Killing 'without the distressing preliminaries': Scientists' defence of the British biological warfare programme.

Abstract

This article presents historical cases in which British scientists, principally scientific advisors, have attempted to defend research on biological weapons. Although the historical record is scant, there is a degree of continuity in their justifications, and a number of themes can be identified. It was argued, that biological weapons research is morally justified because it produces humane weapons; that it is no different from medical or other research; and that is being performed for defensive purposes. It is argued that this defence is directed primarily towards other scientists working on germ warfare, and was formed part of the 'moral economy' of that secret community.