AndrewV69 wrote: ↑
Steersman wrote: ↑Sun Sep 26, 2021 2:36 pm
Somewhat apropos of which and maybe to throw the fox in amongst the chickens, there's been some chatter here about some supposed "gain-of-function" research. But little discussion, that I've seen, about why that might have been done, assuming - on the hypothetical - that it had been. Was it designed to "cull the herd"? Biological warfare? (Why would an American organization ask a Chinese lab to do that?) Or simply to understand the process? As misguided as the latter might be.
What I have been given to understand is GOF (gain of function)research is to determine the likely evolution of a virus and prepare for the day said same virus naturally emerges BUT, we are prepared, so all is good.
<snip.
So, GOF research is proposed as an overall good despite the risks (and last I heard the CCP is now considering outsourcing said research to another country).
Interesting quote from the Intercept article you linked later:
While Racaniello acknowledged that the research in the DARPA proposal entailed some danger, he said “the benefits far, far outweigh the risk.” He also said the fact that the viruses described in the proposal were not known pathogens mitigated the concern.
Given that type of perspective, it's not inconceivable that many researchers might turn a blind eye to the rules. "Medical ethics" often seems something of an oxymoron - Mengele and Tuskegee syphilis study and all that.
AndrewV69 wrote: ↑
<snip>
Meanwhile, a couple of people involved in the scheme (Fauchi, Daszak) have been vehemently insisting that the virus was NOT a lab leak and there was no GOF research in the first place. There are any number of proposals that seek to throw squid ink into the waters :
Gain-of-Function Research: All in the Eye of the Beholder
Seems kind of amusing in a way, particularly if one has something of an affinity for gallows-humour, how a bunch of "scientists" and "politicians" are apparently trying to cover their butts. Though Hanlon's razor - never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity - may be applicable.
But that "Undark" site seems quite a place - hadn't run across it before - but the source of the name is rather horrific:
https://undark.org/2017/07/20/radium-girls-book-review/
Some justification for their "mission":
We appropriate the name as a signal to readers that our magazine will explore science not just as a “gee-whiz” phenomenon, but as a frequently wondrous, sometimes contentious, and occasionally troubling byproduct of human culture.
I had been thinking of Carson's "Silent Spring" as a nice illustration of a too-quick use of technology without thought to possible consequences, but that "Radium Girls" kinda takes the cake.
AndrewV69 wrote: ↑
Not unexpected, who would want to go down in history for all the deaths, extensive societal disruption and economic carnage we are currently experiencing?
Five million dead - so far - is of course nothing to sneeze at. But it's only a small fraction of the yearly death rate - about 0.8% or some 60 million. Not that we shouldn't try to minimize that, not least for the various side-effects, but it seems important to consider the context - we're a dying breed. So to speak.
As for "social disruption" and "economic carnage", I'm not entirely sure there isn't something of a silver lining in that cloud - even if the costs and benefits aren't shared equally. Biologist E.O. Wilson had something of a cogent observation thereon:
The real problem of humanity is the following: we have paleolithic emotions; medieval institutions; and god-like technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall.
Covid seems to have highlighted some serious problems in all 3 areas - moot whether we will have enough sense to learn from the experience.
AndrewV69 wrote: ↑
Anyway,
Despite proposals that it was deliberately released, I tend to not seriously entertain them. There are any number of conspiracy theories one can mix and match and choose from.
Something of a "perfect storm" in many ways. But less malice than stupidity seems to cover much of it.
The winter of our discount tent as Red-Green used to put it. Though I wonder - me in particular or us in general? We seem to have created a remarkably complex society that is in general fairly resilient to various shocks and upsets. But it may well have more than a few fatal flaws, glass jaws, and tipping points which may well turn out to be hell on wheels - some reason to be apprehensive.
But quite an article.