But, if you make a weapon that is deadly and kills quickly; it can easily be defeated by Quarintine. If it spreads and kills slowly, then the enemy has time to devise a vaccination - or respond militarily (ie. nuke).
Since this research is theoretically banned, I question as to whether this is really going on - and if so, why is it being tolerated? Secondly, any country breaking international treaties in this manner has to be prepared for a break-out, should an accident happen; thus have prepared an ample supply of an effective treatment. If your army is sick/dying; it's hard to defeat a sick and desperate opposing force (they have nothing left to lose, as they are dying anyway).
All it takes is a pre-emptive strike - and the developing nation will find itself coated with a weaponized cloud of 'nastiness' - impliment a down-wind quarintine against the offending country; and the problem will 'fix itself'.
“Since this research is theoretically banned, I question as to whether this is really going on - and if so, why is it being tolerated? Secondly, any country breaking international treaties....”
~~~~~~~~~~
Seep post 10:
“The fears are notable because the work was carried out on behalf of the National Institutes of Health in the US.”
“Since this research is theoretically banned,”
we can research naturally occurring viruses all we want. This was research into the structure vs function of H1N1. They found a mod that increases virulence.
They were not explicitly looking at weaponization. Had they been working on aerosolization of francisella, now, that would be biowar research.
According to your link, it is NOT banned. It theoretically has peaceful purposes: studying birdflu and preparing for possible dangerous mutations.