Pandora's box: How GM mosquitos could have caused Brazil Zika Disaster

[burntheships]

It looks from all scientific evidence known to date,
the Genetically Modified mosquito's released in Brazil
are the multiplying  factor in this Zika "escalation".

In Brazil's microcephaly epidemic, one vital question remains unanswered: how did the Zika virus suddenly learn how to disrupt the development of human embryos? The answer may lie in a sequence of 'jumping DNA' used to engineer the virus's mosquito vector - and released into the wild four years ago in the precise area of Brazil where the microcephaly crisis is most acute. http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987024/pandoras_box_how_gm_mosquitos_could_have_caused_brazils_microcephaly_diasaster.html

"it was found that [researchers] had used a cat food to feed the [OX513A] larvae and this cat food contained chicken. It is known that tetracycline is routinely used to prevent infections in chickens, especially in the cheap, mass produced, chicken used for animal food. The chicken is heat-treated before being used, but this does not remove all the tetracycline. This meant that a small amount of tetracycline was being added from the food to the larvae and repressing the [designed] lethal system."

So in other words, there is every possibility for Oxitec's modified genes to persist in wild populations of Aedes aegypti mosquitos, especially in the environmental presence of tetracycline which is widely present in sewage, septic tanks, contaminated water sources and farm runoff.

"Promiscuous Transposons favored by Genetic Engineers
whose goal is to create "universal" systems for transferring
genes into any and every species on earth"

If I recall there were GM mosquitos released into Florida?

[COSMO]

CRISPR

Pandora's box.  Designer life.

Genetic engineering isn't new, but CRISPR is, and it's a stunningly fast, flexible, cheap way to manipulate the code of life. It's so revolutionary — and unnerving — that hundreds of scientists, policymakers and the president's science adviser gathered Tuesday in Washington for the start of a three-day summit on the implications of this astonishing technology.

Developed only in the past four years, the CRISPR technique exploits a natural process used by ordinary bacteria to defend against invasive viruses. It enables rank-and-file scientists — just about anyone with a modern laboratory and the right skills — to alter specific genes within plants and animals and make those changes heritable.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/12/01/historic-summit-on-gene-editing-and-designer-babies-convenes-in-washington/

I want a dog that can talk.  lol  Shades of Phillip K. D.  lol

Cosmo

[space otter]

just tossing this into the mix

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/epidemiology-zika-virus_us_56ab8afae4b077d4fe8dbe4a?ir=Science&section=us_science&utm_hp_ref=science

01/30/2016 11:46 am ET
Carolyn Gregoire
Senior Health & Science Writer, The Huffington Post

An infectious disease specialist explains all you need to know.

Zika Virus Is At Least 50 Years Old.
Here's Why You're Only Hearing About It Now

As the Zika virus spreads, so has widespread alarm and confusion. The leader of the World Health Organization said Wednesday that it is "spreading explosively," estimating up to 4 million infections over the next year. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has said that a U.S. outbreak of the mosquito-borne virus, which is spreading rapidly through mostly central and south America, is "likely," but the risk for local transmission is low. In Brazil, the virus has been linked to several thousand cases of microcephaly, a rare birth defect which causes shrinkage of the skull and brain.

"The level of concern is high, as is the level of uncertainty," WHO director-general Dr. Margaret Chan told the organization's executive board members. "We need to get some answers quickly."

To explain more, HuffPost Science talked to Dr. Arnold Monto, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Michigan School of Public Health, whose work focuses on the causes and prevention of infectious diseases in industrialized and developing countries.

Why is Zika virus spreading now, when it's been around for decades in Asia and Africa?

This is not a new virus. It's been known for 25 or 30 years but has never really spread to this extent.

This virus has been documented in Africa. It was documented creating issues in Indonesia. It was one of these things were you get a couple days of fever, a little bit of a rash, maybe some joint pain and then it goes away. It was dismissed.

Zika had been viewed as a minor threat until we got into the situation where there were enough new cases to recognize this microcephaly situation, which has not been recognized before.

Why have we never seen cases of microcephaly before associated with the Zika virus?

There were not a lot of previous cases in pregnant women occurring at the same time. If only 5 percent of those infected have children with microcephaly, it would take lots of infections to have the abnormality both detected and related to Zika. Why do we see it now? Because there are so many cases occurring in an area where people are recognizing the disease. If it's occurring in a rural area in central Africa, it may not be recognized even though it's occurring at a low level.


"The reason we have not seen this before is that there were not a lot of previous cases in pregnant women occurring at the same time.


Is it common for a virus to exist in low levels for decades and then suddenly spread on a large scale?

We've seen this in some other cases. It's really a question of finding a happy situation for transmission -- everything is really related to transmission and susceptibility. We'd seen Ebola outbreaks before, but never to the extent that we saw it in West Africa last year simply because it was allowed to move into urban areas.

Once a virus goes from benign to 'spreading exponentially,' what comes next?

Sooner or later -- often sooner, with something that's transmitting to this extent -- you're going to hit what we call "exhaust susceptibles." The virus is going to peak and then start going down. So that's when you see that there's crowding of susceptible individuals living in areas where vector control is difficult. It will almost certainly peak then.

Do you think we've reached the peak point yet for the Zika virus?

We'll see. There have been certain places where there have been intense transmission -- extreme levels have been seen in crowded disadvantaged areas of Brazil. But it's going to continue to be a problem in more suburban or rural areas.

How do you think this outbreak will play out the U.S.?

We're going to see occasional introductions into the United States. There may be localized transmissions in the Southern U.S. if there are introductions, but it's unlikely to spread beyond those areas and it probably will be fairly easy to control because we've got the infrastructure to do it.

What's the best response, on both an international and a local level?

In an area where transmission is taking place, aggressive mosquito control. In areas where transmission is not taking place, delaying travel for those pregnant to known infected areas.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.








