7 ms·

How do your links [1][2] support the claim that Ukraine is developing “biomilitary activities” (as claimed in the title of the Global Times article)? They seem

How do your links [1][2] support the claim that Ukraine is developing “biomilitary activities” (as claimed in the title of the Global Times article)? They seem to point to medical research to fight against diseases, rather than “biomilitary activities”.

maratc 5y ago
Genuine question: Why would the US Department of Defence fund "medical research to fight against diseases"?
- hn_go_brrrrr 5y ago
  To defend against biological weapons. The DoD is responsible for defending the US against all kinds of attacks -- conventional, nuclear, chemical, and biological -- even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself.
  - waffleiron 5y ago
    > even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself. US has changed to a limited interpretation of what a biological weapon is, and considers non-deadly biological agents to not be bioweapons when it comes to treaties banning them. https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/resource/original.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.or... The US does research into chemical and bio-weapons they do not consider to be lethal: https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/chemweapons/nonlethal.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.or...
    - kodah 5y ago
      That makes sense. The only bioweapon we were routinely trained on is tear gas, so if they're building stuff on level with tear gas I wouldn't be surprised. The other type of bioweapon that your second link mentioned is microbes that eat through structural material. This looks like it's purposed for breaching, which makes sense given how dangerous breaching is today.
- zdragnar 5y ago
  As evidenced by covid 19, pandemics are a matter of national security. I like to think that the DoD is interested in developing novel ways to fight novel pathogens, rather than use them as weapons. That said, I am under no illusion that the DoD or any government institution should be simply taken at their word either.
- yks 5y ago
  cause they were reducing threat of COVID in UA Armed Forces (first link)
  - maratc 5y ago
    The document linked above is from 2017. Was there a COVID-17 I never heard of?
    - yks 5y ago
      That was for animal diseases and yes, DoD has a department for that as well: https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Combat-Support/Public-Health/Veterinary-Service https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Combat-Support.... There is no conspiracy here unless you just want to see it.
      - maratc 5y ago
        I don't suggest any conspiracy; I am just debating your claim on "reducing threat of COVID in UA Armed Forces" in 2017.
        ethbr0 5y ago
        mRNA vaccine technology was funded out of a DARPA program (from memory, ADEPTS?) to rapidly develop and deploy vaccines to novel pathogens. Circa 2015 or earlier? At the time, pandemic influenza was the best guess, but the point of the platform and the program was to rapidly address any pathogen.
- hkmaxpro 5y ago
  The answer is simply the first paragraph of [1]: > The U.S. Department of Defense’s Biological Threat Reduction Program collaborates with partner countries to counter the threat of outbreaks (deliberate, accidental, or natural) of the world’s most dangerous infectious diseases. The program accomplishes its bio-threat reduction mission through development of a bio-risk management culture; international research partnerships; and partner capacity for enhanced bio-security, bio-safety, and bio-surveillance measures. The Biological Threat Reduction Program’s priorities in Ukraine are to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats
  - zardo 5y ago
    > The Biological Threat Reduction Program’s priorities in Ukraine are to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern Where would these pathogens and toxins that need to be secured be coming from?
    - ethbr0 5y ago
      Everywhere else? The environment, geopolitical opponents. Bioweapons defense is pretty fuzzy, as until recently you generally had to study a strain for a long amount of time to develop and test an effective vaccine. Which means you have to have a representative strain. Which means you either need to get one... or create your best guess. All while the environment and/or your adversary are doing god knows what out of your sight. Miracles like a vaccine-in-a-year don't just happen. They build on decades of research and preparedness.
    - ben_w 5y ago
      Given the phrase “deliberate, accidental, or natural”, basically anywhere. The two hypotheses about the origins of COVID are natural (wet market) and accidental (lab leak). Back when “The War On Terror” was the political Zeitgeist-meme, there was at least one anthrax attack (deliberate), and I remember suggestions that terrorists might also try to trigger foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks or algal blooms (it may not surprise you to learn that the latter was suggested by someone looking for government funding for their existing research into algal blooms).
