Biosecurity policies at international life science journals

Biosecurity and Bioterrorism

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 61-72

  Van Aken, Jan ^a   Hunger, Iris ^b  

^a University of Hamburg ^*

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL WARFARE; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; MANAGEMENT; PUBLICATION; UNITED STATES;

BIOTERRORISM; INTERNATIONALITY; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; POLICY MAKING; UNITED STATES;

EID: 65349103553     PISSN: 15387135     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/bsp.2008.0027     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Jackson RJ, Ramsay AJ, Christensen CD, Beaton S, Hall DF, Ramshaw IA. Expression of mouse interleukin-4 by a recombinant ectromelia virus suppresses cytolytic lymphocyte responses and overcomes genetic resistance to mousepox. J Virol 2001;75(3):1205-1210.
2. Cello J, Paul AV, Wimmer E. Chemical synthesis of poliovirus cDNA: generation of infectious virus in the absence of natural template. Science 2002;297:1016-1018.
3. Rosengard AM, Liu Y, Nie Z, Jimenez R. Variola virus immune evasion design: expression of a highly efficient inhibitor of human complement. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002; 99(13):8808-8813.
4. Basler CF, Reid AH, Dybing JK, et al. Sequence of the 1918 pandemic influenza virus nonstructural gene (NS) segment and characterization of recombinant viruses bearing the 1918 NS genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001;98(5):2746-2751.
5. Reid AH, Fanning TG, Janczewski TA, McCall S, Taubenberger JK. Characterization of the 1918 "Spanish" influenza virus matrix gene segment. J Virol 2002;76(21):10717-10723.
6. Taubenberger JK, Reid AH, Lourens RM, Wang R, Jin G, Fanning TG. Characterization of the 1918 influenza virus polymerase genes. Nature 2005;437(7060):889-893.
7. Tumpey TM, Basler CF, Aguilar PV, et al. Characterization of the reconstructed 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic virus. Science 2005;310(5745):77-80.
8. Campbell P. Empowerment and restraint in scientific communication. New developments make it easier to share information but more difficult to deal with dual-use biology. EMBO Rep 2006;7 Spec No:S18-22.
9. Atlas R, Campbell P, Cozzarelli NR, et al.; Journal Editors and Authors Group. Statement on the consideration of biodefence and biosecurity. Nature 2003;421:771.
10. Falkow S. "Statement on scientific publication and security" fails to provide necessary guidelines. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100(10):5575.
11. Atlas R, Dando M. The dual-use dilemma for the life sciences: perspectives, conundrums, and global solutions. Biosecur Bioterror 2006;4(3):276-286.
12. Kuhn JH. Filoviruses. A compendium of 40 years of epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory studies. Arch Virol Suppl 2008;20:13-360.
13. American Society for Microbiology. Guidelines for Reviewers for ASM Journals. http://journals.asm.org/misc/ reviewguide.shtml. Updated January 2006. Accessed January 26, 2009.
14. Journal of Virology Instructions to Authors. 2009. http://jvi. asm.org/cgi/content/full/83/1/1. Accessed January 26, 2009.
15. Authors & referees npg. Nature journals' policy on biosecurity. http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial-policies/biosecurity. html. Accessed January 26, 2009.
16. American Society for Microbiology. Policy Guidelines of the Publications Board of the ASM in the Handling of Manuscripts Dealing with Microbiological Sensitive Issues. http://www.journals.asm.org/misc/Pathogens-and-Toxins. shtml. Accessed January 26, 2009.
17. Committee on Research Standards and Practices to Prevent the Destructive Application of Biotechnology. Biotechnology Research in an Age of Terrorism. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004.
18. Conducting Research During the War on Terrorism: Balancing Openness and Security, Hearings before the US House of Representatives Committee on Science, 10 October 2002 (testimony of Ronald Atlas, president of the American Society for Microbiology).
19. The Individual and Collective Roles Scientists Can Play in Strengthening International Treaties. London: The Royal Society; 2004.
20. National Research Council. Globalization, Biosecurity and the Future of the Life Sciences. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006.
21. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity. Proposed Framework for the Oversight of Dual Use Life Sciences Research: Strategies for Minimizing the Potential Misuse of Research Information. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2007.
22. Steinbruner J, Harris ED, Gallagher N, Okutani S. Controlling Dangerous Pathogens. College Park, MD: Center for International and Security Studies; 2007. http://www.cissm. umd.edu/papers/display.php?id-217. Accessed January 26, 2009.
23. van Aken J. When risk outweighs benefit. Dual-use research needs a scientifically sound risk-benefit analysis and legally binding biosecurity measures. EMBO Rep 2006;7 Spec No:S10-S13.
24. The Sunshine Project. Mandate for Failure. The State of Institutional Biosafety Committees in an Age of Biological Weapons Research. Austin, TX: The Sunshine Project; 2004. www.sunshine-project.org/biodefense/tspibc.pdf. Accessed January 26, 2009.
25. Editorial: the global approach. Nat Rev Microbiol 2006;4: 238.