7 November 2002 17:00 GMT

by Bea Perks

The presidents of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the UK's Royal Society have joined forces to remind researchers of their vital role in preventing worldwide distribution of potential bioweapon technology.

Bruce Alberts of the NAS and the Royal Society's Robert May, writing in tomorrow's edition of Science, urge researchers, whether in academia, government research facilities, or industry, to "take responsibility for helping to prevent the potential misuses of their work."

The article follows recommendations from the Royal Society for an international set of guidelines to regulate research in sensitive areas, and is timed to coincide with the next meeting of signatories to the 1972 Biological and Toxic Weapons Convention, to be held in Geneva from the 11th to the 22nd of November.

"This month's meeting reminds us that our nations' best scientists must support policy makers in their efforts to make progress toward measures that will counteract the threat from advances in weapons technology," write Alberts and May.

There has been a massive increase in funding for research into combating the threat of bioterrorism since September 11, 2001, they note, but there is also a need for increased understanding of the spread of potential bioweaponry.

Governments must have access to leading scientists in different specialties, they stress, to define clear boundaries between "classified" and "unclassified" research. These boundaries must then be regulated internationally to fit in with the "truly international" nature of cutting-edge science.

Alberts and May acknowledge the difficulties in balancing security with scientific openness, a vital component of scientific research. Life scientists need to take responsibility for helping to prevent misuse of their research, they conclude, "while being careful to preserve the vitality of their disciplines as required to contribute to human welfare."

Send us your comments for publication.

Sign up for BioMedNet News weekly email alerts.

Printer ready version
E-mail article to a friend

 

See also:
Therapeutic challenges posed by bacterial bioterrorism threats
[Review]
Peter H. Gilligan
Current Opinion in Microbiology, 2002, 5:5:489-495

Bioterrorism: responding to an emerging threat
[Opinion]
Margaret A. Hamburg
Trends in Biotechnology, 2002, 20:7:296-298

Bioterrorism: how well are we protected?
[Letters]  Vadim V. Demidov
Trends in Biotechnology, 2002, 20:5:192

New approaches and old problems in the shadow of bioterrorism
[Meeting report]
John M. Leong, Nikhat Parveen and Jon D. Goguen
Trends in Microbiology, 2002, 10:3:112-114
 

Printer ready version
E-mail article to a friend