zlacker

[parent] [thread] 49 comments
1. mkolod+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-02-14 05:45:10
There's a real possibility that a gain-of-function experiment created SARS-CoV-2:

"Lipsitch’s activists (calling themselves the Cambridge Working Group) sent around a strong statement on the perils of research with “Potential Pandemic Pathogens,” signed by more than a hundred scientists. The work might “trigger outbreaks that would be difficult or impossible to control,” the signers said. Fauci reconsidered, and the White House in 2014 announced that there would be a “pause” in the funding of new influenza, SARS, and MERS gain-of-function research." [0]

In December 2017, the US began funding gain-of-function research on these deadly diseases again. This research creates deadly diseases that may not have existed otherwise.

This pandemic has been enough for me to strongly believe that there should be a global ban on gain-of-function experiments on deadly viruses and bacteria. I'd like to help prevent a future pandemic, and that's one clear way we can help.

[0] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-esca...

replies(5): >>rlt+h1 >>raverb+66 >>bhawks+oa >>tal8d+vo >>tremon+fr
2. rlt+h1[view] [source] 2021-02-14 06:08:03
>>mkolod+(OP)
> This research creates deadly diseases that may not have existed otherwise.

This seems like a supremely bad idea.

replies(3): >>alasda+73 >>ttul+S5 >>bondar+mk
◧◩
3. alasda+73[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:38:58
>>rlt+h1
Personally, I kind of like the idea that we could know in advance if a tiny mutation could turn a known disease into something that wipes us all out.

Only inside level four labs, of course. But early warning (and this work on mitigation) seems important.

replies(4): >>Jennif+T3 >>Guthur+16 >>jfoste+o6 >>ajdego+qk
◧◩◪
4. Jennif+T3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:52:26
>>alasda+73
Maybe in BSL-5 labs?

Must be in rural isolation, NOT a city.

The administrators and janitors and everyone has to sleep inside the fence.

Getting out requires spending 40 days in a quarantine hotel in a different nearby fenced area.

Armed guards patrol the fence.

(EDIT: To be clear. BSL-5 doesn't exist yet... but it should.)

replies(3): >>kaczor+I4 >>spoonj+v9 >>galkk+Vg
◧◩◪◨
5. kaczor+I4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:04:42
>>Jennif+T3
I agree. We should treat this as the existential threat that it is.
◧◩
6. ttul+S5[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:23:26
>>rlt+h1
Not if your point is to understand what can go wrong when viruses mutate.
replies(1): >>brippa+J8
◧◩◪
7. Guthur+16[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:26:21
>>alasda+73
I'm definitely no expert but it seems to me that the sheer number of biological variables means that even if you know something could potentially get bad it wouldn't really give you much of a head start as any vaccine you might develop is not so likely to be viable. Testing the impact on living organisms would also have so many ethical issues as to be pretty much a non starter.

I'd genuinely like to know what we would get out of it that would warrant such risk taking?

8. raverb+66[view] [source] 2021-02-14 07:28:19
>>mkolod+(OP)
It could be. But that I find extremely unlikely

A failed experiment? Maybe a bit more likely, but still I don't think so

Sars-Cov-2 looks like pretty much what it is: a zoonotic virus that "doesn't know what's going on"

Hence why only the recent mutations made its transmission more efficient.

Now, if it escaped unbeknownst from a research lab, that I would put on the plausible category. Would be more possible if it wouldn't have had a perfect virus breeding ground right next to it.

