censoring science

[Pieter]

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/09/dutch-court-affirms-limit-publishing-h5n1-findings

A Dutch court had ruled that future research, similar tot Fouchier's H5N1 work, will neef an export permit before publishing.

This entire case is developing in such a wierde direction. Who else is keeping an eye on the effect of last years NSABB report?

http://news.sciencemag.org/people-events/2012/03/breaking-news-nsabb-reverses-position-flu-papers

It concluded that the publication should nog be blocked. However, the recommendations weer the exact oppositie: censorship of science and restricted access to scientific information (in other word: the use of sciencetific knowledge as an political instrument).

Is anyone witnessing the same development in other countries than Holland? This ruling could have devastating effects on the Dutch virology field of research

[Marn]

It is bad to censore, but in that case it was about dangerous bacteria. So I guess it is acceptable. I wouldn't want those informations in the wrong hands.

[Brian Degger]

Its more likely that it stops the knowledge getting into the right hands. 

--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups DIYbio group. To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/diybio?hl=en
Learn more at www.diybio.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to diybio+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to diy...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/diybio/b59ddb0f-7c3a-4d48-817a-a0e10cfbe6fa%40googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Cathal Garvey]

Agreed. Also, define "wrong hands". Pop quiz; the entities with the
largest stockpiles of advanced biological warfare agents are: ____
(Hint: Not civilians, and not imaginary terrorists)

On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:59:25 +0100
Brian Degger <brian....@gmail.com> wrote:

> Its more likely that it stops the knowledge getting into the right
> hands. On 11 Oct 2013 15:53, "Marn" <m.led...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> It is bad to censore, but in that case it was about dangerous
> bacteria. So I guess it is acceptable. I wouldn't want those
> informations in the wrong hands.
>
> Am Freitag, 27. September 2013 07:07:26 UTC schrieb Pieter:
>

> > http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/**news-perspective/2013/09/**
> > dutch-court-affirms-limit-**publishing-h5n1-findings<http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2013/09/dutch-court-affirms-limit-publishing-h5n1-findings>

> >
> > A Dutch court had ruled that future research, similar tot
> > Fouchier's H5N1 work, will neef an export permit before publishing.
> >
> > This entire case is developing in such a wierde direction. Who else
> > is keeping an eye on the effect of last years NSABB report?
> >

> > http://news.sciencemag.org/**people-events/2012/03/**
> > breaking-news-nsabb-reverses-**position-flu-papers<http://news.sciencemag.org/people-events/2012/03/breaking-news-nsabb-reverses-position-flu-papers>