It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bioterror fears halt research on mutant bird flu

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Bioterror fears halt research on mutant bird flu


www.bbc.co.uk

Scientists who created a potentially more deadly bird flu strain have temporarily stopped their research amid fears it could be used by terrorists.

In a letter published in Science & Nature the teams call for an "international forum" to debate the risks & value of the studies.

A senior US health official says "not everyone needs to know how to make a lethal virus".

Two scientific journals are trying to work out with the US government how to make the data accessible to "responsible scientists".
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   
A moment of sanity perhaps? Stepping back from the brink of virtually advertising how to conduct mass bioterrorism?

The WHO has been arguing against limiting access to the research. Others have spoken out boldly concerning the dangers presented by open publication:


One critic of the studies, Richard Ebright, a biologist at Rutgers University, told Science Insider that the letter "includes flatly false statements" making assurances about the safety of H1N1 research labs.

(Source: OP article)

Do you see this 60-day moratorium on publication as an opportunity to write to your representatives? Or do we just trust the WHO?..




www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   
I can see the argument for both sides.

One of the key advantages of any weapon stems from what the target doesn't know about it. The first castle to face field artillery (in its primitive stages) probably didn't think much of it until balls of iron the size of grapefruits started flying their way. And by then, it's too late to think of how to counter it.

The same with bio-weapons. By publicizing research, it makes it more difficult to develop covert, weaponized strains of pathogens.

Of course... the argument could easily be made that they can do this, anyway, and we don't need to be making instructional videos.

Honestly, I'm a little more privy to the idea of limiting the publication of this type of research than simply letting it all go out willy-nilly. But I can understand why people would want to have that kind of stuff publicized for transparency issues and in the spirit of discussion.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 



And by then, it's too late to think of how to counter it.

The same with bio-weapons. By publicizing research, it makes it more difficult to develop covert, weaponized strains of pathogens.

Forgive me, but are you not effectively saying that by allowing such research to be published unhindered you are giving carte blanche to big pharma to start the biological equivalent of an arms race? Now that you say it, "Follow the money" is a very possible explanation for this entire debacle.

But advocating the publication of the research is more akin to taking the latest R&D of LockheedMartin, handing it to every conceivable enemy on the planet, and saying: "Try it out; we've got the specs anyway — so no worries!"

Arguing it makes the world safer strains credulity. Admitting it's good for profits hits the mark. So how many people would die?..






edit on 21/1/12 by pause4thought because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Forget the being used by "terrorists" and accept the fact that a terror supporting regime could fund their own research into cooking up a super-bug like this or worse, and eventually supply it to terrorists, or infect them ( a "suicide bioterrorist") and have them spread that infection among a targeted population.

Evil will find a way....




posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by pause4thought
 


Which would be more costly.... Creating a uranium enrichment program, achieving the level of enrichment required to have the material (in sufficient quantities) to mass produce nuclear weapons (this could be in the 10s or hundreds of billions of dollars) or to fund research into chemical and bio-weapons research programs and create equally effective and dangerous weapons?

Perhaps doing both, one covertly, but known to be going on, the other... unknown... Nukes as a deterrent, defensive, and retaliatory weapons system only, chemical/bio-weapons as offensive weapons capabilities for use in proxy "terrorist" attacks...

Nah, no way that could possibly be happening... Right?




posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Research should continue under government scrutiny. The scientist working on this data should be able to continue research ... but not to give data on how to construe the virus. The reason for the study should be how to DEFEAT the virus strains that can come into existence ... or used as a Bio weapon.

Though some one using this as a Bio weapon would be VERY stupid. Not only would they decimate the population of the nation they wish to attack .. it would also decimate theirs.

Though i am sure they will be doing this regardless of public knowledge. We just wont know about it.
edit on 21-1-2012 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12

Though some one using this as a Bio weapon would be VERY stupid. Not only would they decimate the population of the nation they wish to attack .. it would also decimate theirs.


The way to make such a weapon a good alternative would be to have an exclusive vaccine/antidote/cure developed along with the "weapon"


Developing BOTH is a part of the process.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Hi My name is Thomas Hunter. catch my radio show weekly is @@@ on the am dial



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
Though some one using this as a Bio weapon would be VERY stupid. Not only would they decimate the population of the nation they wish to attack .. it would also decimate theirs.


That's why it is so badly needed at this time. Bird flu, schmird flu. It's better than SOPAs, Patriot Acts, etc. If it kills me, I won't have to worry about them; if it kills most everyone else, I won't have to worry about them. Win-win I'd say. No flu schmu is to continue this travesty of an existence.

So, keep in mind, trying to make it go away is NOT for out benefit.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by pause4thought
Or do we just trust the WHO?..


Never trust the WHO.



The World Health Organization said in a December statement that limiting access to
the research would harm an agreement between its members


Yep, thats important to them?



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Why Why Why are they going on about mutations on the bird flu. Didn't the Dutch scientists admit right out in the open to causing this new effective Bird Flu Creation.

Have they forgotten something.

I havn't!



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join