Hannity and Sebelius: A Pox on both Their Houses

Kathleen Sebelius, the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services--and the woman who taught us all how to sneeze, has written an article in The New York Times on why we need to continue research into smallpox generally and smallpox vaccines in particular. This is a result of another outbreak of a problem stalking the democracy, the politicization of science.

The World Health Organization is having a debate soon on whether to destroy the remaining stores of smallpox currently held in approved microzoos. Since Jenner, humanity has been trying to eradicate smallpox, a savage illness with a high infectivity and mortality. The success we have had is a tribute to human science, innovation, persistence and cooperation. The disease was officially eradicated in 1980 and now these zoos are the last remaining reservoir of the organism. One would think a world holiday would be declared as we finish off the little devils.

But there are other considerations. Vaccinated subjects can sometimes reconstitute the killer organism into a virulent form to infect the subject and spread. There may be viral stores we are unaware of. And, the real worry, there may be homicidal maniacs out there who think the organism is good way to fulfill their goal of death and unhappiness. The DNA of the organism is well known and can be engineered by an experienced biologist. More, the Russians, through their infamous Biopreparat Program developed smallpox as a primary biological weapon and as a secondary carrier for more lethal viruses. (Apparently they were dissatisfied with the traditional 30% mortality and 70% misery with the single organism and developed attachments to Ebola and other such bugs that have a 100% mortality but are so lethal they kill the host before they can spread.)

There is a legitimate argument against the zoos: The group with the vaccine wins. But the notion that there can be a policing of laboratories to guard against such an effort is insane. And the Sebelius article has emerged for a single reason: An American company has developed a retroactive vaccine for smallpox. The vaccine works after the individual has contracted the disease. But because the threat of the illness is not immediate and straightforward, interest and support of the drug has raised the supercilious eyebrows of the Right. Hannity and Bortz have raised questions about its legitimacy as a pursuit. After all, isn't everyone immunized? Are rich people involved in the company? Are some of them Democrates? Is this possibly another Solyandra? We have vaccines, isn't this just overcure? Was undue influence involved? In the war against Obama everything is a weapon.

It is easy to criticize superficial political thinking but, in fairness, it is hard to prove the value of a drug like this. You cannot just give someone smallpox to prove the drug works and a Tom Clancy-like scenario might never develop. But the idea that a smallpox attack would stimulate a successful worldwide immunological campaign is quite naive.

This looks like a very valuable drug for dangerous times. The recent revelation of company influence and that insider trading is the exclusive right of our elected representatives makes everything look suspect.

But sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

(N.B. I own the company in question and when it falls further I intend to buy more.)