Read more Zika virus coverage:

•Here's Why We Don't Have A Vaccine For Zika Virus

•The Latest On Zika: Our Daily Updates

•A Zika Outbreak In The U.S. Is 'Likely,' CDC Says

•An Illustrated Guide To The Zika Outbreak

•Should You Get Tested For Zika Virus? A Flowchart

•The Zika Virus Could Force Women To Have Unsafe Abortions

•The Zika Virus Could Take A Huge Toll In The Americas

•Hawaii Baby Contracts The First Case Of Zika Virus In The U.S.

•Pregnant Women Shouldn't Travel To Countries With Zika Virus, CDC Says

•4 Things To Know About Zika's Potential Spread To The U.S.



..............................................................................
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zika_virus


History

In 1947, scientists researching yellow fever placed a rhesus macaque in a cage in the Zika Forest (zika meaning "overgrown" in the Luganda language), near the East African Virus Research Institute in Entebbe, Uganda. The monkey developed a fever, and researchers isolated from its serum a transmissible agent that was first described as Zika virus in 1952.[17] In Nigeria in 1954, the virus was isolated from a human for the first time. Previously, however, a 1952 research study conducted in India had shown a "significant number" of Indians tested for Zika had exhibited an immune response to the virus, strongly suggesting it had long been widespread within human populations.[41]

From its discovery until 2007, confirmed cases of Zika virus infection from Africa and Southeast Asia were rare.[42]

In April 2007, the first outbreak outside of Africa and Asia occurred on the island of Yap in the Federated States of Micronesia, characterized by rash, conjunctivitis, and arthralgia, which was initially thought to be dengue, chikungunya or Ross River disease.[43] However, serum samples from patients in the acute phase of illness contained RNA of Zika virus. There were 49 confirmed cases, 59 unconfirmed cases, no hospitalizations, and no deaths.[44] More recently, epidemics have occurred in Polynesia, Easter Island, the Cook Islands and New Caledonia.[42]

Since April 2015, a large, ongoing outbreak of Zika virus that began in Brazil has spread to much of South and Central America, and the Caribbean. In January 2016, the CDC issued a level 2 travel alert for people traveling to regions and certain countries where Zika virus transmission is ongoing.[45] The agency also suggested that women thinking about becoming pregnant should consult with their physicians before traveling.[46] Governments or health agencies of the United Kingdom,[10] Ireland,[11] New Zealand,[47] Canada,[12] and the European Union[12] soon issued similar travel warnings. In Colombia, Minister of Health and Social Protection Alejandro Gaviria Uribe recommended to avoid pregnancy for eight months, while the countries of Ecuador, El Salvador, and Jamaica have issued similar warnings.[11][13]

Plans were announced by the authorities in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to try to prevent the spread of the Zika virus during the 2016 Summer Olympic Games in that city.[12]

According to the CDC, Brazilian health authorities reported more than 3,500 microcephaly cases between October 2015 and January 2016. Some of the affected infants have had a severe type of microcephaly and some have died. The full spectrum of outcomes that might be associated with infection during pregnancy and the factors that might increase risk to the fetus are not yet fully understood. More studies are planned to learn more about the risks of Zika virus infection during pregnancy.[48] In the worst affected region of Brazil, approximately 1 percent of newborns are suspected of being microcephalic.[49]






General

Zika virus is related to dengue, yellow fever, Japanese encephalitis, and West Nile viruses.[2] The illness it causes is similar to a mild form of dengue fever,[2] is treated by rest,[3] and cannot yet be prevented by drugs or vaccines.[3] There is a possible link between Zika fever and microcephaly in newborn babies by mother-to-child transmission,[4][5][6] as well as a stronger one with neurologic conditions in infected adults, including cases of the Guillain–Barré syndrome.[7]

In January 2016, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued travel guidance on affected countries, including the use of enhanced precautions, and guidelines for pregnant women including considering postponing travel.[8][9] Other governments or health agencies soon issued similar travel warnings,[10][11][12] while Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, and Jamaica advised women to postpone getting pregnant until more is known about the risks.[11][13]

Along with other viruses in this family, Zika virus is enveloped and icosahedral and has a nonsegmented, single-stranded, positive-sense RNA genome. It is most closely related to the Spondweni virus and is one of the two viruses in the Spondweni virus clade.[14][15]

The virus was first isolated in April 1947 from a rhesus macaque monkey that had been placed in a cage in the Zika Forest of Uganda, near Lake Victoria, by the scientists of the Yellow Fever Research Institute. A second isolation from the mosquito A. africanus followed at the same site in January 1948.[16][17] When the monkey developed a fever, researchers isolated from its serum a transmissible agent that was first described as Zika virus in 1952. In 1968, it was isolated for the first time from humans in Nigeria.[18] From 1951 through 1981, evidence of human infection was reported from other African countries such as the Central African Republic, Egypt, Gabon, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and Uganda, as well as in parts of Asia including India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam.[18]

There are two lineages of Zika virus, the African lineage and the Asian lineage.[19] Phylogenetic studies indicate that the virus spreading in the Americas is most closely related to the Asian strain, which circulated in French Polynesia during the 2013 outbreak.[20][19] Complete genome sequences of Zika viruses have been published.[21] Recent preliminary findings from sequences in the public domain uncovered a possible change in nonstructural protein 1 codon usage that may increase the viral replication rate in humans.[22]

[space otter]

computer was acting up so I couldn't add this to the previous post before time ran out on modify

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/science-sushi/2016/01/31/genetically-modified-mosquitoes-didnt-start-zika-ourbreak/#.VrEgHaRdFMx

By Christie Wilcox | January 31, 2016 9:56 pm

No, GM Mosquitoes Didn't Start The Zika Outbreak.

