In trying to determine the mutations that allow the bird flu to be passed to humans, researchers in the Netherlands and at the University of Wisconsin engineered a potentially more deadly form of the disease that was easily passed among ferrets, the mammal model used in flu vaccine research most closely related to humans.
The laboratory-engineered strain has raised concerns that the virus could escape the lab and infect millions of people or wind up in the hands of terrorists. Furthermore, questions were raised about whether the research should be published and whether it should be conducted in the first place. The New York Times published an article stating that the research was halted for 60 days to address these concerns.
The potential dangers associated with this research are evident. The benefits, however, need to be made clear. The research has the potential to determine the factors that allow viruses to be spread from animals to humans, become transmissible, and cause pandemics. Publication of such research could accelerate the rate of flu vaccination research. But, should we really publish a blueprint for creating a deadly virus? This is one of the few times in history that publication of biomedical research has been delayed. In this case, however, such a delay is necessary. Scientists must be aware of and consider the potential consequences of their work.
In my opinion, the research should be conducted in a Biosafety Level 4 laboratory [rather than a BSL3 lab where it is currently carried out], with greater security and oversight, and the potential risks need to be addressed immediately. That is, can the vaccine infect human cells? Furthermore, publication of the research methods should be limited. The two most prominent scientific journals, Science and Nature, are already taking these steps.
Is flu vaccine research necessary? Yes. Are there vital concerns which must be addressed? Absolutely. Is there need for complete public panic? Not yet. At what point is it it unethical to continue dangerous research? As of right now, it remains to be determined.
What do you think?
Informative commentary on important research and its ethical implications. Your approach was judicious, and convincing on the need for discussion, clear sense of the benefits vs. risks, and the highest level of security.
ReplyDelete