If you are a microbial forensic scientist, you investigate crime scenes for evidence that may have been used in an act of bioterrorism. Bioterrorists release pathogens, like viruses, into a population to cause outbreaks. These pathogens can then spread very quickly through a population, causing a number of deaths, and an even greater number of infections. As a microbial forensic scientist, you won’t know what material, virus, or other toxin has been released, so you will study how that toxin spreads through the population by looking at how many people are infected, what rate the toxin is spreading, and what demographics the infected population have in common (age, gender, race, location). You might also plot the spread of the toxin on a map to see how it is spreading throughout the larger community. Through all of this data gathering, you are doing what every forensic scientist does: telling the story of who (and in this case, what) is responsible for this crime. Imagine that your team is investigating a bioterrorism event that released an infectious disease in a large city. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have already responded and brought the spread under control, but they need you to study their data and see if you can use it to learn more about the person or group behind this attack.

Step One: The CDC sends you data about the incidence, or newly diagnosed cases of this disease. You are going to use it to look at the rate of new infection cases to see when this greater infection occurred.

Week 1: 500 infected
Week 2: 1500 infected
Week 3: 13,500 infected
Week 4: 40,000 infected
Week 5: 42,500 infected
Week 6: 43,000 infected

Plot this data on a graph showing the growth in number of infected people over time. You can use the graphing function of a spreadsheet creator, like Microsoft Excel, or an online graph creator. Use ‘Weeks’ to label your x-axis and ‘New Cases’ as your y-axis.
Look at your graph. What does it tell you about the disease? Is the rate of newly infected cases speeding up or slowing down? (Compare the slope or angle of your line over time: Does it get steeper or flatter?)
At what time was the incidence rate the fastest?

Step Two: Now you will break down this population data and look at the demographics of who was most affected by this attack. Check out this CDC data:

65 percent of all cases are above age 60.
30 percent are below age 3.
85 percent live in the city center, which has a population density of 10,000 people per square mile.
12 percent live in the main suburb, which has a population density of 3,000 people per square mile.

Based on this data, which segments of the population were most at risk for the disease? What other characteristics of these groups of people make them at risk for any major infectious disease?
Since the disease spread the most rapidly among certain age groups, what are some likely places this toxin was released? Where might you go to see if you can find more evidence that could lead to identifying the terrorist?
Based on where this infectious disease struck hardest, what environmental factors did the terrorist consider when deciding where to release the agent? (2-3 sentences)

Step Three: You built a very strong case with your data, came up with a plan of where to investigate for more evidence, and you were actually able to come up with a DNA sample that you should now be able to use to narrow down your list of suspects by predicting your suspect’s appearance. This process is called DNA phenotyping.

DNA phenotyping is different from DNA profiling. In profiling, DNA evidence from the crime scene is matched against DNA evidence from a suspect. In phenotyping, DNA evidence from the crime scene is used to narrow down a suspect pool by predicting appearance. For example, DNA evidence may predict that the suspect is a white male with red hair. Suspects who don’t match this phenotype (appearance) would then be eliminated.

Research DNA phenotyping and make a list of pros and cons. What are its possible advantages? What might go wrong? Would it change investigations for the better, or create unfair bias? Think about how this technology would impact forensics, law enforcement, and the public in general. List at least three arguments for and three arguments against it. (1 sentence/phrase each)
Choose a side from your list and develop an argument. Are you for or against DNA phenotyping? Why? Write at least three paragraphs (3+ sentences each). Don’t forget to address and rebut points from the opposite side. Be persuasive! At the end of your essay, provide a brief conclusory statement and cite your sources in standard format.