You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
The 2nd International Forum on Biosecurity, held in Budapest, Hungary on March 30 - April 2, 2008, represents the efforts of a number of individuals and organizations, over the last five years, to engage the international community of life scientists in addressing how to reduce the risk that the results of their work could be used for hostile purposes by terrorists and states. The participants who gathered in Budapest were already engaged in this challenging task, and, therefore, the focus of the meeting was on what had been accomplished and what challenges remained. There was no attempt to achieve consensus, since there exist real and important differences among those involved concerning the appropriate policies and actions to be undertaken. But there was a serious effort to identify a range of potential next steps, and also an effort to identify opportunities where international scientific organizations could make substantive contributions and offer their advice and expertise to policy discussions. The Forum's presentations, discussions, and results are summarized in this book.
This book is designed to be an easy-to-use guide to understanding the ethical and biosecurity implications of life science research. It provides a framework that will enable scientists, lab managers, researchers, students and teachers to anticipate how research may be used to cause harm, and to identify the steps that can be taken to minimise this risk.Life science research is covered by two international weapons treaties and the tools presented in this book will help scientists and researchers to meet their responsibilities under these conventions. This book will help you: If you've never been sure of how ethics relates to your work this toolkit will help you understand the challenges you do indeed face. Real-world case studies of biosecurity risks and failures will help scientists and all those who work to support science at all levels come to a new understanding of the widespread potential for misuse of research in the life sciences. By asking the questions set out in this book, scientists will be better able to recognise and reduce these risks. This framework is designed to be useful for senior scientists as well as students, and all researchers in between.
In response to a request from the U.S. Congress, this book examines how the unique experience and extensive capabilities of the Department of Defense (DOD) can be extended to reduce the threat of bioterrorism within developing countries outside the former Soviet Union (FSU). During the past 12 years, DOD has invested $800 million in reducing the risk from bioterrorism with roots in the states of the FSU. The program's accomplishments are many fold. The risk of bioterrorism in other countries is too great for DOD not to be among the leaders in addressing threats beyond the FSU. Taking into account possible sensitivities about a U.S. military presence, DOD should engage interested governments in about ten developing countries outside the FSU in biological threat reduction programs during the next five years. Whenever possible, DOD should partner with other organizations that have well established humanitarian reputations in the countries of interest. For example, the U.S. Agency for International Development, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization should be considered as potential partners.
Within the last 30 years, the genomes of thousands of organisms, from viruses, to bacteria, to humans, have been sequenced or partially sequenced and deposited in databases freely accessible to scientists around the world. This information is accelerating scientists' ability to fight disease and make other medical advances, but policymakers must consider the possibility that the information could also be used for destructive purposes in acts of bioterrorism or war. Based in part on views from working biological scientists, the report concludes that current policies that allow scientists and the public unrestricted access to genome data on microbial pathogens should not be changed. Because access improves our ability to fight both bioterrorism and naturally occurring infectious diseases, security against bioterrorism is better served by policies that facilitate, not limit, the free flow of this information.
A contradiction sits at the core of U.S. biological threat prevention policy. Despite the U.S. government accepting the scientific and industrial costs of a domestic biosecurity system, it has not committed the diplomatic and financial resources needed to successfully promote the global adoption of similar systems. While the safety and security of biological pathogens within the United States are important national goals, their pursuit has the potential to impede another crucial goal: a robust research and commercial enterprise. To make matters worse, domestic policies are insufficient to fully protect U.S. citizens, since they provide limited protection from attacks launched with pathogens brought into the United States from abroad. Biosecurity has become a global problem. With the rapid spread of technology and know-how, attacks that originate from less-regulated locales outside the United States are becoming increasingly serious risks to U.S. national security. This means that the United States is bearing the full costs of domestic bio threat prevention without attaining the benefits of a thorough global prevention system.
The government's first Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs were created in 1991 to eliminate the former Soviet Union's nuclear, chemical, and other weapons and prevent their proliferation. The programs have accomplished a great deal: deactivating thousands of nuclear warheads, neutralizing chemical weapons, converting weapons facilities for peaceful use, and redirecting the work of former weapons scientists and engineers, among other efforts. Originally designed to deal with immediate post-Cold War challenges, the programs must be expanded to other regions and fundamentally redesigned as an active tool of foreign policy that can address contemporary threats from groups that are that ...
During the last decade, national and international scientific organizations have become increasingly engaged in considering how to respond to the biosecurity implications of developments in the life sciences and in assessing trends in science and technology (S&T) relevant to biological and chemical weapons nonproliferation. The latest example is an international workshop, Trends in Science and Technology Relevant to the Biological Weapons Convention, held October 31 - November 3, 2010 at the Institute of Biophysics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing. Life Sciences and Related Fields summarizes the workshop, plenary, and breakout discussion sessions held during this convention. Giv...
During July 10-13, 2011, 68 participants from 32 countries gathered in Istanbul, Turkey for a workshop organized by the United States National Research Council on Anticipating Biosecurity Challenges of the Global Expansion of High-containment Biological Laboratories. The United States Department of State's Biosecurity Engagement Program sponsored the workshop, which was held in partnership with the Turkish Academy of Sciences. The international workshop examined biosafety and biosecurity issues related to the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of high-containment biological laboratories- equivalent to United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention biological safety le...
The framework aims to provide global perspectives on principles, tools and mechanisms to support Member States and relevant stakeholders to mitigate and prevent biorisks and govern dual-use research. The framework adopts the One health approach and focuses on the role that responsible life sciences research can play in preventing and mitigating risks caused by accidents, inadvertent or deliberate misuse with the intention to cause harm to humans, nonhuman animals, plants and agriculture, and the environment. The framework is primarily intended for those who have responsibilities in the governance of biorisks, such as policy makers and regulators in charge of developing national policies to h...