Quantification of Open Source Research Publications in Biological Sciences for Biological Weapons Development Utility

摘要

There is on-going concern, expressed both by the scientific and national security communities, about the publication of scientific information that can be exploited in the development of biological weapons. There is little disagreement that aggressors intent on developing biological weapons can benefit from information published in the biosciences literature, and no one disputes that free and open exchange of scientific information is vital to a dynamic biosciences infrastructure. Disagreement arises in determining what, if anything, to do about the publication of scientific information that is deemed to be particularly relevant to a bioweapons program, knowing that dissemination of the same information among legitimate researchers could be essential to scientific advances leading to effective modes of treatment and prevention. The current study was conducted in order to accumulate preliminary semi- quantitative data on the actual occurrence of such information in the scientific literature. In so doing, the hope is to add an objective perspective to a debate that, so far, has been largely based on anecdotal information. The study involved the review and analysis of articles from three respected publications - Scientific American, Science, and Molecular Microbiology - over the course of six months. The articles were evaluated using a set of criteria to rate their potential relevance to biological warfare proliferators (regardless of their technical sophistication). A single issue of Infection and Immunity - a journal focused on pathogenic microorganisms and the immune response directed against them - was included in the survey as an additional point of reference. A total of 43 journal issues and 738 articles were reviewed during the study; of these, 126 were judged to be at least minimally relevant to the development of bioweapons. About 90% of the 126 articles were assessed in the range of 'minimally relevant' to 'somewhat relevant,' and the average overall relevance.