replies(2): >>lucas_+Ra >>tim333+am
◧◩◪
9. jfoste+o6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:32:34
>>alasda+73
Suppose you find that hypothetical mutation. What next? What would you do to prevent the current situation?
replies(1): >>coddle+C6
◧◩◪◨
10. coddle+C6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:38:13
>>jfoste+o6
Start working on a vaccine.
replies(2): >>ericho+o9 >>jfoste+Qg
◧◩◪
11. brippa+J8[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:16:32
>>ttul+S5
That certainly doesn't preclude research that's useful (and essential) to developing new pathogens; all of these things are by nature dual-use technologies.
◧◩◪◨⬒
12. ericho+o9[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:26:40
>>coddle+C6
It took two days to create a vaccine for COVID-19. How much more lead time do we need?
replies(1): >>himlio+4b
◧◩◪◨
13. spoonj+v9[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:28:11
>>Jennif+T3
You’re not going to get any good researchers to live in a quarantine bubble for their whole lives.
replies(4): >>ant6n+va >>Griffi+Cf >>newscl+hg >>spyder+hh
14. bhawks+oa[view] [source] 2021-02-14 08:40:44
>>mkolod+(OP)
Although I am there with you in spirit, a global ban is effectively meaningless.

It is unenforceable from the start. All the major world powers would continue their research (perhaps slightly less openly) simply from a MAD angle (it is irresponsible to ignore the value of a pathogen that no one else has seen and you have the antibiotics for).

We are living in dark times in terms of our technological capability and the aggressiveness of state actors.

I would argue that the only chance we have is to reign in the behaviours of our states. Crazy and seemingly impossible, but stopping science/tech is far beyond reach.

replies(2): >>tim333+Jl >>einpok+Kl
◧◩◪◨⬒
15. ant6n+va[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:41:14
>>spoonj+v9
Do the good researchers themselves need to be near the viruses? Debt they just need some people to handle the work?
◧◩
16. lucas_+Ra[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:46:36
>>raverb+66
How about this possibility: (1) You've got this lab that uses a lot of animals and does experiments. (2) There is a 'wet' market nearby that deals in animals from A to Z. (3) Maybe some animal from the lab carrying a zoonotic virus (origin unknown) somehow got disposed of for cash in the market? How could WHO or anyone uncover such an occurrence a year or more later? Would it be possible that such a thing had happened and no one ever had had any idea that it had happened?
replies(1): >>raverb+Tc
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
17. himlio+4b[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:50:24
>>ericho+o9
Ok, start clinical trial immediately after vaccine creation. At least until the point where it's safe for humans to use the new vaccine.
replies(1): >>garmai+fc
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
18. garmai+fc[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:06:43
>>himlio+4b
You can’t do a trial when there is no outbreak.
replies(1): >>MertsA+Lj
◧◩◪
19. raverb+Tc[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:14:50
>>lucas_+Ra
Yes there are several possibilities. And no, I don't think anybody could figure something like that out.

What you can do is follow chains of mutations and infections and try to get somewhere.

◧◩◪◨⬒
20. Griffi+Cf[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:59:11
>>spoonj+v9
Then don't do it.
◧◩◪◨⬒
21. newscl+hg[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:06:40
>>spoonj+v9
The point isn’t to live there their whole lives, but periods where they can get a lot of work done safely.
◧◩◪◨⬒
22. jfoste+Qg[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:17:06
>>coddle+C6
Has this ever been done in response to gain of function research?
◧◩◪◨
23. galkk+Vg[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:20:04
>>Jennif+T3
Maybe a fully underground, enclosed facility where scientists work and live. Oh, wait...
replies(2): >>josefx+Ak >>pts_+ct
◧◩◪◨⬒
24. spyder+hh[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:25:42
>>spoonj+v9
Yes, just like no researcher will travel to Mars. /s
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
25. MertsA+Lj[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:53:20
>>garmai+fc
You can if you want to show really great efficacy results to the regulators, just omit that pesky control group. Buy my tiger repelling rock, prevents 100% of tiger attacks.
◧◩
26. bondar+mk[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:58:40
>>rlt+h1
Similarly smallpox has been completely eradicated, but USA and Russia like to keep around a few live samples, "for research". Whatever will wipe us all out in the end, we probably had it coming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_virus_retention_debat...

