EbolaUse of Ebola virus as bioterror weapon highly unlikely: Experts
Francisco Martinez, Spain’s state secretary for security, claimed that ISIS fighters are planning to carry out “lone wolf” attacks using biological weapons. He cites conversations uncovered from secret chat rooms used by would-be militants. Bioterrorism experts say the use of Ebola for bioterrorism is highly unlikely. “Assuming a terrorist organization manages to capture a suitable Ebola host, extract the virus, weaponize the virus, transport the virus to a populated city and deliver the virus, it is entirely likely that the sub-optimal climatic conditions of a Western city will kill it off relatively quickly,” says one expert.
Earlier in October, DHS secretary Jeh Johnson dismissed rumors that the Islamic State (ISIS) was planning to use biological weapons including weaponized Ebola, to attack the United States. “We’ve seen no specific credible intelligence that ISIS is attempting to use any sort of disease or virus to attack our homeland,” Johnson said in remarks to the Association of the United States Army.
Francisco Martinez, Spain’s state secretary for security, believes otherwise, claiming that ISIS fighters are planning to carry out “lone wolf” attacks using biological weapons. He cites conversations uncovered from secret chat rooms used by would-be militants.
ISIS militants consider the internet as “an extension of the battlefield,” Martinez said, and many terrorism experts agree with him. ISIS has launched a social media campaign meant to recruit would-be militants, but bioterrorism in the form of Ebola may be out of reach for the organization. “The thing about Ebola is that it’s not easy to work with,” said Dr. Robert Leggiadro, a pediatric infectious disease specialist in New York. “It would be difficult to weaponize.”
Live Science reports that in order to weaponize Ebola, a terrorist organization would need to first obtain a live host infected with the virus. The host would then need to be transported into a Category 4 or Biosafety level 4 lab properly to transform the virus without risking infection to the handler.
Such labs are difficult to access, according to Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, director of SecureBio, a U.K.-based CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear defense) firm. There are less than two dozen Category 4 laboratories in the world, according to the Federation of American Scientists. Failure to work inside a proper lab would result in the death of whoever is weaponizing the virus, de Bretton-Gordon said. “The process to weaponize a biological agent is complex and multi-staged, involving enrichment, refining, toughening, milling and preparation,” de Bretton-Gordon said.
Moreover, the Ebola virus is extremely fragile when compared to other viruses capable of weaponization. “The reason anthrax has been the biological weapon of choice is not for its mortality rate — when properly weaponized it is similar to Ebola — but for the fact that it is exceptionally hardy,” de Bretton-Gordon said. “Anthrax can and will survive for centuries in the ground, enduring frosts, extremes of temperature, wind, drought and rain before re-emerging.” In contrast, the Ebola virus is sensitive to exposure to sunlight and extreme temperatures. “Assuming a terrorist organization manages to capture a suitable Ebola host, extract the virus, weaponize the virus, transport the virus to a populated city and deliver the virus, it is entirely likely that the sub-optimal climatic conditions of a Western city will kill it off relatively quickly,” de Bretton-Gordon said.