A new ridiculous rumor is spreading around the internets. According to conspiracy theorists, the recent outbreak of Zika can be blamed on the British biotech company Oxitec, which some are saying even intentionally caused the disease as a form of ethnic cleansing or population control. The articles all cite a lone Redditor who proposed the connection on January 25th to the Conspiracy subreddit. "There are no biological free lunches," says one commenter on the idea. "Releasing genetically altered species into the environment could have disastrous consequences" another added. "Maybe that's what some entities want to happen...?"

For some reason, it's been one of those months where random nonsense suddenly hits mainstream. Here are the facts: there's no evidence whatsoever to support this conspiracy theory, or any of the other bizarre, anti-science claims that have popped up in the past few weeks. So let's stop all of this right here, right now: The Earth is round, not flat (and it's definitely not hollow). Last year was the hottest year on record, and climate change is really happening (so please just stop, Mr. Cruz). And FFS, genetically modified mosquitoes didn't start the Zika outbreak.


Background on Zika

The Zika virus is a flavivirus closely related to notorious pathogens including dengue, yellow fever, Japanese encephalitis, and West Nile virus. The virus is transmitted by mosquitoes in the genus Aedes, especially A. aegypti, which is a known vector for many of Zika's relatives. Symptoms of the infection appear three to twelve days post bite. Most people are asymptomatic, which means they show no signs of infection. The vast majority of those who do show signs of infection report fever, rash, joint pain, and conjunctivitis (red eyes), according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. After a week or less, the symptoms tend to go away on their own. Serious complications have occurred, but they have been extremely rare.

The Zika virus isn't new. It was first isolated in 1947 from a Rhesus monkey in the Zika Forest in Uganda, hence the pathogen's name. The first human cases were confirmed in Uganda and Tanzania in 1952, and by 1968, the virus had spread to Nigeria. But since then, the virus has found its way out of Africa. The first major outbreak occurred on the island of Yap in Micronesia for 13 weeks 2007, during which 185 Zika cases were suspected (49 of those were confirmed, with another 59 considered probable). Then, in October 2013, an outbreak began in French Polynesia; around 10,000 cases were reported, less than 100 of which presented with severe neurological or autoimmune complications. One confirmed case of autochthonous transmission occurred in Chile in 2014, which means a person was infected while they were in Chile rather than somewhere else. Cases were also reported that year from several Pacific Islands. The virus was detected in
Chile until June 2014, but then it seemed to disappear.

Fast forward to May 2015, when the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) issued an alert regarding the first confirmed Zika virus infection in Brazil. Since then, several thousand suspected cases of the disease and a previously unknown complication—a kind of birth defect known as microcephaly where the baby's brain is abnormally small—have been reported from Brazil. (It's important to note that while the connection between the virus and microcephaly is strongly suspected, the link has yet to be conclusively demonstrated.)

Currently, there is no vaccine for Zika, though the recent rise in cases has spurred research efforts. Thus, preventing mosquito bites is the only prophylactic measure available.

The recent spread of the virus has been described as "explosive"; Zika has now been detected in 25 countries and territories. The rising concern over both the number of cases and reports of serious complications has led the most affected areas in Brazil to declare a state of emergency, and on Monday, The World Health Organization's Director-General will convene an International Health Regulations Emergency Committee on Zika virus and the observed increase in neurological disorders and neonatal malformations. At this emergency meeting, the committee will discuss mitigation strategies and decide whether the organization will officially declare the virus a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern."

GM to the Rescue



Aedes aegypti: the invasive mosquito in Brazil that carries Zika virus and other awful diseases.
Photo by James Gathany, c/o the CDC

The mosquito to blame for the outbreak—Aedes aegypti—doesn't belong in the Americas. It's native to Africa, and was only introduced in the new world when Europeans began to explore the globe. In the 20th century, mosquito control programs nearly eradicated the unwelcome menace from the Americas (largely thanks to the use of the controversial pesticide DDT); as late as the mid 1970s, Brazil and 15 other nations were Aedes aegypti-free. But despite the successes, eradication efforts were halted, allowing the mosquito to regain its lost territory.




The distribution of Aedes aegypti in the Americas in 1970 and 2002, from the Centers for Disease Control

Effective control measures are expensive and difficult to maintain, so at the tail end of the 20th century and into the 21st, scientists began to explore creative means of controlling mosquito populations, including the use of genetic modification. Oxitec's mosquitoes are one of the most exciting technologies to have emerged from this period. Here's how they work, as I described in a post almost exactly a year ago:


While these mosquitoes are genetically modified, they aren't "cross-bred with the herpes simplex virus and E. coli bacteria" (that would be an interkingdom ménage à trois!)—and no, they cannot be "used to bite people and essentially make them immune to dengue fever and chikungunya" (they aren't carrying a vaccine!). The mosquitoes that Oxitec have designed are what scientists call "autocidal" or possess a "dominant lethal genetic system," which is mostly fancy wording for "they die all by themselves". The males carry inserted DNA which causes the mosquitoes to depend upon a dietary supplement that is easy to provide in the lab, but not available in nature. When the so-called mutants breed with normal females, all of the offspring require the missing dietary supplement because the suicide genes passed on from the males are genetically dominant. Thus, the offspring die before they can become adults. The idea is, if you release enough such males in an area, then the females won't have a choice but to mate with them. That will mean there will be few to no successful offspring in the next generation, and the population is effectively controlled.
.
Male mosquitoes don't bite people, so they cannot serve as transmission vectors for Zika or any other disease. As for fears that GM females will take over: less than 5% of all offspring survive in the laboratory, and as Glen Slade, director of Oxitec's Brazilian branch notes, those are the best possible conditions for survival. "It is considered unlikely that the survival rate is anywhere near that high in the harsher field conditions since offspring

reaching adulthood will have been weakened by the self-limiting gene," he told me. And contrary to what the conspiracy theorists claim, scientists have shown that tetracycline in the environment doesn't increase that survival rate.

