6 ms·

The part of it that stuck out to me wasn't the "understandable" part in itself, but the fact that it said the US labs "share similar problems", since these "pro

The part of it that stuck out to me wasn't the "understandable" part in itself, but the fact that it said the US labs "share similar problems", since these "problems" appeared to be just cases of people mishandling these viruses (i.e. negligence?), rather than cases of the viruses being too difficult to handle even when protocols are properly followed. A problem arising due to negligence doesn't seem like something I'd characterize as "struggling" with safety.

james_s_tayler 7y ago
>A problem arising due to negligence doesn't seem like something I'd characterize as "struggling" with safety. Why not? If safety relies on negligence not occuring then negligence compromises safety. If safety is regularly comprised that would be considered "struggling with safety".
roenxi 7y ago
It is a fairly reasonable characterisation. Obviously if there is any potential for a virus to escape even if everything is done correctly then it is far, far too dangerous study. Safety systems are there to catch when people make mistakes and/or don't do things they should do. There is a level of negligence that no system can cope with but up to that point they safe systems should be able to cope with mistakes.