3 ms·
I apologies for my other reply - which was flagged - perhaps I was rude. You are wrong because there are ways to introduce a gene drive through pathogens - e.g.
by reedf1 2y ago
I apologies for my other reply - which was flagged - perhaps I was rude. You are wrong because there are ways to introduce a gene drive through pathogens - e.g. you introduce a self-generating CRISPR payload through a pathogen vector for which it is possible to completely saturate gen 0. Source: I worked in a leading biology lab, with biologists actually performing this research.
- thworp 2y agoHow could they make sure that the CRISPR payload survives replication?
- reedf1 2y agoWhich replication? Of the virus or of gen 0?
- jefftk 2y agoIf you can get a pathogen vector to infect all of humanity you already have just about everything you need to cause massive damage; the gene drive doesn't make this situation appreciably worse. (Speaking for myself, not SecureBio)
- xpl 2y agoWe just recently had COVID which was likely bioengineered (as the lab leak is now "officially" considered a plausible explanation)
- reedf1 2y agoWe are comparing guns and bullets. The fact that you can genetically engineer a pathogen vector to deliver a gene drive is not well known to the public.