Rapid advances in the field of molecular and cellular biologyhave unwillingly unleashed the potential for creating viruses andbacteria more virulent than nature's worst. In the summer of 2002,Researchers at the State University of New York at Stony Brookdescribed the first de novo biochemical synthesis of a virus, basedon published gene sequence information and using \"off the shelf\"commercially available DNA material. After they pieced togethergenetic sequences to form a full-length poliovirus, theysuccessfully replicated and translated this material cell-free intest tubes. The resulting nucleic acids and proteins were then ableto assemble spontaneously into fully infectious viral agents. Thescientists began their work from genetic blueprints that exist inthe public domain, that is, in published journal articles and oninternet databases. The ability to manufacture an infectious agentfrom scratch using preexisting, published knowledge is anunsettling development. The theoretical possibility that currentknowledge could permit the creation of potential agents ofbiological warfare generated intense media interest around theworld. As a result of studies like that at Stony Brook, an ethicaldebate has arisen over whether such research should be pursued, andif so, whether the details of such research should be published.Some argue that the pursuit and publication of such researchunwittingly aids would-be terrorists; others argue that thedissemination of information is necessary for the effective sharingof research within the scientific community and for science toprogress.
In 250-300 words, explain which side of the debate yousupport and why (TYPE ANSWER PLEASE).
