Council National Science Advisory for Biosecurity (NSABB) which asked scientists and journals redact key details in two explosive influenza documents, is also considering a call for a voluntary moratorium on the wider publication of similar studies while an international discussion is held to discuss how the field should continue.
Under such a moratorium, researchers flu would agree not to publish studies on the transmissibility of the strain of avian influenza H5N1 in mammals and not to submit data on these studies at scientific meetings.
NSABB chair Paul Keim of Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff said Science Insider he believes the gravity of the situation requires a thorough international consultation on the risks and benefits of these studies before other results are made public. "This is a moment Asilomar," he said, referring to a 1975 meeting in Asilomar, California, where, after the voluntary cessation of research, scientists have developed safety guidelines for working with the technology of the nascent recombinant DNA.
The idea of a voluntary moratorium NSABB is mentioned in a policy statement that says Keim was sent to Nature and Science , where two controversial papers are being studied; he hopes that newspapers will print with the papers. Keim said he is in favor of a moratorium itself, but the board has not yet voted on it. "We try to avoid calling a moratorium, but this is what it would be," he added.
Unlike Asilomar, the moratorium would most likely on the publication of data, not the conduct of the research itself, Keim said. It would last "maybe 3 months" and would not affect other types of influenza research. Studies on the genetic changes that make it more transmissible H5N1 virus in mammals, including both documents under consideration by Nature and Scienc e-are "in a category their own, "Keim said, because of the risk of a pandemic and the H5N1 mortality rate in humans, appears to be very high.
Keim said that other research groups already conduct similar studies and other results are likely to appear soon, in fact, a paper by researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, caught by surprise the panel during its deliberations when it was published online by the journal Virology ago a few weeks. (in this study, the researchers modified the H5N1 hemagglutinin gene that has made the virus easily transmissible between ferrets, but not nearly in since one of the teams that NSABB asked to redact results said he has witnessed.)
"We know there are many things out there," says Keim, "so I think it is important that we have a kind of cessation of communication in this area. "
NSABB has set up a special working group with an "aggressive program" for how to set up an international debate, which also involve the World Health Organization (WHO). "Our biggest fear is that it will be perceived as the United States tell the world what to do," he adds.
WHO would be the "only place it could find a credible home," says Edward Hammond, an activist in Austin, Texas, who has closely followed the WHO discussions on the search for smallpox and sharing of influenza strains' genetic sequences but the organization will be reluctant to take on another sensitive issue, Hammond predicted;. in the past, member countries like Brazil and Iran have strongly opposed the WHO participation . a security official participation of WHO could also take years, Hammond said, in a few months, "you can not do much more than make a group of people and make them a return."
That scientific flu accept new limits on their scientific freedom, even temporarily, remains to be seen. in recent days, the NSABB recommendations have sparked heated debate between virologists. the principal investigator on one of the teams, Ron Fouchier of Erasmus MC in Rotterdam, omitted key data from its study of H5N1 when it introduced during September 1 meeting in Malta because the issue was still under discussion, but he firmly believes that in the interest of public health, information should be made public and that it will eventually flee anyway. (Fouchier could not be reached for comment today.)
"I think scientists and journals will agree" to the idea, "maybe against the heart, "Keim said." a short-term moratorium will have only a small impact on the research process, and we hope that we can develop a broad consensus on where to go-just as they did in Asilomar. "
* This article has been corrected. the story said that NSABB "called" moratorium and the call "will" in the policy statement sent to Nature and Science . After the story was published, Keim contacted Science Insider to say that the statement mentions the possibility of a moratorium, and that it is in favor of one but the full board has not made such a recommendation and will review in the coming weeks. "I'm sorry if I miscommunicated with you on that," Keim said. The story and its title was changed to reflect this information.
0 Komentar