Updates: Whatever Happened to the Risk for Another Indian Ocean Tsunami?

Also: updates on rabies recoveries, bioterror risks and the genetic tracking of religious persecution

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

No Relief from Tsunami Threat
In the devastating wake of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, scientists rushed to investigate its cause and the potential for another killer wave [see “Tsunami: Wave of Change”; SciAm, January 2006]. They found that the tsunami resulted from a magnitude 9.2 earthquake off Sumatra’s western coast—specifically, at the Sunda megathrust, where one tectonic plate is diving below another. Scientists had conjectured two strong earthquakes there in 2007 might have relieved pent-up energy, thereby preventing another major quake.

Unfortunately, California Institute of Technology researchers and their colleagues have bad news. They analyzed satellite radar and GPS station data, along with coral reef growth patterns and other historical geologic records to assess how much of the area ruptured as compared with past activity. Evidently, the 2007 events released only a quarter of the stress trapped within. The teams report in the December 4 Nature and the December 12 Science that another tsunami-unleashing earthquake could occur there at any time. —Charles Q. Choi

Rabid Recoveries
In 2004 Jeanna Giese became the first person to survive a rabies infection without taking the vaccine. Rodney E. Willoughby, Jr., of the Medical College of Wisconsin saved her by inducing a coma and injecting her with antivirals [for his account, see “A Cure for Rabies?”; SciAm, April 2007]. Last fall this “Milwaukee protocol” may have helped an eight-year-old Colombian girl and a teenage Brazilian boy beat the odds, too.


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 girl began recovering while in her coma; before waking, however, she died of pneumonia, which her physicians say was unrelated to her rabies infection. The boy is recuperating, but whether the protocol worked is not completely clear: he had a partial course of the rabies treatment before showing symptoms. (Five others have recovered after such partial treatment.) Although the two cases may represent positive news for the Milwaukee protocol—research on it is controversial and hard to conduct—Giese remains the only clear-cut success story for now.

Bioterror by 2013
Fear of deadly pathogens released as weapons of mass destruction has risen since the 9/11 attacks and the anthrax mailings [see “The Specter of Biological Weapons”; SciAm, December 1996, and “After the Anthrax”; SciAm, November 2008]. Such an event is more likely than a nuclear detonation, concludes a congressional commission, which in its December 2 report says a bioterror incident will likely occur somewhere by 2013. Cooperative efforts to secure pathogens and steer bioweapons scientists to peaceful activities has worked in the past, but such programs must be strengthened and extended, the commission states.

Religious Effects
The human genome can tell a story of ancestral migrations [see “Traces of a Distant Past”; SciAm, July 2008]. It also reveals the effects of religion and persecution. Investigators studied the genes of 1,140 males from around the Iberian Peninsula—specifically, their Y chromosome, which changes little from father to son. They found that 19.8 percent of the modern Iberian population has Sephardic Jewish ancestry. It probably reflects the 15th-century purge and conversion of Jews by Christians. Similarly, 10.6 percent have Moorish ancestry, probably a result of the Muslim conquest of the region in A.D. 711. The findings appear in the December 4, 2008, American Journal of Human Genetics.

Note: This article was originally printed with the title, "Updates".

Philip Yam is the managing editor of ScientificAmerican.com, responsible for the overall news content online. He began working at the magazine in 1989, first as a copyeditor and then as a features editor specializing in physics. He is the author of The Pathological Protein: Mad Cow, Chronic Wasting and Other Prion Diseases.

More by Philip Yam

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi
Scientific American Magazine Vol 300 Issue 2This article was published with the title “Updates: Whatever Happened to the Risk for Another Indian Ocean Tsunami?” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 300 No. 2 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican022009-5uCzKWhnt5Vgz8jkflzggM

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