- Jul 28, 2016
- 4,806
- 10,199
I came across an article with a view of the 'escaped from the lab' hypothesis about our favorite virus that feels more balanced than most I've seen. It also brings up some intriguing ideas + stories: https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/09/09/alina-chan-broad-institute-coronavirus/
One of these sets of ideas is the fact that studying how viruses can become more dangerous to humans can be reasonably expected to eventually cause an outbreak, and, yes, such research is being done. Ways to avoid such spread are out there, though not necessarily in use: incapacitate such a virus' ability to replicate for example. Minimize the damage by not having any such labs anywhere near large population centers.
There's always 'human error' as a release valve. Or intentional release, as with the anthrax mail bombs of the early 2000s.
Another intriguing concept is that Twitter has become a scientific forum of sorts. It seems to be working, as long as one has a thick skin! Lots of implications there...
Then there's the intrigue: lines of funding from the NIH to the Wuhan Institute of virology are discussed, thoughts on doing research in a politically charged environment, sleuthing out viral clues as well as human research 'oopses' and a story of pushback from researchers when a up and coming young woman finds evidence that threatens funding which is likened to other primate's behavior:
There is the story of the young researcher's steady, firm and polite push-back to negative rhetoric about her findings which resulted in finding a co-author in someone who initially seemed a critic, researchers bored and isolated during quarantine finding they had a big, vital puzzle to work on right in front of them and then collaborating on it. This part is a joy to read.
Who needs fiction when life is full of such pithy stories?
Good material here for pondering
One of these sets of ideas is the fact that studying how viruses can become more dangerous to humans can be reasonably expected to eventually cause an outbreak, and, yes, such research is being done. Ways to avoid such spread are out there, though not necessarily in use: incapacitate such a virus' ability to replicate for example. Minimize the damage by not having any such labs anywhere near large population centers.
There's always 'human error' as a release valve. Or intentional release, as with the anthrax mail bombs of the early 2000s.
Another intriguing concept is that Twitter has become a scientific forum of sorts. It seems to be working, as long as one has a thick skin! Lots of implications there...
Then there's the intrigue: lines of funding from the NIH to the Wuhan Institute of virology are discussed, thoughts on doing research in a politically charged environment, sleuthing out viral clues as well as human research 'oopses' and a story of pushback from researchers when a up and coming young woman finds evidence that threatens funding which is likened to other primate's behavior:
No surprise, funding was being threatened. As has been mentioned by wise ones, when something smells fishy, "Follow the $$".
There is the story of the young researcher's steady, firm and polite push-back to negative rhetoric about her findings which resulted in finding a co-author in someone who initially seemed a critic, researchers bored and isolated during quarantine finding they had a big, vital puzzle to work on right in front of them and then collaborating on it. This part is a joy to read.
Who needs fiction when life is full of such pithy stories?
Good material here for pondering
