4 ms·

Rather than modifying viruses and seeing what happens in the hope that that will inform us for the next pandemic, it seems smarter to start making more vaccines

Rather than modifying viruses and seeing what happens in the hope that that will inform us for the next pandemic, it seems smarter to start making more vaccines with different techniques where mistakes are lower-stakes and the benefit is more clear.

fzeroracer 3y ago
What exactly do you think gain of function research is for? In order to determine how viruses behave in a safe and reasonable manner, gain of function is one of the ways we do so. For example, modifying a virus that normally only infects humans to infect an animal, so we can examine how it works in a lab and in turn design better vaccines or treatments. Some of these fears and comments reminds me a lot of comments around the nuclear accident in Japan. The actual issues stemmed from poor safety measures and protocols, not nuclear itself. That's assuming that the lab leak theory is even true and not just a convenient tool for politicians to use as a wedge.
- dehrmann 3y ago
  > so we can examine how it works in a lab and in turn design better vaccines or treatments This is where I see a gap. How does it actually inform vaccine design? Are there not enough wild viruses to play with?
  - fzeroracer 3y ago
    Do you believe you can cure brain cancer by looking at skin cancer?
  - jncfhnb 3y ago
    Not of the variety we need to study
  - jksk61 3y ago
    If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. Sun Tzu. How do you think you can devise a vaccine if you don't know the virus? They experiment to find out what are the weaknesses of the enemy (i.e. proteins and other markers), so that they can target it. If the next pandemy is caused by a similar strain: ta-dam you have the vaccine already (or at least you know what to target).
- ALittleLight 3y ago
  One huge problem is the "safe and reasonable" part. Gain of function has killed millions in a recent lab leak you may have heard of (high likelihood). That doesn't seem safe to me.
  - xracy 3y ago
    citation needed
    - ALittleLight 3y ago
      No, actually. COVID originated at the location of a lab doing gain of function research on coronaviruses and the lab had a sketchy safety record. If you need someone to tell you the most likely origin of COVID given these circumstances you have a fundamental inability to reason and a citation wouldn't help you because you lack the ability to comprehend.
      - xracy 3y ago
        Ad hominem attacks are famously the first resort of people who are correct about everything.
- peteradio 3y ago
  Is there any requirement that gain-of-function follow conceivably natural pathways?
- Scramblejams 3y ago
  Everybody on the pro-GoF side talks about how valuable it could be. Do we have any demonstrated public health wins from it we can look at?
  - earthboundkid 3y ago
    Sure, remember how useful GoF was during the pandemic? Oh wait, no, that was mRNA vaccines. In fact, if there was ever a time GoF could have been helpful, it would have been a global pandemic. So maybe it's a crappy technique that should be banned by all countries everywhere because it is all costs and no benefits. :-/
  - cdchn 3y ago
    They certainly can come up with plenty of reasons its valuable for them. Cigarette smokers can come up with a lot of justification of why cigarettes shouldn't be banned. It seems like the GoF research shows a lot of "oh look we made a super virus. It would be very bad if a virus did this in nature." Perhaps we can get some data on specifically _how bad_ that particular function would be. What do we get beyond that? Like you said, are there any other benefits that outweigh the risks? Maybe we're all just really bad at understanding risks. I see a lot of comparisons between nuclear power. We know exactly how much dangerous material is in a nuclear reactor. Those physics don't evolve. Nuclear material doesn't reproduce and reinfect endlessly. A nuclear power plant needs a chain of failure to be harmful. A virus only needs one particle to infect.
    - peteradio 3y ago
      Weapons research obviously.

fzeroracer 3y ago

What exactly do you think gain of function research is for? In order to determine how viruses behave in a safe and reasonable manner, gain of function is one of the ways we do so. For example, modifying a virus that normally only infects humans to infect an animal, so we can examine how it works in a lab and in turn design better vaccines or treatments. Some of these fears and comments reminds me a lot of comments around the nuclear accident in Japan. The actual issues stemmed from poor safety measures and protocols, not nuclear itself. That's assuming that the lab leak theory is even true and not just a convenient tool for politicians to use as a wedge.

dehrmann 3y ago
> so we can examine how it works in a lab and in turn design better vaccines or treatments This is where I see a gap. How does it actually inform vaccine design? Are there not enough wild viruses to play with?
- fzeroracer 3y ago
  Do you believe you can cure brain cancer by looking at skin cancer?
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  Not of the variety we need to study
- jksk61 3y ago
  If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. Sun Tzu. How do you think you can devise a vaccine if you don't know the virus? They experiment to find out what are the weaknesses of the enemy (i.e. proteins and other markers), so that they can target it. If the next pandemy is caused by a similar strain: ta-dam you have the vaccine already (or at least you know what to target).
ALittleLight 3y ago
One huge problem is the "safe and reasonable" part. Gain of function has killed millions in a recent lab leak you may have heard of (high likelihood). That doesn't seem safe to me.
- xracy 3y ago
  citation needed
  - ALittleLight 3y ago
    No, actually. COVID originated at the location of a lab doing gain of function research on coronaviruses and the lab had a sketchy safety record. If you need someone to tell you the most likely origin of COVID given these circumstances you have a fundamental inability to reason and a citation wouldn't help you because you lack the ability to comprehend.
    - xracy 3y ago
      Ad hominem attacks are famously the first resort of people who are correct about everything.
peteradio 3y ago
Is there any requirement that gain-of-function follow conceivably natural pathways?
Scramblejams 3y ago
Everybody on the pro-GoF side talks about how valuable it could be. Do we have any demonstrated public health wins from it we can look at?
- earthboundkid 3y ago
  Sure, remember how useful GoF was during the pandemic? Oh wait, no, that was mRNA vaccines. In fact, if there was ever a time GoF could have been helpful, it would have been a global pandemic. So maybe it's a crappy technique that should be banned by all countries everywhere because it is all costs and no benefits. :-/
- cdchn 3y ago
  They certainly can come up with plenty of reasons its valuable for them. Cigarette smokers can come up with a lot of justification of why cigarettes shouldn't be banned. It seems like the GoF research shows a lot of "oh look we made a super virus. It would be very bad if a virus did this in nature." Perhaps we can get some data on specifically _how bad_ that particular function would be. What do we get beyond that? Like you said, are there any other benefits that outweigh the risks? Maybe we're all just really bad at understanding risks. I see a lot of comparisons between nuclear power. We know exactly how much dangerous material is in a nuclear reactor. Those physics don't evolve. Nuclear material doesn't reproduce and reinfect endlessly. A nuclear power plant needs a chain of failure to be harmful. A virus only needs one particle to infect.
  - peteradio 3y ago
    Weapons research obviously.