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

141–150 of 208 posts

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#141

Post by [deleted] »

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?

[deleted]

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#142

Post by peteradio »

jeremyjh wrote: post #125
rngname22 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an ideal world, we'd realize through cost benefit analysis that seeking out novel strains of animal viruses and bringing samples of them back to labs, especially in an era where lab leaks are common ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_laboratory_biosecurity... ), and then further doing gain of function research on those viruses to enhance them for further testing, might not be the best idea. At least until we…

I think the arrogance of thinking its possible to do this research safely with any containment procedures is ridiculous. Yes, you can make the chances of a leak extremely minimal, but you can't rule it out when humans are involved and the consequences are so extraordinary that there just isn't an acceptable trade-off.

Fully automated underground bunkers stocked with precursor pathogens and humanized lab rats equipped with firebombs with the intention of complete evisceration at conclusion of experiment. Dig a deep hole in the desert crane drop in the prepared apparatus wait for experiment results, burn it all down. None of these precautions would prevent someone from using the results of the experiment for ill purposes.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#143

Post by somenameforme »

TrainedMonkey wrote: post #103
ZoomerCretin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What do you define as evidence and man-made here? From what I understand there was a large amount of circumstantial evidence (next to a lab researching similar viruses with a history of poor sample handling) as well as enormous amount of pressure on scientific community to say whatever avoids escalating geo political tensions...

Here [1] is a non-comprehensive list of various lab leaks. Even high security facilities quite regularly leak, which is one of the endless reasons that experimenting with these viruses is one of the most unbelievably stupid things we could be doing. An employee in the Netherlands was infected with polio last year, the year prior to that Taiwan had a COVID lab leak. Since 2000 the US has had no fewer than 16 different lab leaks, and you can add Japan, Singapore, Russia, Hungary, Australia, UK, Germany, and more to the list as well. All since 2000 if that wasn't clear.

And many of these incidents were playing with some various serious diseases - ebola, anthrax, meningitis, and let's not forget just finding 6 vials of live smallpox virus by a worker cleaning at a freezer at a Merck facility, in the US, in 2014. The problem is not incompetence - the problem is the arrogance to think we can overcome these issues with competence, in spite of the absolutely extensive evidence of the fact that this is plainly false.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_laboratory_biosecurity...

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#144

Post by willcipriano »

op00to wrote: post #136
willcipriano wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't Florida have lots of elderly people?

Aren't elderly people entitled to life?

Covid mainly was a threat to life for the elderly. I'd be curious to see a covid death by state chart side by side with the states average age. If Florida has more elderly a middle of the pack performance might be exceptional.

If you contrasted nursing home covid deaths to high school covid deaths you'd see high schools "did better", but that probably has nothing to do with policy.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#145

Post by dudeDDRrulez »

462436347 wrote: post #114
shri_krishna wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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

I can't for the life of me understand the personality cult of Sam Altman. He gives off sociopathic vibes, and looks (probably thanks to plastic surgery) creepy.

WEF Young Global Leader, class of 2016

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#146

Post by criticalmass2 »

defen wrote: post #129
criticalmass2 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cr…

> so that we can be more prepared in terms of creating vaccines and understanding the preventive measures that can be taken in future pandemics. Did the existing decades of research help with that when COVID-19 organically and naturally spontaneously jumped to human hosts?

Can't tell if this is a serious question, but the answer is: yes, obviously. Without the decades of research the death toll would have been orders of magnitude higher. Consider the platform technology revolution in how vaccines are made (and the highly effective vaccines). Structure-based immunogen design, that also helped with the rapid development of antivirals. Consider for example that there are zero recorded deaths from an individual who was vaccinated, got infected, and then was treated with Paxlovid. The use of highly effective PPE in hospitals and other settings was also a result of decades of research into the spread of respiratory infections...

Also when you say "organically and naturally spontaneously jumped to human hosts", you do realize that every virus in history has done exactly that?

