zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. teh_kl+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-09-25 01:06:17
Nope, a panel of virologists and related researchers with the same scientific understanding in the field should make these decisions.
replies(1): >>djenen+M
2. djenen+M[view] [source] 2021-09-25 01:14:45
>>teh_kl+(OP)
It's ok to have wishful thinking. Plenty of grants include virologists and epidemiologists, so your proposal isn't practical.
replies(1): >>teh_kl+c1
◧◩
3. teh_kl+c1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 01:18:07
>>djenen+M
Sure, they could provide anecdotal input based on past outbreaks, but they don't have the biological expertise to decide solely on what research should or could be carried out.
replies(1): >>djenen+c3
◧◩◪
4. djenen+c3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 01:39:26
>>teh_kl+c1
Anecdotally, that's not my experience with epi people. A fair few come from a bio/medicine background with a sufficient amount of experience in wet lab and theory to be considered a 'double threat'. Choose your own team.
replies(1): >>teh_kl+c4
◧◩◪◨
5. teh_kl+c4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 01:50:18
>>djenen+c3
"Anecdotally"
replies(1): >>djenen+D4
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. djenen+D4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 01:55:34
>>teh_kl+c4
That was a reference to your previous comment. Does anecdotal count for nothing? Fine, run a survey of virologists and epidemiologists and report the intersection of set. It will not be arbitrarily small.
replies(1): >>djenen+G6
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
7. djenen+G6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 02:16:21
>>djenen+D4
I looked through the grant. To my eye, I consider some of the participants as epidemiologists.
[go to top]