Our
view concerning the emergence of the SARS virus
By Dr.Shigeo
Honjo and Dr.Hideo Arai
Introduction
We have
already announced (in the paper published in the journal “Technology and Human
Beings” in Japanese in June 2003) that we were thinking over the emergence of the “SARS
Virus.” After we finished publishing our paper on the theme at the end of May
2003, we thought that our paper was insufficient in that we could not refer to
the information on the theme that has increased since our report was published.
Nevertheless, even now we don’t think it necessary to modify or change our way
of thinking as a fundamental view.
Outbreak of SARS as a typical example of biohazards
In the
above-mentioned paper we thought that the outbreak of SARS was a typical example
of biohazards. In our opinion, biohazards mean simply and clearly the “hazards
to the health of human beings and domestic animals as well as the environment which
were caused by naturally occurring pathogens and materials created by modern
biotechnology. The characteristics of biohazards are listed below.
(1)It is difficult to detect the occurrence of infection
immediately, and the hazards would be detected after damage happens.
(2)There appear no apparent diseases in some cases even
though people have been infected with pathogens. In other words, there are
examples of inapparent infections.
(3)There is a possibility that damage will not be limited
to particular areas, but spread to all over the world across the borders.
(4)In the case of unknown pathogens, it is extremely
difficult to isolate and identify them. In addition, it takes a lot of time to establish
proper methods for diagnosis, treatment and prevention.
Thus, we can
say that the outbreak of SARS at this time is a typical example of biohazards.
Why did the
SARS virus appear suddenly? In answering this question, we must not disregard
the hypothesis saying, “The SARS virus may be a product of new biotechnology.”
WHO announced
it has been confirmed that the pathogen of SARS is a new type of corona virus,
expressing an opinion that the pathogen should be named “SARS virus”. Even now,
however, it is not clarified why such a new virus suddenly appeared.
Four hypotheses about the causes of the
emergence of the SARS virus
We think that
there are four hypotheses about the causes of the emergence of the SARS virus,
a new type of corona virus. They are shown below.
(1)Common human-corona viruses able to cause mild
infection may have mutated into viruses
with the ability to cause very severe infection.
(2)
(3)Some kind of unknown corona viruses, which may have a
symbiotic relation to a certain kind of feral animals or may have come to cause
overt diseases to them, have invaded human society and displayed a very strong
ability to cause SARS.
(4)New types of viruses, which have been artificially produced,
intentionally or unintentionally, in the process of experiments with corona
viruses conducted by using gene technology, may have escaped from laboratories
into the environment and invaded human society, causing SARS.
We hope the
readers will consider that the fourth is from the point of view which has been
disregarded by virologists or scientists in the present main stream of science specializing
in elucidation of the cause of infectious diseases or in public health. So it must
be meaningful to examine the reality of the fourth hypothesis mentioned above.
Modification
of genes of corona viruses are widely conducted in virus-related
laboratories
When we wrote
a previous paper in “Technology and Human Being” in June 2003, we missed that a
paper had been published on handling corona viruses by means of gene technology
in the Journal of Virology ( vol.77, No.8, pp.4528〜4538) in April 2003. The paper was written by
a team led by Dr.B.J.Hijema, who belongs to the
The paper
reports that they have succeeded in developing an effective method for
manipulating a genome of feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV) which is a kind of genus
of corona virus, and that they also succeeded in changing the species tropism of
corona virus (the nature of corona virus that a particular species of corona virus
infects a particular host cell).
Dr.Hijema et
al. first replaced a gene of the sugar-protein of spike structures on the
surface of viral particles of FIPV with a spike gene of murine hepatitis
virus, and produced recombinant viruses named mFIPV. This mFIPV could infect
cells of mice and clearly multiplied, but, in feline cells, did not show the
ability of infection and multiplication. Next, when they introduced a spike
gene of FIPV into mFIPV, the ability of infection with and multiplication in
feline cells recovered.
The paper of
Dr.Hijema et al. clearly shows that, simply speaking, it is no longer a pipe
dream to intentionally change innate nature (for example, pathogenicity and
toxicity) of a certain virus by modifying the gene makeup of the viral genome.
Therefore, the hypothesis that so-called SARS viruses may be an artificial
product of genetic engineering is well worth considering. However, it would still
be unwise to conclude that the SARS virus is an intentional product likely to
be utilized as a biological weapon, because they may have been made
unintentionally in the process of basic experiments related to corona virus or
may have been produced as a result of experimental failures.
Moreover, it can
be guessed from the paper by Dr.Hijema et al. that there are a considerable
number of scientists studying corona viruses in the world. It is problematic,
however, whether or not they firmly observe the rules for preventing
biohazards. Generally speaking, scientists actively at work are unwilling to
confess their failure, and apt to conceal it even when they notice that it is a
failure because they are afraid that their failure might be known to and denounced
by people. Taking this into consideration, we cannot deny, for example, the
possibility that virulent recombinant viruses created by failed experiments
will leak unnoticed from laboratories into a community. And it is natural that
there are scientists in
Is it
difficult to completely discard the hypothesis that the SARS virus may have been produced
as a biological weapon?
Dr. K
Yamanouchi, a famous Japanese virologist, who is an emeritus professor of the
University of Tokyo, asserts that the present virology has not yet made such
progress as to create a new virus with a specific trait and that it is
impossible to suppose that the SARS virus is an artificial product for
bioterrorism (for example, please refer to his paper “Correct Knowledge about
SARS” in the Japanese monthly magazine “Newton” August 2003, extra edition).
However, the above-mentioned paper by Dr.Hijema et al. reports that they
succeeded in changing a genome makeup intentionally with an aim at a targeted
gene. Also in
By the way, the
view that SARS virus is a product created for developing biological weapons is
not originated from a Russian scientist. In addition, intelligent agencies of
Thinking about
this “circumstantial evidence,” would it be impossible to erase a suspicion
that the SARS virus was (or is) manufactured by manipulating genes of corona
viruses in
Conclusion
We have a
somewhat affirmative point of view over the hypothesis that the SARS virus may
have emerged as a result of gene technology. However, we should not hurriedly conclude
without much thought and consideration as to whether or not this virus is a
product of the intentional development of biological weapons. This paper is a
summary of our way of thinking. Meanwhile, extremely shocking is the view of Dr.Horowitz,
a sociologist and political scientist, (in “Conspiracy Planet”, June 19, 2003),
that “the SARS viral attack is an ingenious social experiment featuring
institutionalized bioterrorism for widespread psycho-social control. We think,
however, this view is lacking in persuasive power because it provides little
concrete evidence, only based on a series of speculation.
Though public
reports on SARS have recently decreased rapidly in number, the thorough disclosure
of information on the side of