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#147

Post by jjoonathan »

specialp wrote: post #95
jjoonathan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you forgetting that the lockdowns had to happen because authorities (Trump, not CDC) pissed away a month of exponential growth doubling, tripling, and quadrupling down on "ignore it and it will go away" instead of jumping on measures to reduce Rt? They only blinked when faced with the imminent prospect of having hospitals spill out into parking lots full of people slowly dying for want of a respirator. The pandem…

The lockdowns went on far longer than the "flatten the curve" phase. I think the lessons learned here were: 1. Once something like this escapes its confines and starts spreading as COVID did, it is here to stay and any lockdowns that are not to avoid hospital capacity problems just prolong the inevitable 2. Compromised people due to health conditions and age should definitely lay low when there is an outbreak. But lo…

> The lockdowns went on far longer than the "flatten the curve" phase.

Did they? Is the table on wikipedia wrong? Outside of California (which I feel no desire to defend), it looks like the actual lockdowns were 0-3 months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lockdowns

0-3 months doesn't sound nutty to me. Perhaps 3 months was a bit on the high side, sure, but it's also on the high side of actual policy. What does strike me as nutty was the extreme rhetoric around extremely basic Rt reduction measures. Washing hands, social distancing, wearing masks, taking temperatures, installing spit shields etc just don't deserve nearly the same level of vitriol as the lockdowns themselves, but people seem awfully keen to fudge the distinction. Next time we should start those measures out of the gate but I am worried that people will jump right back into the game of pretending that basic public health measures = extreme oppression, sending us down the exact same path as 2020.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#148

Post by shon »

op00to wrote: post #138
defen wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so that we can be more prepared in terms of creating vaccines and understanding the preventive measures that can be taken in future pandemics. Did the existing decades of research help with that when COVID-19 organically and naturally spontaneously jumped to human hosts?

Yes! We understood within weeks how the virus infected cells. We had an INCREDIBLE head start than if we had to build all this science up from the ground.

Ok good. That’s good to know there was something positive.

Still seems that we sort of created a pretty terrible problem to use our new knowledge on though.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#149

Post by jjoonathan »

tristor wrote: post #97
jjoonathan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you forgetting that the lockdowns had to happen because authorities (Trump, not CDC) pissed away a month of exponential growth doubling, tripling, and quadrupling down on "ignore it and it will go away" instead of jumping on measures to reduce Rt? They only blinked when faced with the imminent prospect of having hospitals spill out into parking lots full of people slowly dying for want of a respirator. The pandem…

> lockdowns had to happen because authorities (Trump, not CDC) pissed away a month of exponential growth This does not match my recollection. Not to get all political, but I was headed to a conference in Belgium just weeks prior to the lockdowns starting wearing a full-face respirator and got made fun of by the TSA agents in the Atlanta airport because the CDC was telling people that masks were unnecessary/didn't wor…

No, these two mistakes are not equal. Not remotely.

The CDC didn't think it had the political capital to press the mask issue. Until it did, and then the policy changed. It was a delay of weeks on one Rt reduction measure of many.

Trump, OTOH, placed all of his chips on "ignore it and it will go away in April," delayed all the other Rt reduction mechanisms for longer, lost the bet, and activated his entire voter base to cover. He could have pivoted and managed them (Wear a MAGA mask! Stop the China Virus!) but he chose not to. The FUD he stirred on basic public health measures swirled for years and we still haven't seen the end of it. Just look at this thread.

In terms of the public health implications, one of these is a 1x problem, the other is a 100x problem.

Re: NIH restarts bat virus grant

#150

Post by IIAOPSW »

runsWphotons wrote: post #131
jeremyjh wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just fucking absurd. Are you serious suggesting its remotely possible the Chinese government would release a deadly bioweapon in their own city without even developing and distributing a vaccine first? Because I don't think anyone is suggesting that, but maybe I'm not following the same news sources that you are. To be clear, I don't think they would develop a vaccine and virus first either, but the idea of "…

No, I don't think it is remotely likely they did it on purpose. But if it were proved absolutely they did, then I don't think retaliation would be off the table, which is what I responded to. The virus was most likely either natural or an accidental lab leak (I lean slightly towards latter). If anyone released it on purpose, which is unlikely, China's government would not even be my first bet...I am simply saying tha…

The extremely watered down version of the pants on head "they did it on purpose" theory I've heard is they didn't close outbound travel and did some other non-actions so that the rest of the world would be equally screwed in this zero sum game. Even that I find to be national-narcissism. Not everything China does is about you OK.

Its not actually zero sum. Some people just think in those terms.

Post reply on HN