Abstract
deadly H5N1 strain of bird flu have occurred in Asia and the Middle East. Many labs worldwide — including ours — are trying to understand what makes the virus so virulent, and how to stop it. H5N1 research is thus a global issue, yet the entire research community seems to be following the advice of one country.
We are not questioning the unprecedented recommendations last month from the US National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) to remove key details from the methods and results sections of published papers, including our own, submitted to Science (see Nature 481, 9–10; 2012). But we do question whether it is appropriate to have one country dominate a discussion that has an impact on scientists and public-health officials worldwide. This discussion should include the perspective of people in regions where H5N1 has infected humans. Will the NSABB also advise on which international researchers and officials have the right to see the full papers, to help implement urgently needed surveillance and other intervention strategies?
It is not clear whether an international discussion would lead to different recommendations. [...] It is crucial that scientists and other experts are judged on their qualifications, not on their nationality. If the world is to accept the process, national-security officials cannot be allowed to dominate the discussion.
We are not questioning the unprecedented recommendations last month from the US National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) to remove key details from the methods and results sections of published papers, including our own, submitted to Science (see Nature 481, 9–10; 2012). But we do question whether it is appropriate to have one country dominate a discussion that has an impact on scientists and public-health officials worldwide. This discussion should include the perspective of people in regions where H5N1 has infected humans. Will the NSABB also advise on which international researchers and officials have the right to see the full papers, to help implement urgently needed surveillance and other intervention strategies?
It is not clear whether an international discussion would lead to different recommendations. [...] It is crucial that scientists and other experts are judged on their qualifications, not on their nationality. If the world is to accept the process, national-security officials cannot be allowed to dominate the discussion.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 257 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Journal | Nature |
| Volume | 481 |
| Issue number | 7381 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - 19 Jan 2012 |