Brazil, a hotspot for dengue and other such diseases, is one of the countries where Oxitec is testing their mozzies—so far, everywhere that Oxitec's mosquitoes have been released, the local populations have been suppressed by about 90%.

Wrong Place, Wrong Time

Now that we've covered the background on the situation, let's dig into the conspiracy theory. We'll start with the main argument laid out as evidence: that the Zika outbreak began in the same location at the same time as the first Oxitec release:

tweet

Though it's often said, it's worth repeating: correlation doesn't equal causation. If it did, then Nicholas Cage is to blame for people drowning (Why, Nick? WHY?). But even beyond that, there are bigger problems with this supposed correlation: even by those maps, the site of release is on the fringe of the Zika hotspot, not the center of it. Just look at the two overlaid:



The epicenter of the Zika outbreak is clearly on the coast, hundreds of kilometers from the noted location.

The epicenter of the outbreak and the release clearly don't line up—the epicenter is on the coast rather than inland where the map points. Furthermore, the first confirmed cases weren't reported in that area, but in the town of Camaçari, Bahia, which is—unsurprisingly—on the coast and several hundred kilometers from the release site indicated.

But perhaps more importantly, the location on the map isn't where the mosquitoes were released. That map points to Juazeiro de Norte, Ceará, which is a solid 300 km away from Juazeiro, Bahia—the actual site of the mosquito trial. That location is even more on the edge of the Zika-affected area:



1: Juaziero de Norte, the identified location in by conspiracy theorists. 2: Juaziero, the actual location of Oxitec's release trial, about 300 km away and even further from the outbreak epicenter

The mistake was made initially by the Redditor who proposed the conspiracy theory and has been propagated through lazy journalistic practices by every proponent since. Here's a quick tip: if you're basing your conspiracy theory on location coincidence, it's probably a good idea to actually get the location right.

They're also wrong about the date. According to the D.C. Clothesline:


By July 2015, shortly after the GM mosquitoes were first released into the wild in Juazeiro, Brazil, Oxitec proudly announced they had "successfully controlled the Aedes aegypti mosquito that spreads dengue fever, chikungunya and zika virus, by reducing the target population by more than 90%."
.
However, GM mosquitoes weren't first released in Juazeiro, Bahia (let alone Juazeiro de Norte, Ceará) in 2015. Instead, the announcement by Oxitec was of the published results of a trial that occurred in Juaziero between May 2011 and Sept 2012—a fact which is clearly stated in the methods and results of the paper that Oxitec was so excited to share.

A new control effort employing Oxitec mosquitoes did begin in April 2015, but not in Juaziero, or any of the northeastern states of Brazil where the disease outbreak is occurring. As another press release from Oxitec states, the 2015 releases of their GM mosquitoes were in Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil:


Following approval by Brazil's National Biosafety Committee (CTNBio) for releases throughout the country, Piracicaba's CECAP/Eldorado district became the world's first municipality to partner directly with Oxitec and in April 2015 started releasing its self-limiting mosquitoes whose offspring do not survive. By the end of the calendar year, results had already indicated a reduction in wild mosquito larvae by 82%. Oxitec's efficacy trials across Brazil, Panama and the Cayman Islands all resulted in a greater than 90% suppression of the wild Ae. aegypti mosquito population–an unprecedented level of control.

Based on the positive results achieved to date, the 'Friendly Aedes aegypti Project' in CECAP/Eldorado district covering 5,000 people has been extended for another year. Additionally, Oxitec and Piracicaba have signed a letter of intent to expand the project to an area of 35,000-60,000 residents. This geographic region includes the city's center and was chosen due to the large flow of people commuting between it and surrounding neighborhoods which may contribute to the spread of infestations and infections.



Piracicaba, for the record, is more than 1300 miles away from the Zika epicenter:



1: Juaziero de Norte, the identified location in by conspiracy theorists. 2: Juaziero, the actual location of Oxitec's 2011-2012 trial, and 3: Piracicaba, the location where mosquitoes began to be released starting in April 2015, more than 2,000 km from the disease epicenter.

So not only did the conspiracy theorists get the location of the first Brazil release wrong, they either got the date wrong, too, or got the location of the 2015 releases really, really off. Either way, the central argument that the release of GM mosquitoes by Oxitec coincides with the first cases of Zika virus simply doesn't hold up.

Scientists Speak Out

As this ludicrous conspiracy theory has spread, so, too, has the scientific opposition to it. "Frankly, I'm a little sick of this kind of anti-science platform," said vector ecologist Tanjim Hossain from the University of Miami, when I asked him what he thought. "This kind of fear mongering is not only irresponsible, but may very well be downright harmful to vulnerable populations from a global health perspective."

Despite the specious allusions made by proponents of the conspiracy, this is still not Jurassic Park, says Hossain.

"We have a problem where ZIKV is spreading rapidly and is widely suspected of causing serious health issues," he continued. "How do we solve this problem? An Integrated Vector Management (IVM) approach is key. We need to use all available tools, old and new, to combat the problem. GM mosquitoes are a fairly new tool in our arsenal. The way I see it, they have the potential to quickly reduce a local population of vector mosquitoes to near zero, and thereby can also reduce the risk of disease transmission. This kind of strategy could be particularly useful in a disease outbreak 'hotspot' because you could hypothetically stop the disease in its tracks so to speak."

Other scientists have shared similar sentiments. Alex Perkins, a biological science professor at Notre Dame, told Business Insider that rather than causing the outbreak, GM mosquitoes might be our best chance to fight it. "It could very well be the case that genetically modified mosquitos could end up being one of the most important tools that we have to combat Zika," Perkins said. "If anything, we should potentially be looking into using these more."

