3 ms·

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.