Publicatie Laka-bibliotheek:
The Campus Connection, Military research on Campus (1991)
| Auteur | Evans, Butler, Concalves |
| Datum | 1991 |
| Classificatie | 2.05.0.00/35 (GROOT-BRITTANNIË - ALGEMEEN) |
| Voorkant | 
|
Uit de publicatie:
INTRODUCTION Staff at Bristol University's veterinary school learnt in August 1988 that some building alterations were to take place. As money for this kind of alterations does not come easily in today's cash-starved universities, some members of staff asked how they were to be funded. It was disclosed that the building improvements were to be funded as part of a £145,000 grant from the Ministry of Defence (MoD). This was to spark off one of the biggest controversies in recent years about military- funded research in universities and was to leadto the eventual resignation of a lecturer in protest against the MoD money. It was believed that this was to be the first time the animal husbandry department at Bristol University had received cash from the MoD and that it was the single biggest source of funds at that time. At the heart of the controversy was the project called "aerobiology of Klebsiella pneumoniae." The funds for the three-year project were from the MoD's chemical warfare establishment at Porton Down. Researchers in the department had initially submitted the project to the Agricultural and Food Research Council for funding. At that stage it was to study the effect of four airborne disease organisms on the health of farm animals in closed environments. But funding was refused. The project was then submitted to the MoD which decided to supply the cash. There was however one crucial difference - there was a new aim to the project. It was now to concentrate on a single organism, Klebsiella pneumoniae, which does not endanger animals but causes pneumonia in humans which can be fatal. Sue Mayer, who was to resign, was appalled. "I was extremely upset that our resources at the vet school were being diverted to military ends and certainly that was not something that I had ever thought I would do when I graduated as a vet."(1) She and her colleagues protested (2) that the knowledge gained from the project could be used to "enhance the survival and successful delivery of an airborne pathogen for offensive military purposes" and that "the development of protective clothing was unlikely to be aided by this research" as the size of the bacteria was already known and therefore the barrier needed against them. In short, they felt the project broke the spirit of the Biological Weapons Convention, an international treaty signed in 1972 which outlawed the development and production of biological weapons across the world.
Deze publicatie is alleen op papier bij Laka beschikbaar, niet als pdf.
Publicaties zijn te leen of informeer of we een kopie kunnen maken. Soms, als we tijd hebben, lukt dat tegen kostprijs van de kopieën.