Brazilian authorities couldn't be happier with the results so far, and are eager to continue to fight these deadly mosquitoes by any means they can. "The initial project in CECAP/Eldorado district clearly showed that the 'friendly Aedes aegypti solution' made a big difference for the inhabitants of the area, helping to protect them from the mosquito that transmits dengue, Zika and chikungunya," said Pedro Mello, secretary of health in Piracicaba. He notes that during the 2014/2015 dengue season, before the trial there began, there were 133 cases of dengue. "In 2015/2016, after the beginning of the Friendly Aedes aegypti Project, we had only one case."

It's long past time to stop villainizing Oxitec's mosquitoes for crimes they didn't commit. Claire Bernish, The Daily MFail, Mirror and everyone else who has spread these baseless accusations: I'm talking to you. The original post was in the Conspiracy subreddit—what more of a red flag for "this is wildly inaccurate bullsh*t" do you need? (After all, if this is a legit source, where are your reports on the new hidden messages in the $100 bill? or why the Illuminati wants people to believe in aliens?). It's well known that large-scale conspiracy theories are mathematically challenged. Don't just post whatever crap is spewed on the internet because you know it'll get you a few clicks. It's dishonest, dangerous, and, frankly, deplorable to treat nonsense as possible truth just to prey upon your audience's very real fears of an emerging disease. You, with your complete lack of integrity, are maggots feeding on the decay of modern journalism, and I mean that with no disrespect to maggots.


CATEGORIZED UNDER: Health & Medicine, More Science, select, Top Posts
199 comments

[larishira]

because whe have here...a mosquito called Aedes aegypti....responsable for a desease here...called Dengue. Once you have one time,..the second time...its almost fatal..
But this mosquito its not responsable only for Dengue....also responsable for the Zika virus.
In my city...we control this mosquitos....but all over the country its not like this.
In colombia...almost 22 mil people are infected with zika....
dont believe in everything the midia say...
its bad...but they trying hard to protect all of us

[ArMaP]

But this mosquito its not responsable only for Dengue....also responsable for the Zika virus.

And that's another problem that most media isn't talking about, the number of cases reported as Zika is based on the total number of cases minus the known cases for Dengue and the other known diseases transmitted by the mosquito, they do not even know if all those cases are Zika infections or not.

Good luck.

[Phedre]

Who Owns the Zika Virus?

Quote:

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Zika virus a global health emergency on Monday (February 1) without providing much detail on the disease. So here are some facts until we receive more information:

This sexually-transmitted virus has been around for 69 years and is marketed by two companies: LGC Standards (headquartered in the UK) and ATCC (headquartered in the US).

The LGC Group is:

"...the UK's designated National Measurement Institute for chemical and bioanalytical measurements and an international leader in the laboratory services, measurement standards, reference materials, genomics and proficiency testing marketplaces."

One of its branches, LGC Standards, is:

"...a leading global producer and distributor of reference materials and proficiency testing schemes. Headquartered in Teddington, Middlesex, UK, LGC Standards has a network of dedicated sales offices extending across 20 countries in 5 continents and more than 30 years experience in the distribution of reference materials. These high quality products and services are essential for accurate analytical measurement and quality control, ensuring sound decisions are made based on reliable data. We have an unparalleled breadth of ISO Guide 34 accredited reference material production in facilities at 4 sites across the UK, the US and Germany."

LGC Standards entered into a partnership with ATCC, of which the latter is:

"...the premier global biological materials resource and standards organization whose mission focuses on the acquisition, authentication, production, preservation, development, and distribution of standard reference microorganisms, cell lines, and other materials. While maintaining traditional collection materials, ATCC develops high quality products, standards, and services to support scientific research and breakthroughs that improve the health of global populations."

This "ATCC-LGC Partnership" is designed to facilitate:

"...the distribution of ATCC cultures and bioproducts to life science researchers throughout Europe, Africa, and India and [...] to make access to the important resources of ATCC more easily accessible to the European, African, and Indian scientific communities through local stock holding of more than 5,000 individual culture items supported by our local office network delivering the highest levels of customer service and technical support."

And who owns the patent on the virus? The Rockefeller Foundation!

Of significance, the Zika virus is a commodity which can be purchased online from the ATCC-LGC for 599 euros, with royalties accruing to the Rockefeller Foundation.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-owns-the-zika-virus/5505323

Order Form found on site.

[space otter]

Phedre

see reply 2 & 3 of this thread..i looked it up..hope that helps

and let me say this   that buying of the virus is for purposes of it's use in finding a vaccine i.e. research
the everyday man on the street just can't call up and get it
I really get upset with the scare tactics and pointed fingers floating around cyberspace these days  ...without having ALL the info with it..
when I was working in research I was totally amazed at what some of these places "keep" and how they acquired them but you have to look at the whole picture not a part somebody put out to scare the public....
I agree this is a bad one but it wasn't just put out there

sorry to be so pissy about it..but I really get disturbed with half truths
 



Zika is a flavivirus, which is pronounced a bit a like flavor. Flay-v-virus. Most viruses in this family are carried by arthropods — mosquitoes and ticks. We've known about Zika virus since at least 1947, when researchers from the Rockefeller Foundation put a rhesus monkey in a cage in the middle of Zika Forest of Uganda. The team was conducting surveillance for yellow fever. But "Rhesus 766" would ultimately become the first known carrier of Zika virus. (It remains unconfirmed if monkeys or other animals are consistent carriers — or reservoirs — for the disease).

The virus is also marketed by two companies, LGC Standards (headquartered in the UK) and ATCC (headquartered in the US).








https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATCC_(company)

Facilities[edit]

ATCC activities are housed in a custom-built facility in Manassas, Virginia. The 126,000 sq ft (11,700 m2) building is monitored constantly by on-site security staff, and electric power is backed up by on-site generators. The repository portion of the facility occupies 18,000 sq ft (1,700 m2) and contains 200 freezers to store biomaterials, including 65 vapor-phase liquid nitrogen freezers and 50 mechanical freezers, as well as cold rooms for storage at 4-8°C. The repository space is complemented by 35,000 sq ft (3,300 m2) of laboratory space.[citation needed] ATCC also occupies 45,000 sq ft (4,200 m2) of research and administrative space at the Prince William County campus of George Mason University, which is located across the street from ATCC's Manassas building.

