New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Botulism Bioterror Worries Keep Research under Wraps

Bioterror worries keep key details out of new studies

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

When scientists in California discovered a new strain of Clostridium botulinum, the bacterium responsible for causing the paralytic illness botulism, they duly reported their findings in a scientific journal. The resulting studies were noteworthy for at least two reasons: the new strain of C. botulinum was the first to be identified in 40 years, and, perhaps more extraordinary, the researchers purposefully withheld key details of their discovery.

The scientists are keeping the information secret because of bioterror concerns. The toxins made by C. botulinum, which inhibit muscle movement by blocking the release of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, are the most dangerous known to humankind. A single gram of crystalline toxin, “evenly dispersed and inhaled, would kill more than one million people,” according to a 2001 assessment published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Botulinum toxin is known or suspected to have been part of bioweapon programs in the former Soviet Union, Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Syria.

Each of the seven previously known strains of the bacterium produces its own toxin, labeled A through G, and each has a corresponding antidote. Until an antidote can be developed for the new strain's toxin, dubbed H, the scientists at the California Department of Public Health who discovered the strain have decided not to release any genetic blueprints. The new strain was isolated from a patient who had contracted botulism but did not die.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The situation harks back to a debate that began in late 2011, when leading influenza scientists attempted to publish details of how they had genetically engineered the deadly H5N1 “bird flu” virus to spread among mammals. They initially faced objections from an expert panel that advises the U.S. government, which argued that the research could become a recipe for a pandemic virus. Yet eventually the advisory board reconsidered, and the researchers published their work.

The botulinum investigators could have held off on publishing their findings until the H antitoxin was made, says Ron Fouchier, a virologist at Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam and one of the scientists who led the H5N1 research. “Why rush now?” Fouchier says.

The journal editors weighed the consequences of publishing redacted research but felt an obligation to print the two botulinum studies promptly. “We decided it was important enough to let the scientific community know,” asserts David Hooper, deputy editor of the Journal of Infectious Diseases. The journal plans to add the genetic sequence to the scientific record once an H antitoxin is developed.

Helen Branswell is STAT's infectious diseases and public health reporter. She comes from the Canadian Press, where she was the medical reporter for the past 15 years. Helen cut her infectious diseases teeth during Toronto's SARS outbreak in 2003 and spent the summer of 2004 embedded at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2010-11 she was a Nieman Global Health Fellow at Harvard, where she focused on polio eradication. Warning: Helen asks lots of questions.

More by Helen Branswell
Scientific American Magazine Vol 310 Issue 1This article was published with the title “A Botulism Bind” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 310 No. 1 (), p. 20
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0114-20a

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe