What's the Best Way to Fight Bioterrorism, Magic Bullets or Carpet Bombs?by Doctor Ackerman

What’s the Best Way to Fight Bioterrorism, Magic Bullets or Carpet Bombs?

I was intrigued by an article in the business section of my local newspaper the other day. Given the present anthrax scenario and talk of possible chemical or biological pollution of our air or waters, it was really frightening to be reminded that there was once a flourishing Soviet program headed by a medical doctor named Ken Alibek for seventeen years. You may or may not believe that Dr. Alibek decided at that point, in 1992, that germ warfare was wrong, and so decided to defect to the United States where he utilized his microbiology background to gain the eminent position of president of a Manassas, Virginia company called Hadron Advanced Biosystems. Utilizing his vast experience gained by his earlier occupation, Dr. Alibek joined the growing list of researchers looking for a new way to kill germs. The idea was to develop a universal drug that will, similar to a carpet bomb, destroy a wide spectrum of germs rather than acting like a magic bullet or smart bomb which zeros in on only the specific target that you wish to eliminate. The results of this approach in the war in Afghanistan have been encouraging, but will the same concept hold up when fighting a war against germs? These researchers even wish to go one step further and extend the wide spectrum approach to cover breakdown of the immune system from radiation, and perhaps chemical agents used by terrorists.

Dr. Alibek has an ally at the Medical College of Virginia, the virologist Roger M. Loria. Dr. Loria puts the concept of a broad-spectrum approach into perspective when he clarifies this position with the explanation, “Instead of a magic bullet, we are making a better fort.” Of course, the analogy doesn’t quite hold up. A vaccine might be considered a “better fort.” A broad-spectrum medication is an offensive, not a defensive weapon. It is more aptly compared to a nuclear bomb or a carpet bomb. But the question here is not semantics. This is not a war of words but one of basic concepts applied to winning a war against terrorism. When fighting such a war all possibilities should be weighed and then utilized in accordance with appropriate applications.

What happens when we use a weapon that destroys everything in its path? Unfortunately, sometimes the good is destroyed with the bad. Suppose we examine some drugs under consideration as universal agents. Dr. Alibek has received large grants in the past from the Defense Department and the NIH to research such drugs with recent emphasis on treating anthrax. One type under study is the cytokines, which are proteins that signal the immune system when released by defense cells in the body. Another type is peptidoglycans. These are large molecules located on the cell wall of germs that set off the body’s immune defenses. If these substances are released generally into the body, they can cause widespread responses such as allergic reactions. To get around this, Alibek is trying to use a smart bomb technique for a universal weapon by concentrating the chemicals at the site where they are most needed. For anthrax, this would be the respiratory system, so delivery of the drug is by inhalation. Early testing for anthrax and a relative of smallpox has proven encouraging.

Loria uses a different approach. Knowing that cortisone in the body lowers the immune defense mechanisms he has been trying to reverse this effect with other steroids called androstenes, which block the action of cortisone. In his laboratory, success with mice has been achieved against viruses, bacteria and parasites, and Defense Department researchers have attempted to extend the salutary effects to include radiation exposure. Radiation tends to damage the immune system resulting in loss of ability to fight infection, one of the major causes of death from exposure. Other substances being tested in various laboratories include cysteine, glutathione, and even the old remedy, now just about forgotten, silver.

Competition has always fostered and accelerated progress. This is true of space exploration and it is also true of wars. What a shame that we have to create the new destructive techniques and the new defense mechanisms that are involved in wars in order to reap the benefits that those techniques may later generate. Without the competitive aspects of war, we may have little incentive to pursue these lines of research.