>I hear you, a nuke is the ultimate tool for implementing widespread death. That's not my point. I agree that the barriers to entry for biotech are lower. My

>I hear you, a nuke is the ultimate tool for implementing widespread death. That's not my point. I agree that the barriers to entry for biotech are lower. My point is that whereas the only 'defence' against nuclear weapons is deterrence, i.e more nukes, it is possible to defend against biotech weapons without starting an arms race. This would consist of ongoing, costly research of antidotes by government and university labs (with a high barrier to entry).