(Image source: Wikimedia Commons)

BY EVAN BUSH

Influenza virus H5N1. Could be the mysterious compound in a bad sci-fi movie, right? Well, that might not be far off -- some claim if the lab-created H5N1 pathogen were released it would spell a global flu pandemic and change history. And one scientist wanted to release its recipe. 

But first, New Scientist gives us some background on the dangerous pathogen. 

“H5N1 bird flu can kill humans, but has not gone pandemic because it cannot spread easily among us. That might change: five mutations in just two genes have allowed the virus to spread between mammals in the lab. What's more, the virus is just as lethal despite the mutations.” 

Through experiments, scientist Ron Fouchier discovered how the virus could become ‘airborne’ -- and easier to contract. He wanted to publish a paper that would detail his work-- but before he could, his findings sparked an ethical debate in the science community. 

Science Insider explains: “Fouchier's paper... [has] triggered an intense debate about the limits of scientific freedom and that could portend changes in the way U.S. researchers handle so-called dual-use research: studies that have a potential public health benefit but could also be useful for nefarious purposes like biowarfare or bioterrorism.”

That’s when the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity stepped in -- to Fouchier’s chagrin -- asking him to redact key information from his papers to prevent anyone from replicating the work. NPR talks to the board’s chair, who says...

“You know this is a watershed moment, in the sense that I don’t think any researcher has been ever asked not to publish important results like this before.”

But that’s not sitting well with some folks -- The BBC talks to two flu experts who argue that it’s not terrorism, or letting the virus out of its laboratory cage we should be worried about -- 

Said a London School of Medicine Professor: “The biggest risk with bird flu is from the virus itself. We should forget about bio terrorism and concentrate on Mother Nature.”

And an Imperial College of London Professor:  “This is important scientific information which researchers need to know about. It needs to be scrutinised by all of those working in the field.” 

And the Washington Post writes, because the US government and the National Institutes of Health funded the project project -- calls for its censorship are troublesome. 

“[The recommendation] puts the federal government in a distinctly controversial and embarrassing position. It calls for a limit on the free exchange of information — something viewed as anathema by many scientists. It also suggests there was not sufficient forethought about what might happen if the government-funded experiments actually worked.”