Bad Bugs Bookclub Meeting Report: The Andromeda Strain by Michael Crichton

The aim of the Bad Bugs Book Club is to get people interested in science, specifically microbiology, by reading books (novels) in which infectious disease forms some part of the story. We also try to associate books, where possible, with some other activity or event, to widen interest, and to broaden impact.

We have established a fairly fluid membership of our bookclub through our website In The Loop (www.sci­eng.mmu.ac.uk/intheloop), but we hope to encourage others to join, to set up their own bookclub, suggest books and accompanying activities to us, and give feedback about the books that they have read, using our website as the focus for communication.

The Andromeda strain was the first ‘techno­thriller’, written in 1969. In these novels, the technology is the focus of the book, thus detailed descriptions of equipment, procedures and the like are relished by fans. The book itself deliberately adds elements of ‘reality’, including references (confirmed as being fictitious by a diligent bookclub member!), and extracts from reports.

We were fortunate to be joined at our meeting by David Kirby from the University of Manchester. His research interest focuses on science and the media, and particularly the cinema, thus he was able to offer much relevant background and other information during our discussions.

Some members had also watched the 1972 movie, and the 2008 television miniseries, so we were also able to compare the various presentations of the story.

Book Club discussion points

There were a number of discussion points raised.

1. Reading the book. The book was easy to read, quickly, and the plot drives the reader to finish. Virtually every chapter ends with a cliffhanger noting an error that a character in the story has made. It is certainly preferable to read the book before watching the films. Members commented on the lack of dimensionality of the characters. The focus was almost entirely on events occurring within the somewhat claustrophobic underground laboratory. In the novel, all characters were male; in the first film, one character was female, and in the (4h) miniseries, two characters were female, most were very attractive, and romance, family loyalties and personal histories were introduced into the plot. Human error was responsible for most of the problems encountered in the novel. David commented that this was a recurring theme of Crichton’s work (eg Jurassic Park). He was only a medical student when he wrote the novel: he apparently did no research for it. He liked to play on his scientific expertise in medical anthropology, but if challenged, his riposte would be that it was only fiction. Despite the huge popularity of his novels, his popularity as an individual decreased latterly due to his controversial stance on issues such as climate change.

2. Contemporary issues. The Cold War, and thus atomic bombs would have been very current, and germ warfare would fit well with the paranoia of the time (as now). The film of the book was made in 1970 (released in 1972). Another film, made in 2008 is more watchable (presentation, style), but perhaps less useful in terms of hard science discussion points. References to Iraq (‘we would never take such action without irrefutable evidence’…) and Korea (as nuclear threat) are included. New science/ideas such as wormholes are added to the plot, so that the infection has been sent back from the future to enable a preventive strategy to be developed. The solution comes from microorganisms associated with deep sea vents, which would be destroyed by deep sea mining, so there was yet another story regarding environmentalist protesters and pollution. Germ warfare, and the uncontrolled investigations initiated through the Scoop project, are of relevance in both films, and in the novel.

3. Differences between novel and films. Apart from the different ‘enemy’ (Russia, Korea, Iraq), there were other key differences between the novel and the two movies. There are no famous stars in the 1972 film (and few in the 2008 miniseries), and its production is reminiscent of science fiction of the time – Thunderbirds, Lost in Space etc – with occasionally extremely artificial­looking equipment. The 1972 film plot follows the book very closely, reproducing some of the (now) low­tech computer printouts featured in the book, although it omits some aspects that might unnecessarily complicate the story. Some slow sequences were reminiscent of the movie 2001 – a production designer worked on both films. There are also more clear resolutions to the end of the risk posed by the Andromeda strain. In the novel, it mutates to an ineffective form (but risks of future mutations are not mentioned). In the 1972 film, the ‘supercolony cloud’ is dispersed via cloud seeding, and falls into the alkaline ocean, which destroys it. In the miniseries, the deep sea microorganism is used to kill the Andromeda strain (but a culture is saved in a satellite in case needed for future germ warfare). The ‘epilogue’ of the book was again noted by the bookclub as being somewhat brief and over­generalised (as in previous books – Dorian and Year of Wonders). However, some form of epilogue was necessary in all three versions to explain the final outcome. The treatment of animals and the baby in the 1972 film was surprising – it is unusual nowadays to see such realistic animal deaths (humane advice was provided), and the baby seemed very distressed in parts. In the miniseries, there were no visuals where such treatment was apparent, and the bodies of the animals were very unrealistic. The time period allocated for self­destruction of the laboratory increased from 3 to 5 and then 10 minutes, presumably to allow for increasingly complex issues to obstruct one of the heroes from saving the day: from curare darts (!), and lasers, to a nuclear pool.

