Vials labeled "Smallpox?" Merck owes the public an immediate explanation of this!

[markpkessinger]

Vials were found in the freezer of a Merck lab in Montgomery County, PA that were labeled "Smallpox," and their contents appeared to be intact. There are only two facilities in the world that are authorized to have copies of the smallpox virus: the CDC headquarters in Atlanta, and a lab in Russia. Merck has "declined to comment." From NBC:

Vials labeled 'smallpox' found by lab worker cleaning freezer in Pennsylvania
by Elisha Fieldstadt

[ . . . . ]

The frozen vials "were incidentally discovered by a laboratory worker while cleaning out a freezer in a facility that conducts vaccine research in Pennsylvania," a CDC spokesperson said in a statement to NBC News.

The contents appeared to be intact, and the CDC is partnering with law enforcement to investigate, the agency said.

“The laboratory worker who discovered the vials was wearing gloves and a face mask. There is no indication that anyone has been exposed to the small number of frozen vials. We will provide further details as they are available," the spokesperson said.

Smallpox was eradicated in the 1970s, but vaccines still exist in case of an outbreak, according to the CDC. Once a person develops a smallpox rash, the vaccine cannot protect them. About 3 in 10 people with smallpox die.

NBC Philadelphia reported that the vials were found at a Merck facility in Montgomery County, about 30 miles northwest of Philadelphia. Only two facilities in the world are supposed to have doses of the virus: CDC's Atlanta headquarters and a Russian lab.

[ . . . . ]

[RockRaven]

1. It might take them a while to figure out... Probably few if any of the people working there

have any knowledge of when or how those vials came into existence. It's gonna be a deep dive into archives that the investigators are personally unfamiliar with... if they can even find the relevant documents.

[markpkessinger]

2. Of course . . .

. . . But to think that they can just avoid public comment on something as significant as this is corporate hubris at its worse. At a minimum, they would release a statement explaining what they are doing to get to the bottom of it.

[Gaugamela]

4. A company like Merck would have protocols in place to review the contents in storage on a periodic

basis. If those are leftover vials that really contain the smallpox pathogen then they have been there for decades. More likely these vials are dummies with no real pathogens that were recently planted there by someone, or Merck is involved in government sanctioned research and the vials were inadvertently misplaced.

[nilram]

3. Would be a hell of a Workmen's Comp. claim, if infected.

[Hortensis]

5. Really? Do they owe us an investigation first to obtain information and

tell truth, or will some standard anodyne comment do?

But that's not the real question your post raises. Agencies like the FBI and CDC, which act in our interest, will require explanation, any necessary access for investigation etc, and Merck certainly has a duty to report this to them and comply as required.

But I don't know what explanation a private company might owe the public directly for an internal matter.

Any explanation at all?

There's been a rise in assumption among some that companies not just should be but are directly answerable to private citizens, that they should be influenced by petitions demanding this and that, and, well, this sort of thing.

I'm not at all sure that private companies are, any more than one neighbor owes an answer to just anyone who walks up and demands to an explanation of how he feeds his roses or puppy.

Managing their public relations would almost always call for some kind of business statement, and I'm sure they have templates in storage ready to fill out and release, but that's tending to their business and not at all the same thing.

[markpkessinger]

8. I'm not assuming anything . . .

. . . there are certainly possible scenarios that could explain this (a disgruntled employee, for example). But given the nature of this, and the potential public health implications, I should think, at a minimum, they would release a statement saying that they are investigating, and outlining the steps they are taking to get to the bottom of it. Merely declining to comment strikes me as corporate hubris at its worst!

[Hortensis]

10. Agree, certainly. By itself I'd just have assumed that's

what you meant. I'd also assume Merck would choose to issue a statement, but since so far seemingly no smallpox was found in the vials, just something used in smallpox vaccine, they may also choose not to, and hold the one they were considering about how often they wash the windows as well. .

[captain queeg]

6. This requires full disclosure. I thought small pox has been iradicated world wide

And I thought there were only a couple small samples locked up somewhere really secure

[Brainfodder]

7. Prank?

Labels.... oh that's tough to error/fake.

[hlthe2b]

9. You'd probably be shocked at what has been stored for decades at old, long-past decommisioned

labs across the country. After 911, CDC had to do a top to bottom review and inspection of all their own, and let's just say, long term scientists had been a bit lax, Hell at that time, one important lab outside Atlanta had scores of keys and later keycards given to "visiting scientists" and students from all over the world that had never been destroyed or deactivated. It was corrected, but most were not so surprised. Prior decades were pretty much ones where trust was pretty high among scientists. Some "oldsters" with high regard would arrogantly carry potentially infectious blood vials for antibody testing in their pocket when returning from outbreak investigations to avoid the hassle of paperwork. 911 showed how foolish that was and a lot of way past-due changes were made.

That a freezer long-abandoned at an all but decommissioned private or contract lab might contain infectious agents is horrible, but not too surprising. That was way before the current regulations that determine which labs are authorized to handle various agents and how.

[The Magistrate]

12. Clearing Out An Old Factory Once, Ma'am

We came across bottles of picric acid. Not infectious, but not be dropped. They were in the back of a cabinet I doubt anyone had been in for years. I shudder to think what's slipped out of sight in odd niches of this world.

[malaise]

11. Serious question

If viruses are so profitable, what's to stop big pharma from spreading them?

[harumph]

13. Possibilities:

1. it's a prank by low level lab folks - Ha Ha!
2. it's real.

If (2), even if Merck had authorization for some reason, the vials should have been (a) destroyed and the destruction documented, or (b - less likely) returned to the originating facility, certainly not sitting forgotten in a freezer in a presumably unguarded area.

third worse case scenario: samples are real and viable.
second worse case scenario: second worse case scenario + during interim, someone "borrowed" some of it.
absolute worse case...let your imagination go wild!

[markpkessinger]

14. UPDATE: CDC says Vials did not contain the smallpox virus ...

. . . but instead contained the smallpox vaccine. They were mislabeled. Well, that's certainly a relief! But this should serve as an object lesson in the importance of correct and complete labeling!

See https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vials-found-pennsylvania-lab-not-contain-smallpox-labeled-cdc-says-rcna6094?fbclid=IwAR2HnN2qrlFtU37LbJ3HK9rZp7d7vcG4Oryjqe7xbdA0aNtd3E5CHwj0Ilo