> A scientist discussing the public health effect of Zika virus has no obligation to discuss potential benefit to competing tourist locations: it's simply not p

> A scientist discussing the public health effect of Zika virus has no obligation to discuss potential benefit to competing tourist locations: it's simply not pertinent to the research they are doing. A better analogy would be if some small percentage of people infected with Zika gained some benefit, like resistance to HIV. That would absolutely be pertinent information that the scientist should report.