4 ms·

> That is why they decided to work with chimeras instead of pursuing gain of function research. The distinction between gain of function research, and creating

> That is why they decided to work with chimeras instead of pursuing gain of function research. The distinction between gain of function research, and creating lab made chimeric viruses is purely semantic. If you were doing gain of function research, you'd spend most of your time creating chimeric viruses. The argument is that "not all chimeric virus experiments are gain of function research, because you might be conducting those experiments for reasons other than making the virus more harmful". It's just a big semantic contrivance, and the only reason this distinction was every made in the first place is because a certain public figure claimed numerous times that the NIH had never funded gain of function research in Wuhan, only for that later to turn out to be a lie, with the excuse being "oh yeah, but that wasn't _real_ gain of function research".

ImaCake 5y ago
Isn't a chimera akin to putting part of one organism with another? I think this would make the astrazeneca vaccine a chimera (Adenovirus with SARS-COV2 spike protein). Obviously the AZ vaccine has not causes a pandemic so maybe the distinction is very important here.
- AmericanChopper 5y ago
  The vaccine isn't a chimera virus, and the controversial research isn't similar to processes used to make the vaccines. The research in Wuhan involved sequencing genomes from cornoaviruses found in bat guano, blood and saliva, mixing different sequences together, and using that to create brand new chimera viruses that could be cultured in a lab. Then testing the new viruses they'd created to see if they could infect human tissue, and perform other experiments that were motivated ultimately by a goal of creating a broad spectrum coronavirus vaccine. None of this is part of a disputed conspiracy theory, you can read about it here: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-... If you were attempting to create a viral bioweapon, this is exactly the sort of research you'd do. Mixing parts of different viruses together, and seeing what the new viruses did. The distinction here entirely comes down to the motives of the research. The reason the NIH funded this research to take place in China, is because those research practices had been prohibited in the US as the risks involved were seen as poorly understood. The argument that "that's not gain of function research because..." is just a contrivance of a poorly defined piece of jargon.

ImaCake 5y ago

Isn't a chimera akin to putting part of one organism with another? I think this would make the astrazeneca vaccine a chimera (Adenovirus with SARS-COV2 spike protein). Obviously the AZ vaccine has not causes a pandemic so maybe the distinction is very important here.

AmericanChopper 5y ago
The vaccine isn't a chimera virus, and the controversial research isn't similar to processes used to make the vaccines. The research in Wuhan involved sequencing genomes from cornoaviruses found in bat guano, blood and saliva, mixing different sequences together, and using that to create brand new chimera viruses that could be cultured in a lab. Then testing the new viruses they'd created to see if they could infect human tissue, and perform other experiments that were motivated ultimately by a goal of creating a broad spectrum coronavirus vaccine. None of this is part of a disputed conspiracy theory, you can read about it here: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-... If you were attempting to create a viral bioweapon, this is exactly the sort of research you'd do. Mixing parts of different viruses together, and seeing what the new viruses did. The distinction here entirely comes down to the motives of the research. The reason the NIH funded this research to take place in China, is because those research practices had been prohibited in the US as the risks involved were seen as poorly understood. The argument that "that's not gain of function research because..." is just a contrivance of a poorly defined piece of jargon.