The community of users of ATCC products and services is international, and includes researchers in academia and government, as well as private industry. Over 80% of ATCC's 17,000-strong customer base represents academia and industry – 42% from universities and colleges and 41% from private industry. Government customers comprise 6% of the organization's total. Three-quarters of ATCC customers hail from the U.S., while the remaining 25% are international customers. ATCC maintains authorized distributors in Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Israel, and Taiwan, and makes other international shipments directly from its Virginia facilities. Among the industries represented ATCC's customer base are the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, agricultural and diagnostics industries, as well as food, beverage and cosmetics makers and reference and testing laboratories.

The ATCC also has working links with several other international culture collections, such as the UK's National Collection of Plant Pathogenic Bacteria (NCPPB), Belgian Co-ordinated Collections of Micro-organisms (BCCM), the Deutsche Sammlung von Mikroorganismen und Zellkulturen (DSMZ, or German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures), the Japanese Collection of Research Bioresources (JCRB), and others.






About the ATCC-LGC Standards Partnership
www.atcc.org/.../About%20the%20ATCC-LGC%20Standards%20...
ATCC
LGC's partnership with ATCC facilitates the distribution of ATCC cultures and bioproducts to life science researchers throughout Europe, Africa, and India.



ATCC: The Global Bioresource Center
www.atcc.org/
ATCC
ATCC is a global nonprofit bioresource center (BRC) and research organization that provides biological products, technical services and educational programs ...
?Cell Lines  ?  ?ATCC Bacterial Products  ?  ?Contact Us  ?  ?Cells and Microorganisms


How to Order


If you reside in Europe, Australia, Canada, China, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, Korea, Macau, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa, and Taiwan, R.O.C. you must order from our official distributors.


•New Customer Account Application
You must establish an ATCC Customer account and have your account number available before ordering.


•Material Transfer Agreement
All customers must agree to the terms of our Material Transfer Agreement before ordering.


•Product Use Policy
Find additional information regarding use of ATCC materials for research and commercial applications.


•Distribution Policy
Review our distribution policy regarding who may order our products.


2 Ways to Order

Online - (Recommended) Sign in to view customer specific pricing along with these online features. Note: Your profile must be associated with an ATCC customer account; to associate your account you will need to have the billing postal code associated with the account for verification.

Phone  Toll Free U.S. and Puerto Rico: (800) 638-6597                                                 Non-U.S. Locations: (703) 365-2700


Additional Ordering Information
•Order from Quote
•Discounts
•Permits & Forms 
•Order Status
To check the status of your order, Sign In to access your account history or send an e-mail.

Join our mailing list to receive technical literature and product news.

.......................................

Who We Are


ATCC is the premier global biological materials resource and standards organization whose mission focuses on the acquisition, authentication, production, preservation, development, and distribution of standard reference microorganisms, cell lines, and other materials. While maintaining traditional collection materials, ATCC develops high quality products, standards, and services to support scientific research and breakthroughs that improve the health of global populations.



History

ATCC was established in 1925 when a committee of scientists recognized a need for a central collection of microorganisms that would serve scientists all over the world. The early years were spent at the McCormick Institute in Chicago until the organization moved to Georgetown University in Washington, DC in 1937. As research in the biosciences expanded ATCC began to diversify its holdings, and as the collections grew, ATCC occupied a series of sites, each providing more storage space. ATCC moved to its current location in 1998.



Facilities

ATCC headquarters and bioproduction facilities are located in Manassas, Virginia, near the Nation's Capital and the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The 126,000 sq. ft. building is continuously monitored by on-site security staff and electric power is backed up by on-site generators. The repository portion of the facility occupies 18,000 sq. ft. and contains 200 freezers for the storage of biomaterials, including vapor-phase liquid nitrogen freezers, mechanical freezers, and cold rooms. The repository space is complemented by 35,000 sq. ft. of laboratory space.





User Communities

ATCC customers include leading researchers and scientists in academia, government, and private industry. Over 80% of ATCC's customer base represents academia and industry – about 40% each from academia and private industry. Government customers comprise 6% of the organization's total. Further, 75% of ATCC customers are from the U.S., while the remaining 25% are international. .

ATCC has a direct sales force in the U.S. and maintains a global network of authorized distributors and partners to reach the scientific community in more than 150 countries. Among the industries represented in ATCC's customer base are the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, agricultural, and diagnostics industries; food, beverage, and cosmetics producers; reference and testing laboratories; academic institutions; government agencies; private foundations, and non-profit organizations.



Collection Holdings

ATCC's collections include a wide range of biological materials for research, including cell lines, molecular genomics tools, microorganisms, and bioproducts. The organization holds an extensive collection:
•More than 3,400 continuous cell lines available by species, tissue/disease types, and signaling pathways
•Tumor cell and molecular panels for cancer research, annotated with gene mutations and molecular profiles
•Ethnic and gender diverse induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) collections derived from normal/disease tissues, as well as adult human mesenchymal stem cells and mouse embryonic stem cells
•Donor diverse normal human primary cells and hTERT immortalized cells
•Dissociation and transfection reagents, classical media formulations and supplements, and sera
•Microbial panels for research related to infectious disease, antibiotic-resistance, food and environmental testing, and population studies
•Over 18,000 bacterial strains useful in industry applications, assay development, quality control, and environmental studies
•More than 3,000 human and animal viruses isolated from various sources
•Fungi and yeast representing over 7,600 species
•Taxonomically diverse protists including, parasitic protozoa and algae
•More than 1,000 genomic and synthetic nucleic acids, as well as certified reference materials
•Over 500 microbial cultures recommended as quality control reference strains

Innovation

ATCC utilizes the latest technology such as Droplet Digital™ PCR, CRISPR, and Next Generation Sequencing to authenticate and develop quality products that drive innovation and standards in science. ATCC's cell biology development efforts focus on delivering more relevant in vitro models, while the vast majority of its cellular models are used in basic research, assay development, drug discovery, and toxicology screening. ATCC's microbiology development efforts focus on customer convenience with ready-to-plate organisms for quality control and other applications, workflows, and genomic and synthetic molecular tools.



