zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. dash2+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-12-30 21:38:53
It would have vast consequences if this came from a lab. It would be the most deadly example of "science gone wrong" ever: 1.8 million deaths, comparable to the Holocaust, from a single disaster in a single lab. We would seriously have to rethink how we did virus biology. And probably there would be repercussions throughout the whole of science. We might e.g. start to worry much more about the risks of many kinds of scientific experimentation.
replies(2): >>jtbayl+89 >>rcpt+Ri
2. jtbayl+89[view] [source] 2020-12-30 22:33:54
>>dash2+(OP)
But it doesn't matter. We know that it could have come from a lab, even if it didn't. So why shouldn't we be asking those serious questions anyway?
replies(2): >>sacomo+Yc >>danger+te
◧◩
3. sacomo+Yc[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-12-30 22:56:04
>>jtbayl+89
The origin of the virus is worth knowing. I think the far-right in the US are trying to use "covid was made in a Chinese lab" as a way to build anti-China sentiment and also to dismiss the virus' impact in a way. Their power comes from garnering votes from people who are swayed by boogie men. Keep in mind, the US ruling class is trying to start a new Cold War with China.

Someone mentioned in another comment that some on the left were tying criticism of China with racism, and I'd like to point out that those identity politics only benefit the right. I think this link is mostly coming from some of the US liberal class (financially well off, lives aren't directly affected by election outcomes, centrists, etc.) and not from The Left (socialists, left of Bernie types).

Blame a government, not its people. There is plenty of criticism to throw at China without being racist. But if anyone is claiming that blaming China is racist then they are just as misdirected as the people that use criticism of a county to be racist against its people.

◧◩
4. danger+te[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-12-30 23:04:34
>>jtbayl+89
Yes, even if this was not developed in a lab, every government in the world is now 100% aware of the potential uses for bioweapons. We should discuss how we would deal with and detect attacks like that in the future.

Furthermore, we should talk about ethical disclosure responsibilities that all countries can agree on for outbreaks going forward as well as what will happen if those rules are not followed. For example, countries around the world should agree that if a country experiences a pandemic outbreak and they don't take certain measures to stop an international spread and disclose updates to the world, they will be liable for the extended outbreak. Allowing a virus like this to spread internationally while covering up details where now more than a million people have died is really grounds for war. Even if the virus was not created in a lab or intentional in any way, any limitation on communication and disclosure can have massive impact.

replies(1): >>IanCal+oh
◧◩◪
5. IanCal+oh[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-12-30 23:23:48
>>danger+te
Seems like a great example of why a bioweapon like this is a terrible idea.

I don't think more disclosures would have helped a lot of the countries. China locked what 10M people in January and lots of the world essentially went "huh". There were reports of welding people into their homes when UK rates were in double digits. We seem to have done little with the already very public information so what would have happened with more?

replies(1): >>mschus+ti
◧◩◪◨
6. mschus+ti[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-12-30 23:30:56
>>IanCal+oh
A bioweapon like coronavirus is a terrible idea in ordinary war, but a massive asset in a last-effort or scorched-earth scenario. I would not be surprised if despite all bans any nuclear (super)power does not have at least three different agents under development.
7. rcpt+Ri[view] [source] 2020-12-30 23:34:04
>>dash2+(OP)
> We would seriously have to rethink how we did virus biology.

The link made it pretty clear that the vast majority of the world already refuses to fund the type of research that could have led to the virus.

[go to top]