Contagious Version of H5N1 Created in Lab

[Gmanyo]

ARTICLE

Ron Fouchier has succeeded in creating a strain of H5N1 that can be passed between humans through airborne means. This is, essentially, a superflu. From the article:

"I can't think of another pathogenic organism that is as scary as this one," Paul Keim, a microbial geneticist who has worked on anthrax for many years, told Science Insider. "I don't think anthrax is scary at all compared to this."

Fouchier wants to publish his study, but many are against this, as it could potentially fall into the wrong hands:

"It's just a bad idea for scientists to turn a lethal virus into a lethal and highly contagious virus. And it's a second bad idea for them to publish how they did it so others can copy it," believes Dr. Thomas Inglesby, a bioterrorism expert and director of the Center for Biosecurity of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

On the other hand, it has shown that it is much easier for this virus to become contagious than previously thought, and might help in the event that the virus does become airborne:

However the very same data, if made available to the scientific community, could potentially allow humanity to prepare for an H5N1 pandemic, which Fouchier’s study has shown to be far more probable than was previously believed. Clamping down on freedom of information in the scientific domain may in the end leave us defenseless against the flu, should it arise naturally.

So should the study be published (EDIT: my bad, already published a revised version, too late)? Should the experiments have even been done in the first place? We wouldn't want another Africanized bee incident. Do the benefits outweigh the potential dangers?

I personally don't know. I do think that the article probably over-dramatizes the dangers, but even if "half humanity" is a dramatization, the real thing is still probably pretty bad. I'm also deathly afraid of illness (ba dum tss). My gut reaction is to say release the papers (for science!) but in this case I don't know if the possible consequences are worth it. In fact, the biggest ethical issue at hand might this:

Are we really doing this for the good of humanity are we just doing it for "science" hard-ons?

I can't tell. I really can't.

edit:
I'm too tired to go on much, but here's another article which gives a different spin on things, should've done a bit more research before posting. Also the stuff is already published. Give it a look. Also just noticed this was 2011, not 2012. Still, questions are valid, and I'm still not sure what my answers are to them. I'd say more, but I'm going to bed.