3 ms·
> Not so, because the first two will reduce the rate at which new pandemics emerge I agree that those items are worth doing for other reasons. But I also quest
by realreality 3y ago
> Not so, because the first two will reduce the rate at which new pandemics emerge
I agree that those items are worth doing for other reasons. But I also question whether pandemics even operate in the way that we've been conditioned to believe.
> Those risks still exist, the wet markets just need to end completely, while for the bio labs it's always good to have people imagining various ways things could go wrong in order to make them not actually go wrong outside of our imagination.
The fact that biolabs haven't been regulated at all (in fact, even the notion of investigating biolab safety has become some sort of partisan issue) should be a huge clue that the COVID response has been a political operation.
- ben_w 3y ago> The fact that biolabs haven't been regulated at all (in fact, even the notion of investigating biolab safety has become some sort of partisan issue) should be a huge clue that the COVID response has been a political operation. ??? They were already heavily regulated before, and still are now. And that includes in China, where we don't get to talk much about "partisan" issues owing their government treating any discussion of their own imperfection as some kind of foreign dissent attempt.
- realreality 3y agoSorry, I meant any new regulations or oversight.