North Korea claims the US released Ebola in Africa

     While this headline is hardly newsworthy (or credible), given North Korea's historical record of making claims against the United States, it is a reminder of the same pattern of conduct that we should recognize. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/11269553/North-Korea-accuses-US-of-developing-Ebola-virus.html  Quoted in the article, is a law professor from the University of Illinois (who teaches international law) who gave an interview in October 2014 that supports their claim. I had to listen to his interview before accepting the quote as accurate -- perhaps he was misquoted?  But I found he was not misquoted. He makes several claims that the U.S. is involved in making bioweapons and presents as proof our work in national laboratories on vaccines for exotic diseases like Ebola.  This is similar to the logic supporting the claim made by North Korea in the early 1950s during the Korean War (1950-53) that the U.S. had used bioweapons against them partially based on the logic that because the U.S. was vaccinating troops against yellow fever that it was likely the disease they would use against them with insect-vectors, Japanese style.  (See, M. Furmanski, "Misperceptions in preparing for biological attack:  an historical survey," (Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 2006, 25 (1), 53-70).
      There was more and the U.S.S.R. archives revealed when opened in 1998 that North Korea was being coached by the Soviet Union. In May 1951, North Korea charged that the U.S. had used smallpox and also multiple species of arachnids, clams, insects, mammals, paper leaflets etc. to spread plague, cholera, and other diseases on multiple occasions. A formal complaint was made to the UN Security Council. Long investigatory meetings followed and no allegations were ever proved. It was not until January 1998 when the Soviet archives revealed that the claims were not only wrong they were fraudulent.  For a full account and excellent footnoting of the case study of North Korea and their allegations of biowarfare against the United States see, Milton Leitenberg's chapter "False Allegations of U.S. Biological Weapons Use During the Korean War," in the book, "Terrorism, War or Disease?" (Stanford Univ Press, 2008).
      The trouble with misattribution in biological weapons and epidemics will continue to be difficult, even with advanced genomic identification of strains and the evolution of quickly evolving bacteria and viruses that can help to identify a timeline and origin of the disease. For example, the outbreak of cholera in Haiti during the earthquake disaster was traceable to the UN Peacekeepers and a group from Nepal who brought it into a country that had not seen cholera in 150 years.  However, even this clear evidence was not taken as a liability or calling for compensation from the United Nations.  We have a long way to go in attribution but even further in compensation for mass injury.
    These kinds of claims by North Korea and unsubstantiated claims by people who should know better just seem to keep us in the dark ages of bio-literacy.

Are new regulations called for? Study on bacteria and viruses found on planes is troubling

I made it a personal goal to bring attention to the problem of SARS and the benefits of a HEPA filter system on flights.  Trouble is, that we already have HEPA filter systems on flights, but the inability to change the filters can make them ineffective. I suggested an easier solution -- use ultraviolet light at the portal boarding the flight. I was told that the wind effect at the doorway into the plane would make all of that UV-disinfection pointless.  When I returned from my political appointment to my faculty position, I proposed a study to see if there really were hosts of bacteria and viruses on flights, and in TSA bins, etc.  I was pleased to see that these type of studies were funded recently at Auburn and University of Arizona and we have some hard data, at least about infection patterns and the presence of bacteria and viruses on surfaces with which passengers come in contact.

A microbiology study published in May 2014, found dangerous bacteria and viruses on surfaces on commercial flight seats, armrests, tray tables, bathrooms and just about everywhere else.   American Society for Microbiology. "Harmful bacteria can linger on airplane seat-back pockets, armrests for days." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 20 May 2014.   I had always counted on the wisdom that viruses and bacteria are generally very fragile and cannot live long on surfaces not conducive to thriving.  However, this report shows the dangerous bacteria and viruses can last to infect passengers long after they were left by a previous host occupying the seat as much as 168 hours earlier.  Without disinfection of seats and armrests and tray tables between flights, it provides a regular garden of infection opportunities.  Here's a quote from the article announcing the findings:

In order for disease-causing bacteria to be transmitted from a cabin surface to a person, it must survive the environmental conditions in the airplane. In the study Vaglenov and his colleagues tested the ability of two pathogens, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and E. coli O157:H7 to survive on surfaces commonly found in airplanes. They obtained six different types of material from a major airline carrier (armrest, plastic tray table, metal toilet button, window shade, seat pocket cloth, and leather), inoculated them with the bacteria and exposed them to typical airplane conditions.

 MRSA lasted longest (168 hours) on material from the seat-back pocket while E. coli O157:H7 survived longest (96 hours) on the material from the armrest.

Another study, by Dr. Gerba of University of Arizona, followed the passengers who were infected from another passenger with influenza. The findings appeared only in news articles and I was unable to substantiate this report by finding a peer-reviewed publication on this study by Dr. Gerba.  This graphic was provided in the news article and shows who was infected.

Further burdening the airlines with more regulations is a consideration, but the potential for sickness and spreading a global pandemic is reason enough for me to support mandatory wipedowns of the surface of planes between each flight.