Sergei Netesov, Deputy General Director of the Vektor Novosibirsk State Research Center for Bioengineering and Virology, reveals whether it will be possible to develop mutagenic biological weapons in the future.

- How realistic would it be to develop biological weapons that could kill people according to a genetic marker?
- You know, there are politician who set goals for scientists. These goals are often never accomplished, but nonetheless, why not set goals and why not get money for research? Creating genetic weapons is a goal of this kind.
In reality, it would be quite difficult to create this kind of weapon. A lot of currently published research is dedicated to the structure of the human genome and the difference between various races. It has been proven that the differences are very slight, and scientists have only begun to identify them. We probably could find particular, very important genes that control immunity or receptor proteins in cells that vary significantly among different races but that major task is far from complete. The problem is that there are millions of genes in the human body and to try to pick out the ones responsible for ethnic difference is like looking for a needle in a haystack. But in principle, there is a lot of money behind this project and with time someone might be able to do it at some point.
- How realistic is it to create bacteria that after entering the body only begin to multiple when the person takes a certain medication?
- It would be possible to create this kind of bacteria. The thing is that there are regions of genes or entire genes that work like on-off switches. They are responsible for turning on or off certain genes or clusters. But again, it is completely unclear how this could be applied. The overwhelming majority of countries, including the US and Russia, signed a convention that prohibits developing, testing, manufacturing, and storing biological weapons. If they begin conducting research and tests, they will be violating this convention and giving other countries an excuse to start this kind of research themselves.
- Would it be possible to create bacteria that could change the structure of the DNA in the cells it infects?
- The overwhelming number of bacteria do not penetrate cells during the infection process. They live in bodily fluids and as a consequence do not come into physical contact with the functioning genetic material inside cells. Even when bacteria destroy a cell, its genetic material does not come into contact with the genetic material of the bacteria. They are always separated by at least one membrane. Even if contact does occur after the cell has been destroyed, it happens as a rule with genetic material that has already been broken down. No other cell will be able to use this material, except as nucleotide building blocks.
However, some viruses can penetrate a cell’s genetic material. Fragments of their genomes can establish themselves in a cell’s genome. These adenoviruses, retroviruses, and a few other viruses can already be used theoretically (and now practically) for gene therapy and cancer treatment. Yet to create viruses that could target only a certain race or people is nearly impossible in my opinion, at least at the current stage of biology.
- Would it be even theoretically possible to create a microbe that would be able to resist all pharmaceuticals, including antibiotics?
- In part we already know bacteria, whole varieties and cultures, that are resistant to an entire range of antibiotics. They frequently appear in nature without any help from people. This is encouraged by the uncontrolled human use of antibiotics. For this reason in developed countries over-the-counter antibiotics have been practically banned for quite some time. You must have a prescription.
You would not need to create a microbe to do something with a virus. There are no effective medicines against many viruses. Out of all the many varieties of viruses that exist today, we know only about 5-10% according to some experts. The rest remain a mystery but their numbers are steadily falling. Researchers have identified more than three dozen human pathogens over the last thirty years.
- After the SARS epidemic in China last year, some believed that the virus was man-made. In China, the theory that the epidemic was a test of an ethnic weapon became very popular. What do you think about this?
- There are many writers, especially those with good imaginations, who link up facts in a way that leads to very strange conclusions. However, when more meticulous people begin to dig a bit deeper, it becomes clear that the authors of this kind of book often toss out an entire range of facts that would show a different side of the matter. This is most likely what happened with the Chinese book you are referring to. In part, I would like to note that the patients that died from SARS weren’t just Chinese. They were also Italians, Canadians, and Germans, as well as other nationalities.
Moreover, the SARS virus (a coronavirus) has a very complex structure and the notion that it was artificially created is, to put it mildly, highly unlikely at the current level of virology and genetic engineering. If it was created by someone, this person is either a genius of a caliber as yet unseen by humanity or had an incredible stroke of luck. The same kind of luck that would make a monkey pounding on a typewriter produce a significant portion (say, thirty thousand letter) of War and Peace by sheer coincidence.

Read also the Editorial  "The Mark of Doom"

More in Russian >> www.expert.ru