Slashdot Mirror
SARS and the Internet
AndroidCat writes "In this story scientists who cracked SARS' genetic code credit the Internet as a key: 'The Internet has had a profound impact on how this data has been shared and how scientists have collaborated.' The Internet has also been useful in containing the outbreak by facilitating online discussion by ER doctors. Not mentioned in the stories is that Toronto researchers who were in quarantine were able to stay in touch. Slashdot has also covered Distributed Computing Attacking SARS. Go Internet!"
As someone in public health, I can see both sides of the story.
Certainly, being able to share information quickly with others is useful. My scientific collaborations are (literally) all over the globe whereas 10 years ago I was lucky to be able to collaborate with labs within a few hundred miles.
But science works best by putting forth hypotheses, testing them, and eliminating the false ones. A downside of the net is that these hypotheses get spread as facts, are then amplified by the media, and then the truth gets ignored since a negative finding doesn't seem newsworthy as the original sensation.
SARS is bad, but it luckly hasn't been that bad so far in US (no deaths...*yet*). And I think undeserving of the sheer amount of attention it has received. But sexy new killer diseases always trump real boring old threats to your well being. SARS even managed to trump an otherwise other guaranteed reporting of the recent outbreak of Ebola in Africa. Let alone the much bigger but mundane killer of influenza (flu).
And in the age of HIPAA, you have to extrememly careful about what and how you share any kind of patient information (check out the forms the next visit to your physician or pharmacy). You cannot compromise patient confidentiality but it happens, due to ignorance or lazyiness, far too often.