4 ms·
> The best argument gain of function proponents have for their research (besides weaponization of course) is to create the next big thing in a lab first so that
by defen 4y ago
> The best argument gain of function proponents have for their research (besides weaponization of course) is to create the next big thing in a lab first so that we can figure out how to neutralize it
Did that actually help in this case? Or are gain-of-function advocates the science equivalent of employees who want to rewrite your webapp in the language du jour? They say it's for the benefit of the company (humanity) but really what they want is to play with cool toys and get promotions.
- creato 4y agoI don't understand how this argument has any traction at all. My understanding is we had the COVID vaccines formulated within weeks of the initial outbreak. The problem is, it then took many months of large scale testing, and then scaling production to make the vaccine readily available. In the meantime, the virus spread across the globe and mutated into forms that the vaccine isn't very effective against. Treatments seem to be in a similar position as well. How are you going to test a treatment for a virus that only exists in a lab, and is safely contained?
- rasz 4y agoMonths, and it didnt happen at WIV who was doing gof research thus should be the first one with best results according to the above theory. Quite opposite happened, China with all the power of WIV behind it was last with the vaccine whose efficiency is highly debated but visibly shaky.
- boltzmann-brain 4y agoThat's a clear condemnation of the defense for GoF practices that basically goes "make in lab first, so we can prepare".