Science and censorship: the deadly H5N1 paper debate

The mutated strain of H5N1 avian influenza has been described by the scientist who helped create it as “probably one of the most dangerous viruses you can make”.

And now the journals Science and Nature are seriously considering removing parts of the paper that describe the methodology and specific viral mutations of the virus after a request was made by the U.S. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) to do so.

But such a case of clear scientific censorship has caused some consternation among other researchers.

“I am not convinced that withholding scientific know-how will prevent the highly unlikely scenario of misuse of information, but I am worried that it may stunt our progress towards the improved control of this infectious disease,” said Professor Wendy Barclay, Chair in Influenza Virology, Imperial College, London.

Others have expressed concern about the implications of the research falling into the ‘wrong hands,’ but stress that the restricted details are still important for other researchers to help prevent deadly outbreaks of influenza.

“Clearly, this kind of research needs to be conducted using appropriate security and precautions, with consideration of how any published findings could be manipulated by those with malicious intent, or lead to an accidental release of a dangerous pathogen,” said Dr Jake Dunning and Prof Peter Openshaw, Centre for Respiratory Infection, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, in a statement.

“It is equally important, however, that scientific knowledge is allowed to progress if we are to optimise preparedness for potential outbreaks of avian flu and other pathogens.”

The editor-in-chief of Nature, Dr Philip Campbell, has stated that Nature is in consultation with the NSABB about how to proceed.

“We have noted the unprecedented NSABB recommendations that would restrict public access to data and methods and recognise the motivation behind them. It is essential for public health that the full details of any scientific analysis of flu viruses be available to researchers.

“We are discussing with interested parties how, within the scenario recommended by NSABB, appropriate access to the scientific methods and data could be enabled.”

The research was conducted by virologist Ron Fouchier of Erasmus Medical Center in the Netherlands and details a specifically mutated strain of H5N1 that is easily transmissible between ferrets, which closely mimic the human immune response.

The concern is that the information on how to produce this virus could be used by bioterrorists to produce a pandemic strain which, if released into the wild, could result in millions of deaths.

However, the information could also be used by other researchers to better understand how H5N1 could mutate in natural conditions and how it could be combated should it do so.

Science editor-in-chief, Dr Bruce Alberts, has stated that Science is taking the NSABB request “very seriously” but also wants to ensure the relevant information is made available to genuine researchers.

“Our response will be heavily dependent upon the further steps taken by the U.S. government to set forth a written, transparent plan to ensure that any information that is omitted from the publication will be provided to all those responsible scientists who request it, as part of their legitimate efforts to improve public health and safety,” he said in a statement.

The issue raises broad concerns over censorship in scientific publishing, which is predicated on the open sharing of information between researchers, offset against public security issues.