SmallpoxScientists divided on whether to destroy last stocks of smallpox virus
While smallpox has been eradicated since 1980, the World Health Organization (WHO) still maintains a stockpile of the virus — a measure which is becoming an increasingly contentious issue for members of the 194-nation organization. Some scientists argue that the stockpiles of the virus should be maintained until there is a completely confirmed response to any possible future smallpox outbreak, while other scientists argue that the danger of an accidental outbreak or terrorist bioattack using the virus far outweighed any advances to be made by additional live testing.
While smallpox has been eradicated since 1980, the World Health Organization (WHO) still maintains a stockpile of the virus — a measure which is becoming an increasingly contentious issue for members of the 194-nation organization.
As Nature reports, the decision on whether or not to destroy the remaining stock — historically used for live-virus testing and research — was raised again during the annual World Health Assembly, which was held in Geneva, Switzerland 19-24 May.
The debate revolves around the question of whether or not the WHO’s Advisory Committee on Variola Virus Research (ACVVR) might still find some benefit from further research with the strain. Though the combative drugs tecovirimat and brincidofovir — both in the licensing stage — should provide a sufficient counter to any possible future smallpox outbreak, some argue that the stockpiles of the virus should be maintained until there is a completely confirmed solution.
Additionally, some scientists want to see live-virus testing expanded, arguing that research does not have to be limited to the matter of finding suitable cures. ACVVR members Clarissa Damaso and Grant McFadden urged that “the WHO’s restricting of smallpox research to tightly circumscribed public-health applications has limited fundamental research that could advance public health.”
In contrast, in a paper from November 2013, the Advisory Group of Independent Experts to Review the Smallpox Research Program (AGIES) laid out their case for the Assembly when they argued that there was no continued justification for holding onto the virus of such a deadly disease. More importantly, they urged that the danger of an accidental outbreak or terrorist bioattack using the virus far outweighed any advances to be made by additional live testing.
While some progress was made, the debate did not reach a consensus. Glen Thomas, a WHO spokesman, told Nature that “It quickly became clear that there were sharply divided opinions [among the scientists].”
In regards to a possible compromise, he added that there would be an extension because “The decision to setup a third expert group is intended to bring together a mix of scientists and public-health and other experts to review all the elements of the debate and take the issue forward.”
