Bird flu 'censorship' decision

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Bird flu 'censorship' decision


www.bbc.co.uk

A group which advises the US government on biosecurity has explained why it wants two research papers on H5N1 bird flu to be censored.

Two scientific research teams have modified influenza strains to create mutant avian influenza viruses that can be transmitted efficiently between mammals. In one case, the virus remained highly pathogenic.

The US National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) said publishing the work in full holds significant potential for harm.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.nature.com




posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Great, now we know that researchers indeed have created a new strain that is highly pathogenic, and to keep us safe they will keep their information closed to the vest.

I for one, don't find that very comforting..

Am I overreacting? maybe, but somehow I just don't have the trust that this can or will be kept out of the hands of those who would love nothing better than to use this as a weapon.

When will they stop creating dangerous microbes?

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



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 

As long as there is someone with enough money, to pay someone with the knowledge, and no morals...these horrors will continue to be made. I don't like it at all. It has the potential to wipe us out as a species on this planet.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


Wow, for such a short article it sure is full of baloney, imo. Here are just a few that stood out to me:


Two scientific research teams have modified influenza strains to create mutant avian influenza viruses that can be transmitted efficiently between mammals. In one case, the virus remained highly pathogenic


Bold emphasis mine, because at the end of the article it then states:

In it, he explains in more detail why they have recommended redaction for the paper in press at Nature even though the modified H5N1 virus that it describes is not highly pathogenic.

Again, bold emphasis mine.... so which is it? Or are they talking about 2 different things and I missed it??

Natural mutation of viruses is normal, it happens, it's how they survive. There is nothing really that we can do about that other than to react to minimize the outbreak. However, why do they feel the need to force the mutation in the name of 'science' only to get nervous about the monster they created? Just because we have ability to do so, does not always mean we should. Sometimes it's best to just leave well enough alone.

~MMIMO



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


obvious censorship, the intent to use these as weapons is also obvious

publication of the data would speed up finding an effective treatment

this biosec group and it's employers don't want that





 
5

log in

join