4 ms·

I love me some technology, don't get me wrong. But if the lab-leak hypothesis turns out to be correct than technology is undoubtedly the very thing that put th

I love me some technology, don't get me wrong. But if the lab-leak hypothesis turns out to be correct than technology is undoubtedly the very thing that put the world in peril in the first place, as far as COVID-19 is concerned, before you even consider increased air travel and globalization encouraging/increasing the instant spread of modern pathogens.

onion2k 5y ago
if the lab-leak hypothesis turns out to be correct than technology is undoubtedly the very thing that put the world in peril in the first place Whatever lessons we might learn if it were to turn out that COVID is a human-made experiment are lessons we should be taking heed of even if it isn't.
- larsiusprime 5y ago
  Absolutely! Not to mention that we already have very strong evidence that dangerous pathogens have escaped from other labs in the past.
hairytrog 5y ago
Maybe this will play out like nuclear technologies. Incredible potential for good also means incredible potential for bad. For nuclear, the good was roughly limitless energy at very low environmental cost and low human labor. The bad was nuclear weapons material and nuclear accidents. After the accidents, the nuclear industry in advanced countries basically goes into sleep mode, maintaining existing assets, but unable to expand or grow. Perhaps the lab-leak will have the same result for biomed sciences. Accident leads to millions or tens of millions of deaths and industry must go into stasis. You might say the gain-of-function research is sufficiently differentiated from normal biomedical research that they don't get grouped together. But I doubt it. You can probably do gain-of-function in any old bio lab. The only thing stopping it is the good intentions of the users. The effort to cause massive societal disruption and destruction is so much easier for bio based weapons than for nuclear. In nuclear, you need so many things to line up if you're building a weapon from obtaining the requisite materials, enrichment, weapon design and electronics, delivery vehicles; and so many things to go wrong if you are going to have a consequential nuclear accident. In contrast, bio weapons can be developed in a dinky lab, deployed, and then self-propagate worldwide.
ignoramous 5y ago
Ironically, it is technology that gets the world out of these perils, too. I get your point though, nature could only fuel so much growth before it irreversibly changes course and stops sustaining life as we know it.
arrosenberg 5y ago
Eh, not really more so than usual. We've probably had fewer the last 100 years due to better tech and science. Pandemics have always been a civilizational challenge, often caused by technology, greed and hubris. Making it in a lab (unlikely, but theoretically possible) and transporting it by air instead of doing both in the hull of a galley is just a new twist that enabled greater scale.

onion2k 5y ago

if the lab-leak hypothesis turns out to be correct than technology is undoubtedly the very thing that put the world in peril in the first place Whatever lessons we might learn if it were to turn out that COVID is a human-made experiment are lessons we should be taking heed of even if it isn't.

larsiusprime 5y ago
Absolutely! Not to mention that we already have very strong evidence that dangerous pathogens have escaped from other labs in the past.

hairytrog 5y ago

Maybe this will play out like nuclear technologies. Incredible potential for good also means incredible potential for bad. For nuclear, the good was roughly limitless energy at very low environmental cost and low human labor. The bad was nuclear weapons material and nuclear accidents. After the accidents, the nuclear industry in advanced countries basically goes into sleep mode, maintaining existing assets, but unable to expand or grow. Perhaps the lab-leak will have the same result for biomed sciences. Accident leads to millions or tens of millions of deaths and industry must go into stasis. You might say the gain-of-function research is sufficiently differentiated from normal biomedical research that they don't get grouped together. But I doubt it. You can probably do gain-of-function in any old bio lab. The only thing stopping it is the good intentions of the users. The effort to cause massive societal disruption and destruction is so much easier for bio based weapons than for nuclear. In nuclear, you need so many things to line up if you're building a weapon from obtaining the requisite materials, enrichment, weapon design and electronics, delivery vehicles; and so many things to go wrong if you are going to have a consequential nuclear accident. In contrast, bio weapons can be developed in a dinky lab, deployed, and then self-propagate worldwide.

ignoramous 5y ago

Ironically, it is technology that gets the world out of these perils, too. I get your point though, nature could only fuel so much growth before it irreversibly changes course and stops sustaining life as we know it.

arrosenberg 5y ago

Eh, not really more so than usual. We've probably had fewer the last 100 years due to better tech and science. Pandemics have always been a civilizational challenge, often caused by technology, greed and hubris. Making it in a lab (unlikely, but theoretically possible) and transporting it by air instead of doing both in the hull of a galley is just a new twist that enabled greater scale.