Should the US and Russia destroy their smallpox stocks?

[Tank]

Should the US and Russia destroy their smallpox stocks?

Defeating smallpox has been labelled as one of science's greatest success stories.

The disease once killed 30% of those infected, but after a global vaccination campaign it was declared eradicated in 1980.

However the variola virus, which causes the infection, is not gone. It exists in two laboratories, one in the US and the other in Russia. The question is about to be asked, once again: should they kill their stocks?

The World Health Organization (WHO) will come to a decision at the 64th World Health Assembly this week...

What do you think?

I voted no as this is a unique genetic resource.

[Davin]

I don't see why they should... unless they're making super viruses...

[The Magic Pudding]

I don't know.

Small pox is a big topic, an ally of conquistadors and their ilk.
If they decide to destroy them I'd like to know when and raise a glass to its passing.

[Whitney]

unless they're making super viruses...

According to The Demon in the Freezer there is evidence that the Russians already had such a program in operation complete with delivery mechanisms.  If that is true and the program wasn't destroyed it could cause more human damage than an atomic bomb; and due to the nature of disease could come back to attack the attacker (hopefully that creates a deterrent for its use).

I think the window for saying goodbye forever to small pox passed when they decided to keep samples in the first place...plus it is probably living naturally in less virulent forms in less traveled areas of the world where population hasn't hit the right size for the virulent form to thrive.

[Crow]

I honestly don't think it would make a difference if we destroyed them or not. The Pandora box on biological warfare has already been opened and is impossible to close it again, the same applies with destroying nuclear weapon stocks, even if we did destroy the small pox strain whats to stop someone recreating it in a lab from data already collected on the virus. With the progress of new technologies such as nanotechnology if a weapon was made using this it has the possibility to make nuclear and biological weapons pale in comparison, Nanotechnology dangers.

[Will37]

I honestly don't think it would make a difference if we destroyed them or not. The Pandora box on biological warfare has already been opened and is impossible to close it again, the same applies with destroying nuclear weapon stocks, even if we did destroy the small pox strain whats to stop someone recreating it in a lab from data already collected on the virus. With the progress of new technologies such as nanotechnology if a weapon was made using this it has the possibility to make nuclear and biological weapons pale in comparison, Nanotechnology dangers.

This is a good point.  Plus I really wouldn't trust the current regime in Russia to actually burn that bridge.  Not necessairly because of America but more because of China.  The Russians are scared of China and rightly so.  Take a look at the map and think about the geopolitical consequence of an over populated , up and coming nation screaming for natural resources sharing a border with a sparsly populated part of a declining nation teeming with natural resources.  The one thing Russia has to keep China out is their nuclear and other unconventional weapons.

[Crow]

This is a good point.  Plus I really wouldn't trust the current regime in Russia to actually burn that bridge.  Not necessairly because of America but more because of China.  The Russians are scared of China and rightly so.  Take a look at the map and think about the geopolitical consequence of an over populated , up and coming nation screaming for natural resources sharing a border with a sparsly populated part of a declining nation teeming with natural resources.  The one thing Russia has to keep China out is their nuclear and other unconventional weapons.

This is true but I personally don't think we will see a military offense from China, for the sustained growth of country such as this it needs to be a leader of sustainable energy and a revolution in production (I will use the nanotechnology example again but this time for its benefits), China is one of the only countries in the world that can afford to progress with these changes and has a social structure that could actually implement these changes without pressure from private corporations. For there economic dominance it would be silly to go down the route of military snatch and grab tactics for rapidly declining resources but rather embrace technology early and sell it to the rest of the world whilst keeping it very cheap (or free) to there nationals, creating envy in other nations.

[Asmodean]

Why destroy a nice virus..? I voted a "no"

[Will37]

This is a good point.  Plus I really wouldn't trust the current regime in Russia to actually burn that bridge.  Not necessairly because of America but more because of China.  The Russians are scared of China and rightly so.  Take a look at the map and think about the geopolitical consequence of an over populated , up and coming nation screaming for natural resources sharing a border with a sparsly populated part of a declining nation teeming with natural resources.  The one thing Russia has to keep China out is their nuclear and other unconventional weapons.

This is true but I personally don't think we will see a military offense from China, for the sustained growth of country such as this it needs to be a leader of sustainable energy and a revolution in production (I will use the nanotechnology example again but this time for its benefits), China is one of the only countries in the world that can afford to progress with these changes and has a social structure that could actually implement these changes without pressure from private corporations. For there economic dominance it would be silly to go down the route of military snatch and grab tactics for rapidly declining resources but rather embrace technology early and sell it to the rest of the world whilst keeping it very cheap (or free) to there nationals, creating envy in other nations.

I think this is a very good point.  I would only say that while I think your point is correct, I don't think the political elite in Russia are viewing the world through the same geopolitical prism as you are and therefore still sees Chine as a serious military threat that might someday make a grab for some pretty valuable parts of Russia. 

[Tank]

The more commercial China becomes the more complicated the issue of attacking Russia becomes. While there was little trade between China and the rest of the world the issue of sanctions was relatively clear cut. If China invaded Russia there would have been sanctions as there was little for either China or the West to lose financially. Now the picture is more complicated (IMO). If China invaded Russia they would be hit by sanctions but so would the countries applying the sanctions. So if China were to consider perusing a land grab of part of Russia they would have to be really really sure there would be a net positive effect, in some way valuable to them.

I think that, on balance, the commercialisation of China has had a net positive effect on the regions stability. In addition China sees Russia as a commercial opportunity know in a way it has never done in the past. Russia has lots of natural resources but a poor industrial infrastructure to add value to them and limited export opportunities to exploit anything it can make as it has a poor quality record in manufacturing. The Chines have a relatively good quality record. So the ideal situation is for China to buy raw materials from Russia and sell manufactured goods back to them and the West. As long as ideology doesn't get in the way I cant see an immediate need for China or Russia to risk a war with the other.

The commercial interdependence between China and the West also makes the future of Taiwan less problematic, as the same sanctions issue applies. Particularly as the USA is both the biggest supporter of Taiwanese independence and China's biggest export market. I would contend that as idealogical issues between China and Taiwan reduce in years to come (as China continues to become more commercial) the rift between the two countries could narrow to the point where they become meaningless. This would mean that Taiwan's desire to access the Chinese market could lead to a reconciliation at some point in the relatively distant future.

[Tank]

Worth a bump for our new 50+ members.

[Will37]

Worth a bump

That's what she said.




HEY YO!




















That'll class this place up.

[ThinkAnarchy]

I voted not sure for this reason. I don't think they should be destroyed, but I don't want governments to have them. I think they should be sold or donated to private labs and/or scientists.