Scientists Assess Potential Ramifications of Biological Attack with Hemorrhagic Fever Viruses

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

They start with muscle and joint aches, high fever, nausea, perhaps a skin rash. Evidence of bleeding follows, leading to organ failure, shock and often death. This is the terrible course of the hemorrhagic fever viruses (HFVs), such as the dread Ebola and Marburg, and if terrorists mounted a biological attack using them, the consequences could be disastrous. So say a panel of experts in a report published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

An outbreak could occur between two and 21 days after the agents were released, report Luciana Borio of the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies in Baltimore and her colleagues. HFVs' inherent ability to sicken aside, the situation would be made all the worse by clinicians' lack of familiarity with such scourges. The panel thus made a number of recommendations concerning diagnosis, handling and treatment of infected patients, noting that any suspicious clinical specimens would need to be sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases--the only laboratories equipped to rapidly diagnose these viruses.


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.


But exactly what could be done for infected individuals is worryingly unclear. So far, the USDA has yet to approve any antiviral drugs for treatment of HFVs, although the drug ribavirin has apparently shown some promise in combating certain of them. And with the exception of yellow fever, licensed vaccines against these viruses do not exist. Indeed, as the authors conclude, "the diagnostic and therapeutic armamentarium urgently needs to be augmented. There also is an urgent need to develop vaccines and drug therapy."

"An outbreak of Ebola and Marburg would have a significant impact on our society because they carry significant morbidity and mortality, and other than supportive medical care, there are no specific treatments," Borio remarks. "It is not possible to predict whether any of the hemorrhagic fever viruses are likely to be used as a bioweapon. However, we know that it is not impossible to weaponize these viruses, and we in medicine and public health are obliged to prepare."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe