This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Bioterrorism  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Brian Vastag

JAMA. 2003;289:686-690.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Washington—With questions regarding national security omnipresent since September 11 and the anthrax attacks last year, it was simply a matter of time before scientists were called on to defend the practice of publishing research that government security watchdogs deem potentially harmful. Now, following a string of recent basic biology articles, two groups who until recently rarely shared a stage—scientists and national security experts—are finding themselves at odds.

In response, the National Academies (which includes the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine) and the Center for Strategic and International Studies brought scientists and policymakers together last month for the first in a string of meetings meant to bridge the chasm between scientific openness and concerns about bioterrorism.

OPENNESS VS CAUTION

Predictably, the scientists spoke out—sometimes fervently—in favor of unfettered openness; the security experts pleaded for caution.

Parney Albright, PhD, who works for the Office of . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?