4. Technology. Some of the technologies mentioned have developed into commonplace procedures, or subjects of interest in the present day, eg triangulation orientation on the first few pages (satnavs?); ‘....machine would not, of course, give the sequence of aminoacids’ p200; microsurgery, robotics, novel textiles, palmprint identification, touch sensitive screens. Explanation and procedures for transmission electron microscopy are accurate, but the limitation of not having 3D stands out – were scanning electron microscopes available in 1969? It is rather endearing to read about paper printouts from computers.

Although the technology text is generally clearly explained, some sections are slightly annoying:

P220 ‘the black rock was not rock at all, but some kind of material similar to earthly organic life. It was akin to plastic’. When the plastic on the plane was destroyed, it was described as a skin­like polymer. The polymer gaskets in the isolation facility were also destroyed, triggering the atomic bomb that would have fed the microorganisms and enabled growth and more mutation. The total removal of all tissue from the bones of the pilot was described but not linked to any activity of the microorganisms. It is noted in the book that the damage would not have been so great if the polymer on a car had been destroyed, but if the airborne microorganisms could damage one plane so quickly, why were no other vehicles affected?

P227 ‘in three dimensions it is probably a hexagonal slab, like a piece of tile. Eight sided, with each face a hexagon (?)

P277. The resolution is so quick. The agent mutates from killing in three seconds (we found this difficult to accept) to eating plastic (rationale? Back to black rock? Why was only one plane affected?) to being avirulent (not dangerous), but presumably it could still multiply (growth conditions?) since it was re­dispersing. Transmission was a bit vague generally – ‘it will migrate back out of the atmosphere, since there is too much oxygen down here’

5. Errors. The group generally were unable to accept the extremely rapid death. Haematologists amongst us questioned blood being turned to powder. The cleaning of bones by the microorganisms that were simultaneously eating plastic was not explained. The use of acid to ‘raise’ the pH was noticed, as was a bacterium with a nucleus. Why were the survivors rescued from the town not isolated during the helicopter flight? 6. Microbiology. The novel provides ample opportunity to explore aspects of microbiology. More up to date examples could be provided by students in discussion.

Is it jargon? The microbiology on p52

The development of antibiotic resistance – presage! p62

The appearance of TSEs (prions) as non­autoclavable agents, resistant to many things p118

Virulence determinants p120

Microorganisms as conquerors of the earth p122.

Microorganisms on meteorites p130

Origin of microorganisms on rockets, satellites etc p132

Culture media p163

Airborne transmission aetiology p166

Commensals as more successful than pathogens p168

Cells and tissues p200

Mathematics of uncontrolled growth of bacteria p247

Procedures used to identify an unknown species (transmission, visualisation, culture and identification)

Drug discovery and limitations p266

Secrecy, bioterrorism, science, politics, continuation of research, p288

7. Overall, the book was one of the more heavily science­orientated of those read. There were some provocative and stimulating points raised. The group particularly enjoyed the description of the significance of human time to time as ‘experienced’ by a rock. If a rock were ‘alive’, its lifespan would be so long in comparison to that of human existence, that we could never assess any changes associated with its ‘life’. Comparisons could be made with Hot Zone regarding decontamination procedures. The plot lacked flesh in terms of characterisation, but many aspects of microbiology in particular and science in general are presented that can be discussed by scientists and non­scientists alike.

Joanna Verran