- alxlaz 5y ago
  Research on infectious disease & co. is a big part of military research because servicemen operate all across the world, including areas where they are exposed to diseases that are uncommon in the US, or that have been eradicated. That is, of course, on top of all the diseases that fall under "chemical warfare" and for which you have to be able to treat your people (both military and civilian), and afflictions associated with crowded areas in general (besieged cities and the like). I obviously don't know what the labs mentioned by the parent poster were doing but the fact that the US DoD (or any country's department of defense) does medical research should be about as surprising as the fact that they do research on explosives.
- thereddaikon 5y ago
  The US DoD funds a lot of peaceful science at labs around the world. This is often misinterpreted by laymen as "weapons labs" when they are just normal civilian labs. Not all research funded by the military is directly applicable to weapons. A lot of times its applicable to defense against said weapons. Which also has application in the civilian medical field.
- oneoff786 5y ago
  Because medical research is useful?
- OminousWeapons 5y ago
  The DoD funds a lot of medical research to improve combat readiness. When I was an academic researcher, we were working on a project that was partially DoD funded to develop a diagnostic device which was meant for personalizing medication for patients undergoing cardiac procedures, but the military was interested in using it for developing personalized versions of QuikClot for soldiers who experienced battlefield trauma. I also worked for a company which had several novel therapeutics for agents commonly used in bioweapons in their pipeline and the DoD was funding parts of that as well.
  - saalweachter 5y ago
    It's also worth noting that science funding in the US government is decentralized. Each branch of the military as well as a half dozen "civilian" departments each have their own separate programs for funding basic science research. If I recall correctly, when I was an undergraduate research assistant working for a cognitive psychologist studying how humans solve the traveling salesman problem, that research was funded by the US Navy. So the DOD funding research could mean it thought the research could mean it had potential as a weapon, or a defense against weapons, or was just a random thing being funded to promote basic science research. You can't really draw a line from "This was funded by this department, so it had this intent" in US science funding.
- ModernMech 5y ago
  DARPA funds all kinds of stuff. The national defense angle I think should be obvious at this point post COVID.
- shagmin 5y ago
  The other comments already answer this question. But I'd like to add just how massive the DoD is. It's not like how one might imagine a typical military, where the government is basically funding an entity to pay soldiers' salaries, pay for their equipment, and basic necessities and not much else. The DoD on a macro level doesn't really skimp on anything, from research on how climate change will affect its mission to dealing with overwhelming quantities of rust. Plus historically, there are plenty of wars where disease was more deadly than enemy combatants.
- JohnHaugeland 5y ago
  You're asking this during Covid?
qiskit 5y ago
> They seem to point to medical research to fight against diseases, rather than “biomilitary activities”. They are dual use research. Just like research for nuclear energy is the same as research for nuclear weapons. Research for rockets is the same for icbms. It's why we are so keen on preventing iran from developing their nuclear energy program. It's why we are worried about north korea's "space" program. The same thing with cybersecurity. By learning to prevent cyberattacks, you are also learning how to carry out cyberattacks. And vice versa. You can't research against diseases/viruses/etc without procuring, creating and developing them.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  Researching viruses in general is not a dual-use activity. Most viruses spread everywhere when they get out. Pathogens like anthrax can't spread from human to human, making them plausible weapons and proportionally decreasing the urgency of researching them. (The labs may have been researching anthrax but the odds are fair that none of their research involved anything that could be a weapon.) Edited to replace virus with "pathogen".
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    > proportionally decreasing the urgency of researching them Unless your primary concern is defensive against biowarfare rather than natural outbreaks...which is indeed a priority for military research h.
    - whatshisface 5y ago
      That's true, but it remains that bioweapon research is distinct from virus research.
      - ashwagary 5y ago
        I disagree, there is plenty of overlap.
        5y ago

