This Is Not The Planetary Protection Headline That NASA Needs Right Now (Update)
NASA Should Beware of Viruses From Outer Space, Bloomberg Opinion
“This summer, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration will launch a rover designed to collect samples of the Martian surface and store them until they can eventually be brought back to Earth. When they arrive, according to a former NASA scientist, they’ll be “quarantined and treated as though they are the Ebola virus until proven safe.”His statement caused a minor media sensation, and understandably so. … At the same time, a public scarred by the coronavirus is likely to be wary of any space missions that require Ebola-level containment strategies. If NASA and other spacefarers want to assure people that they shouldn’t be worried about Martian Ebola, they need to prove that their safety efforts are as failsafe as their engineering.”
Keith’s update: Scott Hubbard needs to apologize to everyone working at NASA for his ignorant remark. It is still echoing through the news media. This calls for a public retraction by him saying that he was wrong and that the report that he claims to represent did not mention the words “Ebola” or “disease” or cover that issue and that he was in error suggesting that it did. The author of this new article clearly did not research before writing it. He just repeats what was already bouncing around from Hubbard’s original gaffe. Saying stupid stuff like “Ebola” simply gives the media something to arm wave about – especially when we are in the midst of a pandemic. Why are people going to take NASA science seriously when former senior NASA officials say uniformed things like Hubbard did – and then do not have the professional responsibility to correct the record?
MARS ATTACKS Stanford professor warns Mars rock samples ‘could bring alien viruses to Earth’ and they ‘must be treated like Ebola’, The Sun
“A STANFORD professor is warning that new rock samples from Mars could bring new viruses to Earth.”
Larger image
Stanford’s Scott Hubbard contributed to new ‘planetary quarantine’ report reviewing risks of alien contamination, Stanford University
“In my opinion, and that of the science community, the chance that rocks from Mars that are millions of years old will contain an active life form that could infect Earth is extremely low. But, the samples returned by MSR will be quarantined and treated as though they are the Ebola virus until proven safe.”
Keith’s note: Scott Hubbard is certainly free to speak his mind – especially if he is on a panel that writes a NASA advisory report. But he really should not be at the forefront of discussing the planetary protection topic in public. The use of the word “Ebola” in the same sentence with NASA’s Mars sample return plans is just ill-advised arm waving and results in follow-on articles that pick up on the use of the word “Ebola”. Oh yea and we’re IN THE MIDDLE OF A GLOBAL PANDEMIC, Scott. Talk about the worst time to link something NASA wants to do with a lethal infectious disease.
And guess what, Scott – when you make comparisons like this you inevitably get headlines in follow-on articles and quotes that hype the “Ebola” mention that millions of people will read as a direct result. Not the smartest thing to say right now – or at any other time. Look at the quick Google news search for “Scott Hubbard Ebola” (larger image). I’m sure NASA loves headlines like this from the Sun: “MARS ATTACKS Stanford professor warns Mars rock samples ‘could bring alien viruses to Earth’ and they ‘must be treated like Ebola'”.
But wait, there’s more: download the report that Scott Hubbard is referring to. Link here: “Assessment of the Report of NASA’s Planetary Protection Independent Review Board“. Do a simple word search for “Ebola”. Guess what: the report never mentions “Ebola”. The report makes no mention of the words “disease”, “pandemic”, “virus”, or “Coronavirus” either. Then why is Hubbard freelancing and making a comparison to a lethal pathogen – a topic that the report itself does not even mention?
With all that has happened in the US in recent years, I’m beginning to feel that the end of this country will be due to us sitting on our laurels with regard to scientific education. Once conspiracies convince more than 50% of the population of something, we can no longer count on a voting system to keep us sane or safe.
I think it would be closer to 10% of the voters, not 50%. Many elections turn on the undecided or “swing” voters, and that’s often well under 10%. If conspiracy theories and “alternate” facts affect _those_ voters, it doesn’t have to take many of them to alter the election results. And quite a bit of false news seems to be targeted at those undecided voters.
I hate to break it to you but nothing has really changed. A 100 years ago there were conspiracy theories that the Pope was sending Catholics to America that resulted in strict immigration laws the consequences of which we are dealing with today. There were conspiracy theories with the red scare in the 1930’s and again in the 1950’s, the anti-nuclear energy movement where folks bought into the conspiracy that government scientists were lying about nuclear and since the 1950’s the on going conspiracy government scientists were lying about aliens, it just goes on and on. This is only the latest wave. But somehow things seem to workout.