ISO Accreditation

ATCC is an ISO 9001:2008 certified, ISO 13485:2003 certified, ISO 17025:2005 and ISO Guide 34:2009 accredited organization. ISO accreditations have allowed ATCC to evolve from a traditional culture collection to Biological Resource Center with an infrastructure that supports the future of life science and biotechnology.



Quality Program

ATCC is committed to provide quality products and services to the life science community. The commitment includes the following certifications and accreditations:
•ISO 9001:2008 Certified
•ISO 13485:2003 Certified
•ISO/IEC 17025:2005 Accredited
•ISO Guide 34:2009 Accredited

An experienced Quality management team who ensure that the acquisition, authentication, preservation, development and distribution of biological materials are being performed under, and conform to a documented quality management system.

Please contact the Manager, Quality Assurance with any questions regarding ATCC quality systems and conformities at QAAssistance@atcc.org.



Trademarks

ATCC retains all right, title and interest in the ATCC trademark and trade-name, ATCC®, PRECEPTROL®, UNIPLUS®, Authenticult™, YOUR DISCOVERIES BEGIN WITH US®, EXPRESS-CHECK™, YOUR GLOBAL BIORESOURCE CENTER™, ATCC CULTURES™, ATCC BIOPRODUCTS™, ATCC SPECIAL COLLECTIONS™, ATCC SERVICES™, ATCC Genuine Cultures®, ATCC Licensed Derivative®, BioEscrow™, ATCC Reference Material™, ATCC Fungal Allergen Standard™, ATCC Proficiency Standard™, ATCC Standard Reference Material™, and any and all ATCC Catalog Marks (example ATCC® CRL-1740™) or ATCC specific designations of ATCC Materials sold by ATCC, or other trademarks registered or owned by the ATCC. The ATCC trademark, the ATCC trade-name, or the ATCC Catalog numbers can not be used in any way in connection with any offering, marketing, promotion, or sale without ATCC's prior written agreement.

[Phedre]

Space Otter, Quote:

Phedre

see reply 2 & 3 of this thread..i looked it up..hope that helps

I read the entire thread , Space Otter, before I posted. The information I posted is from a solid site. It is meant as added information take it or leave it. I did not how ever expect to be "Spanked" with it

and let me say this   that buying of the virus is for purposes of it's use in finding a vaccine i.e. research
the everyday man on the street just can't call up and get it
I really get upset with the scare tactics and pointed fingers floating around cyberspace these days  ...without having ALL the info with it..

I now understand that you do not see the "Irony"  of life and situations. It does help break the "tension" at times", I also am not very PC , it is just a good way to stop all discussion, unless of course that is ones intention.


when I was working in research I was totally amazed at what some of these places "keep" and how they acquired them but you have to look at the whole picture not a part somebody put out to scare the public....
I agree this is a bad one but it wasn't just put out there

How can "research "be done without all the "knowns" being known?   You have posted page after page of of things that Should be of great (Scary) concern to the people, yet, you seem to be accusing me of using "scare tactics"?? I do find it interesting on who owns the patent on this suddenly very active disease.  I have a lot more questions now.

sorry to be so pissy about it..but I really get disturbed with half truths

OK, so I'm just a poster,  who is only is half a liar, that's nice to know, I do take things personally at times and this is one of them. This used to be the best forum ever and I would love to see it come back to it's full glory again. But, I don't see that happening soon , with the "Don't Scare Me With Information Police. It is not just me, I've watched it being done to others, over and over again. WHY?

[space otter]

hey Phedre

my apologies to you for sounding like I was making it personal..i wasn't.
and I surely wasn't trying to spank you.. I realize that I was unclear  when I said that.. it is the places on line that tick me off when they only give half the info or slant it in a way  that it is only partial true... and yeah that makes me pissy that they are trying to scare folk and I have a tendency to go overboard in finding as much info as I can and posting it in the hopes that
makes it less scary

and geeeeeee I am so sorry for posting too much.. that can be easily remedied by not posting
anything but an opinion without other info..just a chat between posters about stuff
but don't hold your breath for me to change anytime soon..i'm old and set in my ways but in no way would I set out to hurt anyone's feelings  I truly believe that kindness counts


personally I think you should post more ..

..that's why I post so many info things.. to try and dispel the scary with as much information as possible.. obviously  my adding an opinion here was a bad move and again it was not meant to you personally  but I can see that I screwed up by the way I said  it.
I didn't take what you posted as your personal view.. but as stuff  you had discovered and I took that to mean that someone was posting that the rockefellers were making money with this virus being spread..   

I should have been more clear when I posted what I did  -
by saying that the researchers from the Rockefeller Foundation made the original discovery of the virus and that is why it is their name is on it..i didn't got further to see if they did have a patten or not and I didn't continue to see if they were somehow making money from ATCC even though they are listed as nonprofit    ATCC is a global nonprofit bioresource center
..  they get the credit that's how it works...  do they get any money.. I don't know
but if I go look it will be for my own info and I promise not to come back here with it

and that is what I was referring to as half truths..
that the info being spread  (from the writers of the info you shared.)not you
but again I was not clear where my remarks were aimed.. my bad..sorry your feelings took a hit
but I hope I have cleared that up




I don't understand what you are saying here
I now understand that you do not see the "Irony"  of life and situations. It does help break the "tension" at times", I also am not very PC , it is just a good way to stop all discussion, unless of course that is ones intention.

what irony do you mean?

the irony that posting facts prevents other folks from posting opinions and/or things they find?
that I am trying to stop other posters?

do you mean the  irony that in trying to convey what I thought has inadvertently stepped on what you thought and it hurt your feelings?.

