3 ms·

> I think we should care A LOT MORE about our [apparent total lack of] ability to quickly deploy effective public health responses to new infectious diseases (r

> I think we should care A LOT MORE about our [apparent total lack of] ability to quickly deploy effective public health responses to new infectious diseases (regardless of their source). Then we shouldn't be doing _gain of function_ research on the types of viruses that can cause these outbreaks. > Maybe it was an accident at a sloppy lab, ok, so labs on the other side of the planet in sovereign countries we do not control might make mistakes. We should get better at responding fast to save lives. What's the cost-benefit analysis for running the lab in the first place? Was any of it's research used in producing the vaccine? If it's all about saving lives, can't we be mad at both the lacking response and the laboratory at the same time? > I don't care where it came from [...] We should get better at responding fast and saving lives (my opinion). Those two goals seem in conflict with each other. Good offense is something we should aspire too.. but that doesn't mean we should entirely ignore defense as well.

WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
> we shouldn't be doing _gain of function_ research on the types of viruses that can cause these outbreaks. Why not? Seriously, this is the "let's just stop developing nukes" argument... someone will and whether we're prepared or not is on us.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  For one, the US banned such research and specifically for SARS: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-diligence-assess-risks-and-benefits-life-sciences-gain-function-research https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-d... We should also remember that there were past lab leaks in China of SARS, including ones that led to smaller outbreaks and deaths: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20040423/china-sars-death https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20040423/china-sars-death
  - throwaway_r1453 6y ago
    Let's be accurate: This research wasn't "banned." NIH paused granting new funding pending a review [1]. After the review, it was determined that the benefits outweigh the risks and was resumed [2]. [1] - https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/statement-funding-pause-certain-types-gain-function-research https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statem... [2] - https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/nih-lifts-funding-pause-gain-function-research https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statem...
- jonny_eh 6y ago
  > Why not? It's not worth the risk.
Pyramus 6y ago
I agree with parent's point to focus on defence, because a) defence is where the US leadership, but arguably also large parts of society, horribly failed and b) defence lies within your locus of control. Before the pandemic, the US was actually rated #1 for endemic preparedness. No one had imagined that wearing a piece of cloth to protect others would become a political statement. No one was dreaming of the loss of half a million (!) American lives being remotely acceptable. I would even go so far as to argue that from a psychological perspective the situation is similar to losing a war. US society will have to come to terms with what happened and how to prevent it in the future, and that's at the heart of parent's post.

WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago

> we shouldn't be doing _gain of function_ research on the types of viruses that can cause these outbreaks. Why not? Seriously, this is the "let's just stop developing nukes" argument... someone will and whether we're prepared or not is on us.

throwawaysea 6y ago
For one, the US banned such research and specifically for SARS: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-diligence-assess-risks-and-benefits-life-sciences-gain-function-research https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2014/10/17/doing-d... We should also remember that there were past lab leaks in China of SARS, including ones that led to smaller outbreaks and deaths: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20040423/china-sars-death https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20040423/china-sars-death
- throwaway_r1453 6y ago
  Let's be accurate: This research wasn't "banned." NIH paused granting new funding pending a review [1]. After the review, it was determined that the benefits outweigh the risks and was resumed [2]. [1] - https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/statement-funding-pause-certain-types-gain-function-research https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statem... [2] - https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statements/nih-lifts-funding-pause-gain-function-research https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we-are/nih-director/statem...
jonny_eh 6y ago
> Why not? It's not worth the risk.

Pyramus 6y ago

I agree with parent's point to focus on defence, because a) defence is where the US leadership, but arguably also large parts of society, horribly failed and b) defence lies within your locus of control. Before the pandemic, the US was actually rated #1 for endemic preparedness. No one had imagined that wearing a piece of cloth to protect others would become a political statement. No one was dreaming of the loss of half a million (!) American lives being remotely acceptable. I would even go so far as to argue that from a psychological perspective the situation is similar to losing a war. US society will have to come to terms with what happened and how to prevent it in the future, and that's at the heart of parent's post.