replies(1): >>bbatha+Ze1
◧◩◪
27. ajdego+qk[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:59:10
>>alasda+73
There was some considerable progress recently using AI to predict possible mutations. I wish I could find the link. That seems like a better way to go.
◧◩◪◨⬒
28. josefx+Ak[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:01:10
>>galkk+Vg
The lock down in the first Resident Evil movie seemed quite effective, until the response team reset the security system to get out.
◧◩
29. tim333+Jl[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:13:48
>>bhawks+oa
Most of the gain of function research is either well meaning to understand disease or part of normal science published in journals. Banning it would reduce the amount done greatly.
replies(2): >>mkolod+3D1 >>Stanis+x45
◧◩
30. einpok+Kl[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:13:52
>>bhawks+oa
There are very strong controls on experiments on humans, for example, and they seem to work, for the most part. Governments may circumvent them in secret, but when it's found out people were experimented on, there's a scandal.

So, while it may not be 100% foolproof, it would be quite meaningful.

◧◩
31. tim333+am[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:19:33
>>raverb+66
>Sars-Cov-2 looks like pretty much what it is: a zoonotic virus that "doesn't know what's going on"

It was actually remarkably stable in the early days suggesting it was used to reproducing in human cells. Or so Professor Petrovsky says https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8356751/How-COVID-1...

As how that could have happened lab wise here's Daszak saying they routinely infect human cells with coronavirus in the lab https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=1701&v=IdYDL_RK--w&feature=y...

Or maybe it was in humans a bit before it took off. I see Daszak's kind of changed his tune a bit these days to not mention anything like that lab stuff.

replies(1): >>raverb+Kq
32. tal8d+vo[view] [source] 2021-02-14 11:40:48
>>mkolod+(OP)
It is an absolutely braindead thing for a nuclear power to do - bio/chem weapon R&D. The reason why the US abandoned that course so long ago had nothing to do with morality - somebody in the DoD simply realized that they were furthering the state of the art in dirt cheap WMDs. If you already have nukes, you want to keep the cost of doomsday devices as high as possible - limiting the number of potential rivals.
replies(2): >>Aeolos+Nx >>PeterS+141
◧◩◪
33. raverb+Kq[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:04:04
>>tim333+am
"Human cells" are mammal cells. Macaques and Golden Hamsters can get sick with Covid-19

The common Flu can infect horses and even chickens. "stability in human cells" means pretty much nothing

replies(1): >>tim333+Sz
34. tremon+fr[view] [source] 2021-02-14 12:08:34
>>mkolod+(OP)
there should be a global ban on gain-of-function experiments on deadly viruses and bacteria.

Would you make the same argument for software vulnerability research? I think the arguments against both are the same, and with the same result: white-hat researchers will halt their work, leaving more of the field available to black-hat researcers.

replies(2): >>silves+hv >>diabet+du2
◧◩◪◨⬒
35. pts_+ct[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:29:03
>>galkk+Vg
Only to be defeated by a rubber gasket eating mutation.

Anyway Murphy's law is always applicable and we need the capability to fight fires even more.

replies(1): >>Meltin+ZI
◧◩
36. silves+hv[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:46:11
>>tremon+fr
It is much easier to contain bad software than it is to contain an virus that spreads using aerosols.

It is also much easier to stop bad software than bad biology. Software is much simpler than the human body.

◧◩
37. Aeolos+Nx[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 13:07:20
>>tal8d+vo
> The reason why the US abandoned that course so long ago had nothing to do with morality - somebody in the DoD simply realized that they were furthering the state of the art in dirt cheap WMDs

Is there a reliable reference that the US is no longer researching biochemical weapons?

Wikipedia claims: "Both the U.S. bio-weapons ban and the Biological Weapons Convention restricted any work in the area of biological warfare to defensive in nature. In reality, this gives BWC member-states wide latitude to conduct biological weapons research because the BWC contains no provisions for monitoring or enforcement.[74][75] The treaty, essentially, is a gentlemen's agreement amongst members backed by the long-prevailing thought that biological warfare should not be used in battle.[74]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_biological_weapo...

