>For his PhD thesis, he proved that a working hot fusion reactor would either consume more energy than it generates or spew as much radiation as existing nuclear power plants—a finding that did not endear him to many physicists and cut off some career options.

The science field doesn't really work like this, does it? You'd think if he definitively proved a particular thing there wouldn't be any animosity about it toward HIM. I can understand being pissed your funding gets cut off and irritated a thing you've been pursuing for years turns out to be a wild goose chase. But are the punitive measures alluded to in that last paragraph normal?

edit: Also wouldn't a "kill switch" be counterproductive with flu and other environmentally persistant diseases? Isn't the point of vaccinations that we train our body to fight the disease? I suppose in emergency situations you'd want to kill the virus outright, but I don't think being able to kill an arbitrary viral outbreak excludes the need for vaccinations and other public health programs.