Emerging Viruses-Aids & Ebola - By Leanard ... - preterhuman.net

assembly. He warned that very soon through "chemicaloperations on DNA components," researchers would be able tosynthesize small viruses and engineer their design "to exquisitedetail." He argued that biological weapons stand "apart from allother devices in the actual threat that it poses to the health andlife expectancy of every human being whether or not he ispolitically involved in belligerent actions." [8]"In a word, the intentional release of an infectious particle, be it avirus or bacterium, from the confines of the laboratory or ofmedical practice must be condemned as an irresponsible threatagainst the whole human community. . . .""We have learned in recent years that viruses undergo constantevolution in their own natural history, not only by mutationswithin a given strain, but also by the natural cross-hybridizationof viruses that superficially appear to be only remotely related toone another. Furthermore, many of us carry viruses in our bodycells of which we are unaware for years and which may beharmless - though they may eventually cause the formation of atumor, or of brain degeneration, or of other diseases. At least inthe laboratory, we can show that such latent viruses can stillcross-breed with other viruses to give rise to new forms. . . .""We are all familiar with the process of mutual escalation inwhich the defensive efforts of one side inevitably contribute tofurther technical development on the other, and vice versa. . . .And the potential undoubtedly exists for the design anddevelopment of infective agents against which no credibledefense is possible, through the genetic and chemicalmanipulation of these agents." [8]'Nature,' 'Science,' and 'Lancet' published dozens of articlesexpressing grave concerns over the fate of humanity shouldbiological weapons research continue. One such article entitled"The Biological Bomb," written by an anonymous author,discussed the ethical implications of biological weapons research- an industry that lay "at the heart of the cellular nucleus, tickingus to destruction." [9]Dr. V. W. Sidel, a Boston physician, declared that not onlyshould medical personnel refuse to participate in such activities,but physicians "must actively protest against the development,production, and use of biological weapons." Failure to do so, heargued, represented an insult to the medical profession,complicity, and one of the greatest dangers to society. [9]Scientists could not "retain public esteem if they did nothingabout the present state of the world," declared another protestor.The delicate balance between good and evil was "changingrapidly" and the "present juncture" was seen as crucial. [9]In Britain, several groups frustrated by the secrecy surrounding