◧◩◪◨
38. tim333+Sz[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 13:31:11
>>raverb+Kq
I mean stability in that the sequence of the virus is much the same as it was a month before. That's not true when a virus jumps species - they evolve rapidly to the new species.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
39. Meltin+ZI[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 14:46:28
>>pts_+ct
> It is also much easier to stop bad software than bad biology. Software is much simpler than the human body.

As an RE geek, and a biologist, the Movies were so f'ing awful... I'm playing the new reboot of the Outbreak series, my favorite of all, RE: Resistance and its pretty awesome and still does way more with genre of survival horror in what was simply an add-on DLC cash-in to sell an updated RE3 then all the horrible movies combined. Online play was always more fun, but now that you're the villainous 'master mind' behind the plot kill the subjects for your own gain is absolutely brilliant, something sorely lacking the same Raccoon City Outbreak universe.

They simply did what Hollywood always does: make shit up and refused to speak about the Cyberpunk-esque undertones of Umbrella and the T virus in any adequate way. This works for comic book stuff because it's audience is so self-serving, but it's also why it's so boring and suffers from the repeated one dimensional story telling.

Instead of following the manga-style adaptions they have in Japanese cinema Hollywood made a series of mindless 2 hour brain drains of of zombie shooting banality, and then made up characters the main character (Jovovich) doesn't even exist in the lore, they deviated so far from the plot that they even managed to get Jill's character so bad I literately pissed of my date when we went I was nerd-raging so hard about how bad it was and how much a missed opportunity it was to inspire more like me to enter into biology--we were both freshman in University and I was at my peak of biopunk naivety and advocacy.

The animated series were way better, as is the case with Batman stuff and shows how gritty and dire these subjects are when properly told from the right platform and setting.

As for COVID, I witnessed how resurgance of the yellow movement in HK was being quelled by the CCP and PLA since that Summer, and I personally feel the theory that an accidental leaked gain of function virus makes sense but that nothing 'damning' will ever be uncovered as the floods that impacted Wuhan provided perfect cover to do any successful form of epidemiology, the wet markets are no longer a source of valid data and it was clear how the WHO who were refused at first from entering) is not to be trusted given their alliances to the CCP and refusal to acknowledge the efforts Taiwan had during this pandemic.

Sadly, political theater will always undo anything Science can prove (or not prove) even when it results in the death of 2+ million people. Let it not be forgotten the CCP was jailing, disspeaing and going fafter people on Social media for talking about the deadliness and serious nature of what was happening. Mainland Citizen-journalists who exposed the dire situation and the pathetic state of these make shift hospitals over run by are still not accounted for and are presumed to be either dissapeared in a black-site re-education camp, or simply murdered at this point.

That's why the CCP is such a threat, and its reliance needs to be broken from and decoupled: cheap labour and trinkets aren't worth having them be the vanguard for Human or even environmental health and denying and hiding, getting rid of any and all evidence when it suits them--which includes but is not limited to disspearing people and committing war crimes and acts of genocide while Xi speaks at DAVOS about creating a more 'diverse' system as it extinguishes ethnic groups it see's as threat to it's divisive death cult (CCP).

replies(1): >>galkk+2n2
◧◩
40. PeterS+141[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 17:20:50
>>tal8d+vo
"the US abandoned that course so long ago "

How do you know this?

replies(1): >>tal8d+ID2
◧◩◪
41. bbatha+Ze1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 18:30:20
>>bondar+mk
It’s substantially more complicated than that smallpox samples keep turning up in the US [1][2]. Who knows how many samples were lost in the chaos of the fall of the Soviet Union. Smallpox was in every country on earth until relatively recently simply destroying samples isn’t enough. Hanging onto them in case we need a new vaccine is absolutely prudent.

