4 ms·

This has nothing to do with bioweapons. The reality is that throughout all of human history, viruses have evolved organically in the environment in such a way t

This has nothing to do with bioweapons. The reality is that throughout all of human history, viruses have evolved organically in the environment in such a way that they are infectious to humans. Viruses will continue to evolve and future pandemics will happen. This research is attempting to study how viruses might evolve in a way that is particularly concerning to humans so that we can be more prepared in terms of creating vaccines and understanding the preventive measures that can be taken in future pandemics.

shon 3y ago
[flagged]
- criticalmass2 3y ago
  The downside would be no vaccines for any diseases, as all vaccines are derived from "gain of function" research. There is also not conclusive evidence that this latest pandemic was the result of a laboratory accident. Every other catastrophic pandemic in human history emerged "naturally", and many more will continue to do so.
  - baja_blast 3y ago
    But vaccine development can only be done with existing viruses circulating in humans. The mutations to the existing virus to test immunity escape are minimal and less risky. But mutating unknown animal/bat viruses to be transmissible towards humans to see how infectious it can possibly be only creates new risks, because if any of those viruses get out of the lab there will be no vaccine (since you can't test the effectiveness of a vaccine without circulation in humans) and to make matters worse the viruses are already predated towards humans! SARS/MERS were easily contained because the virus needed to adapt and evolve before effectively spreading amongst humans. SARS2 was predated and highly infectious thus containment was impossible. Also if this research was so essentially, why does EcoHealth still to this day refuse to share their research/data? You'd think that would be useful to have publicly funded research to help with the worst pandemic in 100 years, but I guess not! So why take the risks?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - shon 3y ago
    To clarify: are you saying that it is not possible to do [any] vaccine research in general without this specific type of gain-of-function research? Citations? Looking to educate myself.
    - revelio 3y ago
      It's nonsense, GoF didn't seem to play any role in vaccine development. It's what virologists tell themselves and each other.
    - criticalmass2 3y ago
      Quoting Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: "Some want to pass a law: All gain-of-function should be stopped. But if all gain-of-function stops, you will have no vaccines for flu. You will have no vaccines for any of the other diseases, because all of that manipulates a virus or a pathogen to gain a certain function to be able to make a vaccine."
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
defen 3y ago
> so that we can be more prepared in terms of creating vaccines and understanding the preventive measures that can be taken in future pandemics. Did the existing decades of research help with that when COVID-19 organically and naturally spontaneously jumped to human hosts?
- op00to 3y ago
  Yes! We understood within weeks how the virus infected cells. We had an INCREDIBLE head start than if we had to build all this science up from the ground.
  - shon 3y ago
    Ok good. That’s good to know there was something positive. Still seems that we sort of created a pretty terrible problem to use our new knowledge on though.
- criticalmass2 3y ago
  Can't tell if this is a serious question, but the answer is: yes, obviously. Without the decades of research the death toll would have been orders of magnitude higher. Consider the platform technology revolution in how vaccines are made (and the highly effective vaccines). Structure-based immunogen design, that also helped with the rapid development of antivirals. Consider for example that there are zero recorded deaths from an individual who was vaccinated, got infected, and then was treated with Paxlovid. The use of highly effective PPE in hospitals and other settings was also a result of decades of research into the spread of respiratory infections... Also when you say "organically and naturally spontaneously jumped to human hosts", you do realize that every virus in history has done exactly that?
  - defen 3y ago
    I'm not talking about virus research in general, I'm talking about the specific type of research EcoHealth Alliance was doing. You're not arguing that their research helped us develop hospital PPE, are you? My question is whether pre-pandemic research into hybrid coronaviruses was essential for the development of the vaccines or other treatments for COVID-19.

shon 3y ago

[flagged]

criticalmass2 3y ago
The downside would be no vaccines for any diseases, as all vaccines are derived from "gain of function" research. There is also not conclusive evidence that this latest pandemic was the result of a laboratory accident. Every other catastrophic pandemic in human history emerged "naturally", and many more will continue to do so.
- baja_blast 3y ago
  But vaccine development can only be done with existing viruses circulating in humans. The mutations to the existing virus to test immunity escape are minimal and less risky. But mutating unknown animal/bat viruses to be transmissible towards humans to see how infectious it can possibly be only creates new risks, because if any of those viruses get out of the lab there will be no vaccine (since you can't test the effectiveness of a vaccine without circulation in humans) and to make matters worse the viruses are already predated towards humans! SARS/MERS were easily contained because the virus needed to adapt and evolve before effectively spreading amongst humans. SARS2 was predated and highly infectious thus containment was impossible. Also if this research was so essentially, why does EcoHealth still to this day refuse to share their research/data? You'd think that would be useful to have publicly funded research to help with the worst pandemic in 100 years, but I guess not! So why take the risks?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- shon 3y ago
  To clarify: are you saying that it is not possible to do [any] vaccine research in general without this specific type of gain-of-function research? Citations? Looking to educate myself.
  - revelio 3y ago
    It's nonsense, GoF didn't seem to play any role in vaccine development. It's what virologists tell themselves and each other.
  - criticalmass2 3y ago
    Quoting Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: "Some want to pass a law: All gain-of-function should be stopped. But if all gain-of-function stops, you will have no vaccines for flu. You will have no vaccines for any of the other diseases, because all of that manipulates a virus or a pathogen to gain a certain function to be able to make a vaccine."
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

defen 3y ago

> so that we can be more prepared in terms of creating vaccines and understanding the preventive measures that can be taken in future pandemics. Did the existing decades of research help with that when COVID-19 organically and naturally spontaneously jumped to human hosts?

op00to 3y ago
Yes! We understood within weeks how the virus infected cells. We had an INCREDIBLE head start than if we had to build all this science up from the ground.
- shon 3y ago
  Ok good. That’s good to know there was something positive. Still seems that we sort of created a pretty terrible problem to use our new knowledge on though.
criticalmass2 3y ago
Can't tell if this is a serious question, but the answer is: yes, obviously. Without the decades of research the death toll would have been orders of magnitude higher. Consider the platform technology revolution in how vaccines are made (and the highly effective vaccines). Structure-based immunogen design, that also helped with the rapid development of antivirals. Consider for example that there are zero recorded deaths from an individual who was vaccinated, got infected, and then was treated with Paxlovid. The use of highly effective PPE in hospitals and other settings was also a result of decades of research into the spread of respiratory infections... Also when you say "organically and naturally spontaneously jumped to human hosts", you do realize that every virus in history has done exactly that?
- defen 3y ago
  I'm not talking about virus research in general, I'm talking about the specific type of research EcoHealth Alliance was doing. You're not arguing that their research helped us develop hospital PPE, are you? My question is whether pre-pandemic research into hybrid coronaviruses was essential for the development of the vaccines or other treatments for COVID-19.