Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NIH restarts bat virus grant

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 208 posts

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#31

Post by vinyl7 »

eli wrote: post #9
dablweb wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really the case here. Gain of function research can not be justified using this argument. There are so many potential mutations that putting specific evolutionary pressure on a virus in order to "prevent" only those specific effects has such low efficacy considering the size of the problem space. GOF research has provided very little in terms of benefits, and many argue it's simply been a way to disguise b…

The NIH, the scientists doing the research, and most other experts in the field disagree. Partisan politicians are the ones yelling about how dangerous it is. I think I'll listen to the experts.

You mean the ones who get their paycheck from this research don't want to lose their job?

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#32

Post by shri_krishna »

echelon wrote: post #25
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #13

What would it even mean if we created covid 19 in a lab and it was accidentally released? Would it change anything? Would anyone be held responsible?

A seriously creepy thought that I've had (that I certainly don't agree with) - It could be a way for governments to quickly and affordably "cull the herd" of expensive to support elders, immune compromised, sick, and infirm individuals. In doing so, it would free up capital, resources, housing, jobs, etc. for the younger workforce. This is of course only a creative musing, not a proposal for an unsubstantiated conspi…

"I try not to think about it too much. But I have guns, gold, potassium iodide, antibiotics, batteries, water, gas masks from the Israeli Defense Force, and a big patch of land in Big Sur I can fly to" [1]

- Sam Altman, OpenAI

[1]: https://futurism.com/the-byte/openai-ceo-survivalist-prepper

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#33

Post by bobbylarrybobby »

ethanbond wrote: post #27
netbioserror wrote: post #19

I love the appeal to the "independence" of science from politics, after what may have been the single most materially and socially destructive scientific disaster since the invention of the atom bomb. We'll just act like none of that ever happened and continue with impunity.

Act like what didn’t happen?

[flagged]

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#34

Post by sergiotapia »

netbioserror wrote: post #19

I love the appeal to the "independence" of science from politics, after what may have been the single most materially and socially destructive scientific disaster since the invention of the atom bomb. We'll just act like none of that ever happened and continue with impunity.

Whatever happens, I don't think people will tolerate another lockdown ever again for at least two generations.

I know in florida there could be literally airborn aids and people will still go out and live life, myself included. COVID lockdowns were a test of how much the government could push without backlash.

I feel so badly for the kids that lost their last two years of high school for what?

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#35

Post by ifyoubuildit »

eli wrote: post #9
dablweb wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really the case here. Gain of function research can not be justified using this argument. There are so many potential mutations that putting specific evolutionary pressure on a virus in order to "prevent" only those specific effects has such low efficacy considering the size of the problem space. GOF research has provided very little in terms of benefits, and many argue it's simply been a way to disguise b…

The NIH, the scientists doing the research, and most other experts in the field disagree. Partisan politicians are the ones yelling about how dangerous it is. I think I'll listen to the experts.

Do you really know what "most" of the experts agree or disagree with? It seems like you'd have to be an expert yourself to know that.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#36

Post by droopyEyelids »

ed25519FUUU wrote: post #13

What would it even mean if we created covid 19 in a lab and it was accidentally released? Would it change anything? Would anyone be held responsible?

On a very basic and obvious level, it'd change the protocols required to work with the virus. Researchers and organizations would take safety more seriously.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#37

Post by fallingknife »

ed25519FUUU wrote: post #13

What would it even mean if we created covid 19 in a lab and it was accidentally released? Would it change anything? Would anyone be held responsible?

It's China so someone would be held responsible. Exactly who would be a matter of political expediency more so than actual responsibility.

I would speculate that if it were lab created, having access to the initial genetic material and procedure that was used to create it would be of great scientific value in understanding how viruses jump species.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#38

Post by jMyles »

peteradio wrote: post #16
local_crmdgeon wrote: post #14

At what point does a conspiracy become a fact? This results in another pandemic, it's not going to be pretty when gov't demands lockdowns.

Conspiracy and fact are orthogonal descriptors.

I don't understand this concept. I see it all over the internet. But I don't get it.

At what point did we stop believing it was possible for people to conspire to commit crimes?

Nobody disputes, for example, that the convictions of the Watergate conspirators - for the charge of conspiracy - was based in fact.

So how is it that we can now say that fact and conspiracy can't be part of the same pattern?

It's true that a huge majority of conspiracy theories are bogus and lack evidence. But it's also true that, albeit rarely, conspiracies do occur.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#39

Post by shon »

First, nice name OP. ;)

Second, are there any bio people here who can weigh-in on why this is a good idea and how the potential benefits outweigh the risks?

Bioweapons seem like a terrible idea in general. The worst case scenario of any weapon system is that it’s used against its creators and we humans aren’t that good at controlling biology.

So what’s the benefit?

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#40

Post by Eumenes »

op00to wrote: post #3
MeteorMarc wrote: post #2

Obligatory: What could possibly go wrong?

Better to study and be prepared, than to stick our head in the sand and pretend emerging infectious disease aren't a recurrent factor in our lives.

They literally study viruses that don’t infect humans but they purposely mutate them so they can study the “what if they mutate in real life” - this is cover to study bioweapons
Post reply on HN