> Ultimately, it was just a fun, harmless experiment, and as a bonus anyone arrogant enough to expect current human genetic engineering to beat evolution got a

> Ultimately, it was just a fun, harmless experiment, and as a bonus anyone arrogant enough to expect current human genetic engineering to beat evolution got a lesson in humility. Why is is any more "trying to beat evolution" than, say, using antibiotics? In a 18 month timespan, there is not much useful mutation (afaik!). The problem was that there was already a variant that could survive the attack. How can we quantify the risk a given attack will fail/calculate how many such interventions would be needed?