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

81–90 of 208 posts

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#81

Post by fullshark »

sergiotapia wrote: post #34
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?

Fear gets your population to largely go along with horrendous gov't actions. I've seen it twice in my life, America's actions post 9/11 and COVID lockdowns. Terror over nuclear annihilation from the USSR allowed western gov'ts to fight Korean/Vietnam war with drafted citizens also.

If that fear returns then the population will go along with whatever terrible intervention is proposed, at least until that fear dissipates.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#82

Post by jonhohle »

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.

[flagged]

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#83

Post by caned »

> The project no longer involves collecting new bat samples or working with live viruses. WIV has no role beyond contributing more than 300 whole and partial genome sequences of SARS-related bat coronaviruses from its collection, Daszak says.

I join others in their skepticism, but, as a layman, I'd like to know: Is this gain-of-function research as described? What are the risks if the research doesn't involve live viruses?

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#84

Post by qclibre22 »

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #77
lvass wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There is no evidence that the pandemic was a man-made disaster.

High levels of concern in the Chinese government in Fall of 2019 about goings on at WIV are certainly interesting, though circumstantial evidence. On the flip side, there's is little evidence that it wasn't a man-made disaster.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#85

Post by ZoomerCretin »

jeremyjh wrote: post #30
ethanbond wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Act like what didn’t happen?

They were trying to create SARS-Cov-2 to study methods of treating or managing it, and quite likely they succeeded only in creating it. We may never know for sure, but if you read the original grant proposal its clear they were trying to engineer a variant of bat coronviruses that could cross into humans.

>they were trying to engineer a variant of bat coronviruses that could cross into humans.

Right, because bat coronaviruses very famously have never crossed into humans. Google "SARS-CoV-1".

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#86

Post by ethanbond »

xenophonf wrote: post #76
bobbylarrybobby wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There's no evidence for a lab leak, while there's evidence supporting direct zoonotic transmission.

It hardly matters if there's evidence for or against.

Gain-of-function research is ludicrously dangerous anyway!

You need only three facts to take 100% of the action that would ever reasonably be taken:

1) We are doing GOF research that could produce something like (or worse than) COVID.

2) Humans and lab operations are fallible and mistakes will happen at high enough scale over long enough time periods.

3) With MRNA therapies and modern genomic science, GOF research likely provides almost zero benefit in the event of a new virus.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#87

Post by criticalmass2 »

shon wrote: post #39

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?

This has nothing to do with bioweapons. The reality is that throughout all of human history, viruses have evolved organically in the environment in such a way that they are infectious to humans. Viruses will continue to evolve and future pandemics will happen. This research is attempting to study how viruses might evolve in a way that is particularly concerning to humans so that we can be more prepared in terms of creating vaccines and understanding the preventive measures that can be taken in future pandemics.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#88

Post by IIAOPSW »

ethanbond wrote: post #69
bobbylarrybobby wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Fact? It's frankly discrediting to refer to the lab-leak hypothesis as such because GOF is definitely a huge risk vector that we should address even without high-confidence conclusions like "fact" regarding COVID's origin (which we don't currently and probably never will have anyway). GOF is dangerous and should be stopped regardless of its causal relationship to COVID in particular. I.e. if we were ever to find cert…

Lets also not forget the danger of pinning the blame rather than finding the facts. Its like watching people leave in the bottom of the third cause they're just that cocky about their pet theory winning

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#89

Post by ngai_aku »

zamnos wrote: post #63
sergiotapia wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

airborne aids isn't the doomsday scenario, airborne ebola is.

I just finished listening to _The Hot Zone_, and that virus is truly scary.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#90

Post by transcriptase »

diuddnbsb wrote: post #54
kfrzcode wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

hey so im really curious do you actually believe Trudeau is a communist? i was speaking to a Canadian guy I work with and he seems to actually believe that

Aspiring authoritarian is a more apt description. The country has very real problems (housing, inflation, immigration, money laundering, health care) that get little attention, while his government focuses on regulating the internet, protecting friendly oligopolies that dominate our economy, and banning firearms while limiting debate and lying to the public every step of the way.

And I say this as someone who voted for him, or rather voted for who he appeared to be early on.

Post reply on HN