No extinction from bioterror – 5 reasons
Turchin 2014, Alexei Turchin is an expert of global catastrophes and a Reasearch Fellow in Foundation "Science for longer life". Nick Bostrom and Michael Anissimov also helped Turchin with his paper. Nick Bostrom is a Professor of Philosophy at Oxford University, the Director of the Future of Humanity Institute, and the Director of the Programme on the Impacts of Future Technology. Michael Anissimov is a writer for Popular Mechanics, Popular Science, and other popular news outlets. (“Risks of human extinction in the XXI century”, http://www.scribd.com/doc/6250354/Risks-of-human-extinction-in-the-XXI-century, 2014) Kerwin
1) Biological attack could be survived in underground shelters. The United States and other countries could substantially upgrade their shelter infrastructure to preserve a major percentage of the affected population after biological warfare or terrorism. 2) The first serious catastrophe connected with a leak of dangerous pathogens results in so draconian control measures, enough to prevent the creation or distribution of dangerous bioprinters. This would require a government substantially more authoritarian than what we have now. 3) Al and molecular manufacturing are developed first, and serve as a shield against bioweapons before they are developed. (Highly unlikely as these technologies seem much more difficult than bioprinters.) 4) Nuclear war or other disaster interrupts the development of biotechnologies. Obviously, depending on a disaster to mitigate another disaster is not the best strategy. 5) It is possible that biotechnologies will allow us to create something like a universal vaccine or artificial immune system before biological minilaboratories become a serious problem.