maratc 5y ago

Genuine question: Why would the US Department of Defence fund "medical research to fight against diseases"?

hn_go_brrrrr 5y ago
To defend against biological weapons. The DoD is responsible for defending the US against all kinds of attacks -- conventional, nuclear, chemical, and biological -- even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself.
- waffleiron 5y ago
  > even if it doesn't use all of those weapon types itself. US has changed to a limited interpretation of what a biological weapon is, and considers non-deadly biological agents to not be bioweapons when it comes to treaties banning them. https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/resource/original.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121204112835/http://www.fas.or... The US does research into chemical and bio-weapons they do not consider to be lethal: https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.org/programs/bio/chemweapons/nonlethal.html https://web.archive.org/web/20121119043547/http://www.fas.or...
  - kodah 5y ago
    That makes sense. The only bioweapon we were routinely trained on is tear gas, so if they're building stuff on level with tear gas I wouldn't be surprised. The other type of bioweapon that your second link mentioned is microbes that eat through structural material. This looks like it's purposed for breaching, which makes sense given how dangerous breaching is today.
zdragnar 5y ago
As evidenced by covid 19, pandemics are a matter of national security. I like to think that the DoD is interested in developing novel ways to fight novel pathogens, rather than use them as weapons. That said, I am under no illusion that the DoD or any government institution should be simply taken at their word either.
yks 5y ago
cause they were reducing threat of COVID in UA Armed Forces (first link)
- maratc 5y ago
  The document linked above is from 2017. Was there a COVID-17 I never heard of?
  - yks 5y ago
    That was for animal diseases and yes, DoD has a department for that as well: https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Combat-Support/Public-Health/Veterinary-Service https://www.health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Combat-Support.... There is no conspiracy here unless you just want to see it.
    - maratc 5y ago
      I don't suggest any conspiracy; I am just debating your claim on "reducing threat of COVID in UA Armed Forces" in 2017.
      - ethbr0 5y ago
        mRNA vaccine technology was funded out of a DARPA program (from memory, ADEPTS?) to rapidly develop and deploy vaccines to novel pathogens. Circa 2015 or earlier? At the time, pandemic influenza was the best guess, but the point of the platform and the program was to rapidly address any pathogen.
hkmaxpro 5y ago
The answer is simply the first paragraph of [1]: > The U.S. Department of Defense’s Biological Threat Reduction Program collaborates with partner countries to counter the threat of outbreaks (deliberate, accidental, or natural) of the world’s most dangerous infectious diseases. The program accomplishes its bio-threat reduction mission through development of a bio-risk management culture; international research partnerships; and partner capacity for enhanced bio-security, bio-safety, and bio-surveillance measures. The Biological Threat Reduction Program’s priorities in Ukraine are to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats
- zardo 5y ago
  > The Biological Threat Reduction Program’s priorities in Ukraine are to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern Where would these pathogens and toxins that need to be secured be coming from?
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    Everywhere else? The environment, geopolitical opponents. Bioweapons defense is pretty fuzzy, as until recently you generally had to study a strain for a long amount of time to develop and test an effective vaccine. Which means you have to have a representative strain. Which means you either need to get one... or create your best guess. All while the environment and/or your adversary are doing god knows what out of your sight. Miracles like a vaccine-in-a-year don't just happen. They build on decades of research and preparedness.
  - ben_w 5y ago
    Given the phrase “deliberate, accidental, or natural”, basically anywhere. The two hypotheses about the origins of COVID are natural (wet market) and accidental (lab leak). Back when “The War On Terror” was the political Zeitgeist-meme, there was at least one anthrax attack (deliberate), and I remember suggestions that terrorists might also try to trigger foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks or algal blooms (it may not surprise you to learn that the latter was suggested by someone looking for government funding for their existing research into algal blooms).
alxlaz 5y ago
Research on infectious disease & co. is a big part of military research because servicemen operate all across the world, including areas where they are exposed to diseases that are uncommon in the US, or that have been eradicated. That is, of course, on top of all the diseases that fall under "chemical warfare" and for which you have to be able to treat your people (both military and civilian), and afflictions associated with crowded areas in general (besieged cities and the like). I obviously don't know what the labs mentioned by the parent poster were doing but the fact that the US DoD (or any country's department of defense) does medical research should be about as surprising as the fact that they do research on explosives.
thereddaikon 5y ago
The US DoD funds a lot of peaceful science at labs around the world. This is often misinterpreted by laymen as "weapons labs" when they are just normal civilian labs. Not all research funded by the military is directly applicable to weapons. A lot of times its applicable to defense against said weapons. Which also has application in the civilian medical field.
oneoff786 5y ago
Because medical research is useful?
OminousWeapons 5y ago
The DoD funds a lot of medical research to improve combat readiness. When I was an academic researcher, we were working on a project that was partially DoD funded to develop a diagnostic device which was meant for personalizing medication for patients undergoing cardiac procedures, but the military was interested in using it for developing personalized versions of QuikClot for soldiers who experienced battlefield trauma. I also worked for a company which had several novel therapeutics for agents commonly used in bioweapons in their pipeline and the DoD was funding parts of that as well.
- saalweachter 5y ago
  It's also worth noting that science funding in the US government is decentralized. Each branch of the military as well as a half dozen "civilian" departments each have their own separate programs for funding basic science research. If I recall correctly, when I was an undergraduate research assistant working for a cognitive psychologist studying how humans solve the traveling salesman problem, that research was funded by the US Navy. So the DOD funding research could mean it thought the research could mean it had potential as a weapon, or a defense against weapons, or was just a random thing being funded to promote basic science research. You can't really draw a line from "This was funded by this department, so it had this intent" in US science funding.
ModernMech 5y ago
DARPA funds all kinds of stuff. The national defense angle I think should be obvious at this point post COVID.
shagmin 5y ago
The other comments already answer this question. But I'd like to add just how massive the DoD is. It's not like how one might imagine a typical military, where the government is basically funding an entity to pay soldiers' salaries, pay for their equipment, and basic necessities and not much else. The DoD on a macro level doesn't really skimp on anything, from research on how climate change will affect its mission to dealing with overwhelming quantities of rust. Plus historically, there are plenty of wars where disease was more deadly than enemy combatants.
JohnHaugeland 5y ago
You're asking this during Covid?

qiskit 5y ago

> They seem to point to medical research to fight against diseases, rather than “biomilitary activities”. They are dual use research. Just like research for nuclear energy is the same as research for nuclear weapons. Research for rockets is the same for icbms. It's why we are so keen on preventing iran from developing their nuclear energy program. It's why we are worried about north korea's "space" program. The same thing with cybersecurity. By learning to prevent cyberattacks, you are also learning how to carry out cyberattacks. And vice versa. You can't research against diseases/viruses/etc without procuring, creating and developing them.

whatshisface 5y ago
Researching viruses in general is not a dual-use activity. Most viruses spread everywhere when they get out. Pathogens like anthrax can't spread from human to human, making them plausible weapons and proportionally decreasing the urgency of researching them. (The labs may have been researching anthrax but the odds are fair that none of their research involved anything that could be a weapon.) Edited to replace virus with "pathogen".
- shkkmo 5y ago
  > proportionally decreasing the urgency of researching them Unless your primary concern is defensive against biowarfare rather than natural outbreaks...which is indeed a priority for military research h.
  - whatshisface 5y ago
    That's true, but it remains that bioweapon research is distinct from virus research.
    - ashwagary 5y ago
      I disagree, there is plenty of overlap.
      - 5y ago