[Skip to Content]

The Upstate Ethicist looks at bird flu research: Should science be shared this way?

“The nature of science in general has been one of openness and sharing, even before we called science ‘science,‘ back to Plato and Aristotle,” says Gregory Eastwood MD, professor of bioethics and humanities at Upstate. That philosophy pervades science today -- for the most part.

When scientists at two laboratories tinkered with a bird flu virus to make it more contagious, they sparked debate over whether to share details in scientific journals. Some criticized the value of the research itself. Others wanted to keep information out of the hands of terrorists and amateur biologists who might recreate the mutated virus and release it on purpose or by accident.

Not all science is open. The theory of the earth revolving around the sun was suppressed in the 1600s for religious and political reasons, for example, and the atom bomb was developed in secret during World War II. In the case of bird flu research, once revisions were made, the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity supported publication.

Eastwood reminds us that science is ethically neutral. It‘s how the science is used and the moral consequences of the uses that may raise ethical concerns.

Top