Scientists debate terrorist risk
A meeting of leading scientists will today meet to discuss how best to prevent cutting edge research falling into the hands of terrorists.
In the post 9/11 world, politicians are increasingly worried about the prospect of biological and chemical terrorism. Incidences so far, such as those involving anthrax and ricin, have been relatively “low tech”, but scientists are concerned that cutting edge research in the wrong hands could be exceptionally harmful.
Today’s joint meeting of scientists and policy makers – hosted by the Royal Society and Wellcome Trust – will examine what measures can be taken to reduce the risk of misuse, without risking the potential benefits of new research.
The report from the meeting will be submitted to the Foreign Office as part of its preparation from the 2005 meeting of the Biological Weapons Convention. Particular emphasis is likely on codes of conduct for scientists.
Professor Julia Higgins, vice-president of the Royal Society, said: “Scientists have a responsibility to minimise the possibility of their work being misused. At the moment cutting-edge work such as targeted modification of viruses is probably well beyond the capabilities and resources of those who wish to cause harm.
“However, as the technologies progress these processes are likely to become cheaper and easier to perform. What we want to look at in this meeting is whether it is possible to monitor the flow of information into the public domain without unduly hindering scientific progress and how we can raise awareness with scientists that their work may be open to misuse.”
Dr Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, added: “SARS and bird influenza are recent examples of human vulnerability to new and dangerous natural infections. Responsible international research conducted in an open fashion is essential to understand and find effective vaccines and treatments for infections such as these. While it will always be important to do what we can to minimise the risk of research being used for evil purposes, we must guard against inhibiting the vast majority of medical research which is carried out for the benefit of mankind.”
