Hi Y'all
I think scientists and journalists alike have done some
disservice to the public, myself included, but I think its pretty much
human nature. Virologists are certainly going to argue that deadly
viruses must be taken "very" seriously when they are applying for
research monies. They tend to stretch the limits of the deadly
capabilities of virus strains. But when journalists pick up on this and
start portraying the agents in question as "Apocalypse Bugs", we wince
mightily. This is partly because journalists are stealing our thunder and
partly because we know that such characterizations are very likely not
true. Certainly the potential exists I suppose for an "Apocalypse Bug",
but so does the potential for an apocalyptic meteor arrival. The problem
is when you see patients oozing blood from their various orifices on CNN the
"killer virus" scenario seems a bit more immediate and close to home.
For journalists, I have one big admonition. My experience is
that viruses don't "try" to do anything (e.g. "trying to escape the
jungle or Africa"). You might stretch the case for bacteria,
saying they are "trying" to establish niches or "trying" to
communicate with one another while causing disease, but really, viruses do
neither of these things and certainly don't try to infect new hosts and
leave continents, or cause an apocalypse. News reports which do
things like calling the ebola virus the "apocalyse bug" as CNN did really
does a disservice to viewers not familiar with viruses and in my worthless
opinion should be avoided at all costs in journalism.
Mike
Michael L. Perdue, Ph.D.
Athens, Georgia 30605
Ph: 706-546-3435
Fx: 706-546-3161
mperdue at asrr.arsusda.gov