https://www.wired.com/2014/07/cdc-found-pox/ https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/scab-story

replies(1): >>bondar+VB1
◧◩◪◨
42. bondar+VB1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 20:58:47
>>bbatha+Ze1
If there is an actual outbreak that we need a vaccine for, we can just get new samples from the infected, right?
◧◩◪
43. mkolod+3D1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 21:06:48
>>tim333+Jl
Even if these researchers have good intentions, they're human, and humans make mistakes. If someone doing gain-of-function research lets a new deadly virus or bacteria out into the wild by mistake, their mistake can can cause a pandemic like the one we're currently suffering from.

I don't think there's anything that we could learn from gain-of-function research on deadly viruses and bacteria that would be worth risking millions of deaths.

replies(1): >>mkolod+VP5
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
44. galkk+2n2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 04:32:42
>>Meltin+ZI
I may be wrong, but I think that by saying rubber gasket the parent commenter had "Andromeda strain" in mind.

I meant RE though

◧◩
45. diabet+du2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 05:58:09
>>tremon+fr
Maybe so but i would assume the barrier to entry for creating a synthetic pathogen is likely to be much higher than somebody tinkering with a Kali Linux VM. I dont know much about gain of function experiments and limited working infosec knowledge so take that with a grain of salt.
◧◩◪
46. tal8d+ID2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 07:41:06
>>PeterS+141
The very public shuttering of facilities, the absence of military doctrine, etc. Yes, there could be secret congressional funding for a secret research lab serving a secret component of the military that secretly maintains readiness to do something that is strategically counterproductive and categorically denied. Do I really need to go on with how silly that line of thought is?
replies(1): >>joshua+eJ3
◧◩◪◨
47. joshua+eJ3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 16:44:41
>>tal8d+ID2
I really don’t understand how anyone can have such a profound level of trust in organisations that have proved themselves utterly unworthy of that trust. Have the lessons of Snowden really been forgotten this quickly??
replies(1): >>tal8d+Yay
◧◩◪
48. Stanis+x45[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-16 00:20:03
>>tim333+Jl
>Most of the gain of function research is either well meaning

It doesn't matter how good your intentions are when your behavior is extremely dangerous and can (and possibly did) result in a global pandemic that kills millions of people. Risk/reward calculations should be performed without regard to intent.

>Banning it would reduce the amount done greatly.

It would also reduce the risk of a man-made virus killing millions of people.

◧◩◪◨
49. mkolod+VP5[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-16 09:45:34
>>mkolod+3D1
To be clear, I would guess that if SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab in Wuhan, it was created with good intentions, and escaped from the lab by mistake. And rather than figuring out where to point fingers, we can work together to prevent future pandemics by preventing research that creates deadly diseases.
◧◩◪◨⬒
50. tal8d+Yay[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-25 10:01:06
>>joshua+eJ3
Well that is a major mischaracterization of my views on the US government. It is funny that you mention Snowden, because many of us were called paranoid conspiracy nuts for using the exact same logic I just demonstrated to warn about dragnet surveillance programs. Watch: the USG has the disposition to spy on its citizens and the capability to do so without fear of consequences, therefor it is almost certainly happening. You can see that argument commonly popping up all over the 90s cypherpunks mailing list.

Now, try to apply that same reasoning to your allegation without looking silly. Yes, the USG has secretly run certain aspects of a public biowarfare program - and when it came to light they paid. Boom, they couldn't keep it secret and they couldn't escape the consequences (lots of very damaging legal cases and hearings). Finally, do they have an incentive? No - as I said, it makes no sense for them to reduce the cost of yet another world ending weapon. Now you could point to Russia getting caught with massive stockpiles of Anthrax after they claimed to end the program... but their nuclear program's credibility isn't comparable - they've always demonstrated clear signs of insecurity about it. That isn't the case for the USG.

[go to top]