• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Science: Critics Skeptical as Flu Scientists Argue for Controversial H7N9 Studies

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Science DOI: 10.1126/science.341.6146.601

News & Analysis

Avian Influenza
Critics Skeptical as Flu Scientists Argue for Controversial H7N9 Studies

David Malakoff





Flu scientists are hoping to vaccinate themselves against another outbreak of a crippling controversy.

In a letter published this week by Nature and Science (see p. 612), 22 researchers make their case for launching potentially risky experiments with the H7N9 avian influenza virus, which emerged earlier this year in China and which some scientists fear could spark a deadly human pandemic. The scientists, who mostly work in U.S.-funded labs, also detail the safety and security precautions that they would take to prevent the possibly dangerous viruses they create from escaping from the lab?or falling into the hands of terrorists. In an accompanying online letter (http://scim.ag/fluHHS), officials from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) write that they will require extra review of especially problematic studies.

The communiqu?, the authors say, is intended to head off the kind of global controversy that in 2011 engulfed researchers conducting experiments with another avian flu virus, H5N1, halting certain studies for more than a year (Science, 22 June 2012, p. 1494). Critics charged that those studies?which involved engineering new H5N1 strains able to move between mammals, and not just birds?carried risks that outweighed any benefits and had too little public oversight.

?With H5N1, we were criticized for not being transparent,? says virologist Ron Fouchier of Erasmus MC in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, one of the scientists at the center of the H5N1 storm and a lead author of the 7 August letter. ?So this time we want to be sure the public understands what we want to do before we do it, why we need to do it, and how we are going to do it safely.?

...

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2013/08/07/science.341.6146.601.full
 
Back
Top Bottom