.again I do apologize sincerely because  I worded that poorly and it looks like it was meant for you.....it wasn't    ...blame my not re reading before hitting post - I don't like meaness even when it isn't meant.. I go to great lengths to not step on anyones opinions or beliefs as I feel we are all intitled to those and hitting at others has never been my intent EVER
we are all posters here.....so please don't let me stop you

[Phedre]

Space Otter, Apology is accepted, and I wish to offer you my heartfelt apology to you. I suffer from my own anger something terrible, if that is any consolation.

A question? Did my link Not show up on my post?



Concerning the Rockefeller Foundation, it is not clear that they discovered the virus, but they did patent it in 1947. Most hospitals are non-profit, sure doesn't feel like it when get the bill though.

If it makes it better for you I will vet my sources to you. I try not to use "mainstream" sources for reasons I won't go into.

Have a good evening Space Otter

[ArMaP]

The information I posted is from a solid site.

I wouldn't call that a "solid site", as most (if not all) of the information I have seen from them is biased or changed to make the article look good, but I suppose that's the problem with all those sites (some from real news companies) that accept any article sent to them and just add a disclaimer saying that the contents of the articles are of sole responsibility of the author and that they will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in the article.

In this case, for example, the article (by Guillaume Kress) starts the second paragraph with "This sexually-transmitted virus..." as if that's a fact, but if we click on the link on that text it takes us to a Reuters page that says "The first known case of Zika virus transmission in the United States was reported in Texas on Tuesday by local health officials, who said it likely was contracted through sex and not a mosquito bite, a day after the World Health Organization declared an international public health emergency." One case, not confirmed, among millions of cases does not turn this into a "sexually-transmitted virus".

The article by Guillaume Kress also says:"And who owns the patent on the virus? The Rockefeller Foundation!", but without any proof of that (although he added the usual exclamation point to grab the attention of the reader). If we look at the image or follow the link to the ATCC site we can see that The Rockefeller Foundation appears as the "depositor", not as the owner.

The article ends with "Of significance, the Zika virus is a commodity which can be purchased online from the ATCC-LGC for 599 euros, with royalties accruing to the Rockefeller Foundation.", without providing any evidence that royalties are going to the Rockefeller Foundation and ignoring the "VR-84^TM" part that shows that what ATCC sells is a ATCC trademarked product.

If the virus is patented, what's the patent's number?

PS: if we keep on looking on that ATCC page, on the "DOCUMENTATION" tab we can see more information, and in the FAQs section we can see:

Source of VR-84 Zika
What was the source of ATCC® VR-84™ MR 766 strain? 
The virus was deposited into ATCC by Dr. Jordi Casals of the Rockefeller Foundation Virus Laboratory in 1953. The original source was isolated in 1947 from the blood of an experimental forest sentinel rhesus monkey in Uganda.

We can also see:

Current sources of Zika
Are there other current sources available for Zika virus?

Yes.  The Zika virus is also available through the following sources:

Three Zika strains (MR 766, IbH 30656, DAK AR 41542) are currently available through BEI Resources, a NIAID Biorepository established  to support basic research and develop improved diagnostic tests, vaccines, and therapies.  Registration and approval is required by NIAID to obtain these viruses. www.beiresources.org

Zika virus can also be obtained through the National Collection of Pathogenic Viruses, a Culture Collection of Public Health England. http://hpacultures.org.uk/products/viruses/detail.jsp?refId=1308258v&collection=ncpv

For the most up-to-date information regarding the Zika Virus please visit the CDC website

PPS: there are at least six strains of the Zika virus:
MR 766 - found in 1947 in Uganda, on a Rhesus monkey;
P6-740 - found in 1966 in Malaysia, on Aedes aegypti mosquitoes;
IbH 30656 - found in 1968 in Nigeria, in human blood;
ArD 41519 - found in 1984 in Senegal, on Aedes africanus mosquitoes;
EC Yap - found in 2007 in Micronesia, on human blood samples.
The above information was found here.

PPPS: It would be easier if we had on this forum a way of identifying quotes from external sources, it would make it easier to differentiate between the work of the poster, a quote from other post and an external source, but as we do not have it I think we should always try to make it clear when we post something from an external source.

[space otter]

PPPS: It would be easier if we had on this forum a way of identifying quotes from external sources, it would make it easier to differentiate between the work of the poster, a quote from other post and an external source, but as we do not have it I think we should always try to make it clear when we post something from an external source.

PPPS: It would be easier if we had on this forum a way of identifying quotes from external sources,

I make a note that sources are embedded or I go to that source and copy the link
it would make it easier to differentiate between the work of the poster,
put your remarks in a color  other than black when you are not the only poster...I stay with this green color..cause I like it and my remarks are always the same color when I'm not alone in a post 

a quote from other post

highlight and use that little quote thing above 

and an external source, always list the place you are quoting from

but as we do not have it I think we should always try to make it clear when we post something from an external source.
  yep..total agreement..takes more time but makes things more clear

I'm a pusher for clarity since it usually eliminates arguments..
.except when I don't read my own remarks and correct stuff..sigh

bwhahahaha opps..shoulda made that my green color..

[Phedre]

Please post list of "Acceptable" sources.   Please list all "Rules" to posting on the "Living Moon Forum" Zorgon must have not posted all of them. Sorry , to have broken "The Rules".

[ArMaP]

Please post list of "Acceptable" sources.

I don't have one, that's why I didn't say that the source you used was not acceptable, I said "I wouldn't call that a solid site", the "I" showing it's a personal opinion that I tried to explain in the following sentences.

Please list all "Rules" to posting on the "Living Moon Forum" Zorgon must have not posted all of them.

I said nothing about breaking rules.