A
scientist studying the H5N1 avian influenza virus holds up an
infected
duck: Is America's fear of terror inhibiting vital research
into
cures - or is scientific censorship needed to prevent an even
deadlier
strain of the virus from getting into terrorist hands?
La Stampa, Italy
Deadly 'Virus' of
Censorship Terrorizes the White House
"The
long wave of terrorism that began ten years ago with the collapse of the Twin
Towers has resulted in damage to a fundamental principle: the free flow of
information in the world of scientific research. This is the first time that a
political authority has asked scientific journals to exercise self-censorship."
H5N1 avian influenza virus particles: Researchers in the U.S. and The Netherlands have come up with a way to make the virus even deadlier - posing the threat that terrorists might get hold of it. But White House instructions to squelch publication of the research threatens to undermine the free flow of information that scientists depend on.
The long wave of terrorism
that began ten years ago with the collapse of the Twin Towers has resulted in
damage to a fundamental principle: the free flow of information in the world of
scientific research. Science and Nature were
unable to accept an invitation to publish the details of experiments that could
have led to the production of biological weapons employable by terrorist groups.
The request for the two
scientific journals not to publish was made by the National
Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, a body that is an arm of the U.S. National
Institutes of Health (NIH). This happened just weeks after an announcement that
American and Dutch laboratories had succeeded in modifying H5N1 avian influenza
A, making it extremely aggressive. Four genetic "finishing touches" did
the trick. An epidemic caused by this modified virus would become a global
tragedy.
This is the first time that a
political authority has asked scientific journals to exercise self-censorship. Bruce
Alberts, editor of Science, a journal with a circulation of 140,000 that
go to members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the
world's largest scientific society, has expressed his readiness to accept the restrictions
on publishing, but only if the government creates a system to provide the redacted
information to scientists around the world who need it.
The triangle of politics, science
and information is a delicate one. The free flow of information is a
cornerstone of pure science. During the 20th century, this is a principle that
was suspended only during World War II in the field of nuclear physics, when Nazis
and Allies engaged in a race for the atomic bomb. In the most critical areas of
research, confidentiality dragged on during the years of the Cold War. Suffering
as a result were scientists in general, and they did what they could to
overcome that censorship.
Today, international
collaboration in particle physics, space activities and controlled fusion are
the rule. In the field of genetics, however, it was biologists themselves who
agreed to a moratorium on such experiments at the Asilomar Conference
in 1975 when they showed the power of recombinant DNA technology - the basis of
genetic modification of living organisms.
The inspiration for the moratorium
was Paul Berg, 1980 Nobel laureate in chemistry. The moratorium, which was signed
by 140 researchers, generated a greater sense of responsibility but also a
noticeable impact on the biotech industry, where the line between pure research
and business is a very thin one. It was, in any case, the autonomous choice of
the scientific community at that particular time. It was neither a political
imposition nor censorship, but the suspension of their experiments as a shared
regulation.
Posted
by WORLDMEETS.US
The request to practice self-censorship
is understandable in a nation as wounded by terrorism as the United States. But
it hasn't failed to stir controversy among scientists themselves. Even if
applied, there is doubt as to whether self-censorship actually works. Techniques
to modify viruses are widely known and are easily applied by people in unreliable
countries like North Korea. What is discovered in the United States today will
be found in the Far East tomorrow. On the other hand, since the same techniques
also apply to research on vaccines and drugs, self-censorship may slow research
into useful applications. In short, once again, censorship risks making an own
goal [in European football, this means scoring a goal for the other side].
