don't make soylent green out of the bodies and dispose of them adequately, I don't see how it could be a problem. Otherwise we'd have many more cases of C-J disease in populations near cemeteries...
Re: (Score:2)
Apart from a few whackjobs, the whole point of WMDs is using them to threaten people to accomplish other goals - not actually using them.
True ... unless, of course, you come up with a viable treatment for your weapon and can prove it works. Then you could place an entire population under a death sentence ... with you holding the reprieve.
That would probably buy you a lot of influence to accomplish those other goals.
Re: (Score:2)
On a completely unrelated note, does anyone know if there's a place near Washington D.C. that sells malformed human prions? Preferably one that's willing to offer a volume discount.
Capitol Hill?
I have heard congress-critters can be bought easily now days.
Re: (Score:2)
A weapon that destroys your enemy's economy in a matter of years is still a viable weapon.
Yes, lets nuke the Brits from orbit! Deploying cows of mad destruction to make all of Europe sick. No, the nerve!
Fortunately, the Germans have their mighty dioxine eagles (a.k.a. chickens) to defend the continent!
Re: (Score:2)
It's not completely unprecedented though. The biosciences weapon theorists have been worrying about control of airborne transmission, by tailored pathogens that target a particular ethnic group selectively, for at least a decade now. Some basic conclusions have become almost tautological, particularly two of them, that some nations with particularly homogeneous populations would benefit from such selectivity much more than other, more diverse, nations, and that some racist groups would make producing such w
Prions straddle living/non living gap (Score:3, Interesting)
Leather tanning industry has some really weird mix of chemicals and some of them involve brain matter. Hope the left over prions on the leather jackets degrade or wear off.
Re:Prions straddle living/non living gap (Score:4, Informative)
How long do the exist in prion form left to themselves I wonder. Can they exist in some dried powder form forever? Or do they spontaneously disintegrate into constituent compounds?
Scientists have taken prion-infected tissue and reduced it to ashes in a crucible at 600 C, and there were still viable, infective prions in the ashes.
they aren't living (Score:3)
is silver iodide used in rainmaking living? it catalyzes a chain reaction
is a bit of ice in supercooled water living? it catalyzes a chain reaction
take a prion, put it at the right spot in a susceptible brain, and it makes a cascade of prions. this is chemistry, not life. if you call a prion living, lots of chain reactions in nature you would have to call living
now a virus, that's the border between living and nonliving
Re: (Score:1)
circletimessquare correctly addressed the "living" issue. Prions are plain dead proteins, they're not alive in any sense. But there is another, even simpler misconception.
No, they don't. Prions have no ability whatsoever to replicate. They are plain boring proteins like all other proteins and as such are completely dependent on the common protein biochemistry (coded in DNA - transcribed to RNA - translated to the actual protein sequence - folded to yield a particular, specific 3D structure
Re: (Score:1)
It has an LD50 of 0 (Score:2, Funny)
There. I told a different joke. A nerdier one. There ought to be a +1 Nerdy mod for that sort of thing here.
Prions: Bunch of Hooey (Score:1, Interesting)
Wow. Those genetically modified mice "tga20 transgenic mice overexpressing PrPC" bred to be hyper-susceptible seem to be highly susceptible. After 15+ years of this "ice 9" business I'm still waiting for results that in any way meet Koch's Postulates. Oh yeah, let's stop calling this protein "prion" and start calling it a proteinaceous "toxin" which is what it is. Moreover, since this Nobel Prize winning hypothesis in no way seems to conform with the reality of widely spreading communicable encephalitis i
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Prions: Bunch of Hooey (Score:4, Insightful)
After 15+ years of this "ice 9" business I'm still waiting for results that in any way meet Koch's Postulates.
OK, this one will cover a lot of ground. Weber P et al. Cell-free formation of misfolded prion protein with authentic prion infectivity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA 2006 October 24; 103(43): 15818–15823. [nih.gov] It's open-access, so no excuses about being stuck behind a paywall.
Making claims that biochemists working on prions "don't like to get dirty" is both insulting and disingenuous. Animal models are, in fact, used here to demonstrate that purified PrPsc (misfolded prion protein) is infectious in live hosts, in addition to triggering misfolding in vitro. No one uses farm animals because they're large, expensive, and there's no compelling reason to incur that cost when simpler model animals (here, hamsters) will do.
why not entertain the notion that this is a slow virus and that the symptomatic misfolded protein is a mere phenotype, possibly detrimental, but not causal
Well, because the linked paper was able to amplify the infective population of PrPsc in a cell-free system, which would not be conducive to the amplification of a virus.
I understand the appeal of an underdog hypothesis, but unless you can present a better argument that isn't comprised of ad hominems, vague conspiracy theories, and a smattering of scientific claims answered by 5-year-old literature, I'm not convinced.
Re:Prions: Bunch of Hooey (Score:5, Insightful)
After 15+ years of this "ice 9" business I'm still waiting for results that in any way meet Koch's Postulates.
But Laura Manuelidis is claiming that vCJD and others are caused by "a slow-acting virus"... and Koch's Postulates aren't strictly applicable to viruses either. The best that Manuelidis has managed to do is to isolate "virus-like DNA signatures" -- which does not even prove the presence of a virus, let alone that a virus is causative. So in the best case scenario, Manuelidis may have raised some questions, but has been no more successful at meeting your preconditions for accuracy than anybody else. You apparently just think she's "fighting the good fight" because -- much like Jenny McCarthy -- she questions the prevailing theory. That attitude is bad science.
100% lethal (Score:1)
Isn't everything 100% lethal provided something else doesn't kill you first?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but it won't necessarily rot your mind in the process like prion disease does. Could be a horrific terrorist weapon, assuming the terrorists are long-sighted enough - poison a large number of the population with something that they won't even know they have for 5-20 years, then watch society crumble as half the population suffers from mindrot.
They don't even need to do the research now to see if it works or not.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You just described Jerry Springer
Of course, you die *without* prions... (Score:2)
... because otherwise your proteins wouldn't work properly. I guess it's just another misunderstood buzzword now.
Who the F^-* ?? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Who would even do an experiment with such things?
People who then know more than those that don't bother checking. Tribes with this characteristic are thought to optimize their use of limit resources slightly over people who would never think to check for themselves.
One could call them ... winners.
Airborne Prions? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah that was how I read the headline first - another recall for Toyota...
Isn't everything that lethal ? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Anything I can think of is 100% lethal if something else doesn't kill the animal first.
Yep... even water. Come to think of it... 100% of animals that were alive and then died ingested some water during their lifetime. This makes water some pretty dangerous stuff.
I suppose the computer equivalent to throwing prions into the air is pointing a fan at a fully powered up computer with open case running full blast, and dumping a 5 pound bag of copper and iron filings across the path of the fan, so
No further testing needed (Score:1)
How to protect from extraterrestrial prions? (Score:1)
If the prions do not reproduce in culture, they could pass any quarantine test applied to a sample returned from Mars or from another planet and they could still infect the scientists that breath them in. With an incubation period of 10 years, perhaps a lot of people could become infected by such a form of exogenous life before we notice any symptoms. By then it could be too late. Perhaps we have mined that stuff and brought tonnes back to Earth and everyone breathed it in and then all