Does the approach to animal testing followed by Peter Jahrling and other researchers in The Demon in the Freezer strike you as ethically sound? Why or why not?

Which proposed approach to smallpox was more sensible, eradicating the virus outright (Henderson’s approach) or preserving smallpox for research (closer to Jahrling’s approach)?

How would The Demon in the Freezer be different without the descriptions of the scientists’ personal lives, particularly Jahrling’s and Hensley’s? Do these descriptions improve or weaken Preston’s text?