Scientific paper points to possible laboratory
origin of swine flu
By Peter Duveen
PETER'S NEW YORK, Tuesday, November 24, 2009--A just-released
scientific paper spells out the hypothesis, first suggested in the
weeks following the initial outbreak of swine flu in humans in the
Spring of 2009, that the flu emerged from a laboratory.
The peer-reviewed paper, published today in the Journal of Virology, analyzes
the makeup of the genes of the now-famous A H1N1 virus, and concludes
that, although it could possibly have come about through
cross-contamination among flocks of birds or herds of swine, an
equally, or perhaps more probable explanation is that it emerged from
laboratories that store viruses for research or vaccine production.
The authors, Adrian J. Gibbs, John S. Armstrong and Jean C. Downie,
contend they have identified three swine flu viruses as the most likely
parents of the new flu. The last time these parent viruses were known
to have caused disease in pigs was from ten to seventeen years ago.
Each parent comes from a different continent--one from North America,
another from Europe, and a third from Asia. In order for these parent
viruses to have combined in nature to form the new virus, pigs would
need to have breached strict quarantines designed to prevent the spread
of livestock disease. But the scientists note that the European parent
was never found in North America, nor the North American virus in
Europe, indicating that the quarantines were effective. This, of
course, begs the question of how the parent viruses got together to
form the new virus.
Some scientists have suggested that the pigs were shipped
internationally and violated the strict quarantines. But Gibbs and his
colleagues say perhaps a more credible hypothesis is that the parent
viruses were individually stored in different sections of a laboratory,
or in different laboratories, and were brought together for research or
in the production of a vaccine. Storage in a laboratory would also
explain why the parent viruses remained undetected in pig populations
for a decade or more, and then suddenly emerged as components of the
new virus--they were sitting on a shelf in a laboratory refrigerator
during the interim. "Viruses," the paper notes, "do travel
between laboratories in cells." The authors say additional
investigative work is needed to establish which scenario is most likely.
"The possibility that human activity may have had some role in its (the
swine flu virus) origins should not be dismissed without a
dispassionate analysis of all available evidence," the paper states.
The escape of a disease-causing virus from a laboratory would not be an
unprecedented event, the authors contend. They note that a virus that
had not been sampled since the 1950s and one that emerged in 1977 were
practically identical. Had the virus been infecting humans in the
interim, it would have mutated. The absence of mutations suggests that
the virus had been sitting in a laboratory refrigerator during the time
its presence in humans went undetected.
The best ways to trace the origins of the new swine flu, according to
Gibbs's team, is by maintaining a database of viruses and viral
components from laboratories around the world, and by instituting more
intense monitoring of infected animal and human populations.
The swine flu virus "has already proved to be a significant and very
costly cause of mortality and morbidity in the human population," the
authors note. "It is important that the source of the new virus be
found if we wish to avoid future pandemics rather than just trying to
minimize the consequences after they have emerged."
Gibbs, lead author of the paper, achieved notoriety in May of 2009 when
he was among the first in the scientific community to suggest that
the virus causing the swine flu showed telltale signs of having been
produced in a laboratory. Gibbs, who has some 200 scientific
publications to his credit, became a familiar icon on TV screens
across the globe after being interviewed about his theory by reporters
and talking heads from major media outlets. The Australian professor
and researcher relayed his concerns to officials at the
Geneva-Switzerland-based World Health Organization (WHO), where
scientists examined, but tentatively rejected, his hypothesis. A WHO
official said the organization's scientists would revisit Gibbs's
theory once it emerged in the scientific literature.
BACK TO HOME PAGE