And the 1910 Halley’s Comet hysteria, too. Snake-oil salesmen made good money selling cyanide antidotes to people who thought gasses in the comet’s tail was going to kill all life on Earth.
Sadly, this is nothing new.
https://archive.macleans.ca…
I know. And even seven hundred years or so ago, there were pogroms over the idiotic idea that jews were causing the plague. More recently, in the twentieth century, my father was heavily involved in project Mogul, so you don’t need to remind me of UFO conspiracy theories and Roswell. And, yes, it does work out. People get hurt along the way, but those conspiracy theories eventually die their own death before _too_ many people die because of them. But somehow that doesn’t comfort me. In any case, my point was that swaying an election doesn’t require 50% of the voters to believe this sort of nonsense. A few percent, if they are undecided/swing voters could do it.
I would like to see a full up Vulnerability and Risk Assessment to see how the best numbers fall out, and exactly what mediation is required.
The better the numbers are developed and supported with real scientific analysis makes it all the more difficult for “conspiracy mongers” to make a point.
Not necessarily. I’ve seen things like that summarized out of context.
This is actually a great argument for sending humans to Mars first, along with a biology lab where you can analyze the samples in-situ. It may endanger a few astronauts, but it ensures no Martian sample will reach Earth until it is thoroughly analyzed, a good tradeoff.
I just assumed you’d treat any samples brought back to Earth as a Level 4 Biohazard until you’ve had time to examine them in a secure lab for a few months. Do that 2 or 3 times to be sure there’s no life in them, and then you are probably golden.
Actually, that is basically what Dr. Hubbard said since Ebola is an example of a Level 4 Biohazard. So treating the Mars Samples as a Level 4 Biohazard is treating them like Ebola.
I suspect the reporter asked for an example of what a Level 4 Biohazard is and the professor gave him the first one that came to mind. Then, this being The Sun, they ran with it as a headline to get folks to read the article.
Scott Hubbard is not a newbie. He should have used his brains a little bit and not used an example like Ebola in the middle of an academic. The original interview with the Ebola comparison was published by Stanford University so there’s no confusion as to whether he said it or not.
If he’s that experienced than maybe that is the message he wanted to put out about the sample return. Do you know if he expressed any public views on risks associated with it before this report?
Unfortunately, the track record for planetary sample returns isn’t good. Three planetary, robotic missions have landed samples back on Earth (of the solar wind, a comet and an asteroid.) One of the three crashed and some of the sample containers broke open. I think there is a contradiction between treating martian samples as a level 4 biohazard and avoiding the risk of a crash when they are returned to Earth. Someone will have to address that.
The type of hysteria this ill-advised hype would cause was dramatized *brilliantly* in Robert Zubrin’s Mars novel ‘First Landing’ 20 years ago. The out-of-context hyperbole from Dr Hubbard flirts with irresponsibility.
Two words… Andromeda Strain
No. Not at all.
Not quite. Fantastic book & movie but the crystalline infectious agent in Crichton’s The Andromeda Strain was brought to Earth’s surface by a military satellite (Project Scoop) intentionally designed to go find possible alien infectious agents for application in biological warfare research.
Using the name of a technothriller that’s almost as well established in the popular culture with ‘bad’ as Ebola is would be just as serious a mistake. Hype or Shock reporting versus measured informative scientific reporting.
That’s why I’m not a reporter. Just a commenter. Cheers!
Its a good argument for making the human trip to Mars a one-way colonization trip instead of a round-trip.
The popular storyline in fiction is that some “space contagion”
The popular sci-fi storyline is that some “space contagion” would get is because we wouldn’t have an immunity to it because it’s new. But I’ve read expert opinions that take the opposite tack…namely that a contagion originally from outside our biosphere wouldn’t I know how to infect us.
I’ve heard both ideas, as well as a third. Organisms (at least on Earth) produce wastes, and sometimes they can be toxic. The production of oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere, when bacteria and algae started photosynthesis is a common example. If there were some new species of bacteria introduced on Earth, there could be a problem from whatever waste products it generated, even if it wasn’t infectious.
I hadn’t heard that one. It’s good.
I’ll embellish it by saying that it is introduced on purpose as an alien terraforming tech. Strictly for sci-fi of course. 😉