zlacker

[parent] [thread] 9 comments
1. ramraj+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-09-25 01:59:58
Do also note that damn near every lab today would not propose a new approach or project without already secretly having gone half the way in it with prior funds. No one proposes a potential novel idea without already being fully sure it will work.
replies(4): >>stable+Db >>blabla+9i >>splitt+kl >>sgt101+PS
2. stable+Db[view] [source] 2021-09-25 04:18:37
>>ramraj+(OP)
This is something I wish more people understood about academia with regards to this grant.
3. blabla+9i[view] [source] 2021-09-25 06:09:22
>>ramraj+(OP)
Certainly not true in the area of particle accelerator experiments. Every single step there is done in public so to say. And it's not that it's a niche, literally thousands of scientists and engineers work on this stuff. (Also I know people that had to change thesis topics half-way through, although I cannot fully recall the reasoning for that.)

It's well-known that there has been high-risk coronavirus research across the globe. Actually there are even documentaries from before the pandemic, not sure why this has to be double-emphasized.

replies(2): >>N00bN0+Pl >>rualca+Vw
4. splitt+kl[view] [source] 2021-09-25 06:57:48
>>ramraj+(OP)
100% true for theoretical/computational physics, solid state physics, optics, catalysis research, and many more. You use existing grants to explore completely different topics and once you have something promising where you are 50-80% there, you write the next grant. Rinse, repeat.

Particle physics (or gravitational wave research for example) is the odd one out here. Maybe because it is 100% fundamental research, where it is known to not produce applicable results.

◧◩
5. N00bN0+Pl[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 07:06:12
>>blabla+9i
> It's well-known that there has been high-risk coronavirus research across the globe.

Not to me.

>Actually there are even documentaries from before the pandemic, not sure why this has to be double-emphasized.

Got any names/years so I watch them?

replies(1): >>blabla+nM2
◧◩
6. rualca+Vw[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 09:42:17
>>blabla+9i
> It's well-known that there has been high-risk coronavirus research across the globe.

It's the first time I heard of anything of the sort.

Do you have any reference pointing out, or is this just Facebook hearsay?

replies(1): >>ezconn+qy
◧◩◪
7. ezconn+qy[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 10:07:28
>>rualca+Vw
Corona virus and gain of function was done in the US and when a leaked accident occurred it got banned and outsourced to the world. The research labs and stories was famous during MERS outbreak. India, Pakistan and China is the best known countries with advance research labs for it.
8. sgt101+PS[view] [source] 2021-09-25 13:49:00
>>ramraj+(OP)
Not true where you have to get ethics consent. You can't do this because you're lab will be shut if you are found to be doing experiments in secret. Yes - in some labs for maths, physics and so on you are right, but not medicine & biology.

If you don't believe this then look at the failure rate of the projects.

The other thing is that the funding agencies really, really, really don't like this - they want high risk research not handle turning. So if you get caught out you will get blacklisted - it's misconduct.

replies(1): >>madame+iV
◧◩
9. madame+iV[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-25 14:05:59
>>sgt101+PS
> You can't do this because you're lab will be shut if you are found to be doing experiments in secret.

It's almost like if you move your research to a country who has no regards for safety or ethical concerns, that suddenly isn't a problem.

◧◩◪
10. blabla+nM2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-09-26 12:46:05
>>N00bN0+Pl
There's one documentary from ARTE.tv, a french-german state-owned TV station that I watched in Spring 2020 but which was from around 5 years ago at that time. I cannot find it but I'd add a link here if I do eventually. (Not easy since so much similar content has popped up since then)

One particular reference (point) the documentary was revolving around was the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies which has been pointing out the problem with zoonotic epidemics/pandemics vs. populations and wild ecosystems intertwining too much. (AIDS, SARS, MERS)

Maybe that's interesting enough:

"Thus, it is highly likely that future SARS- or MERS-like coronavirus outbreaks will originate from bats, and there is an increased probability that this will occur in China. Therefore, the investigation of bat coronaviruses becomes an urgent issue for the detection of early warning signs ..."

Bat Coronaviruses in China, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6466186/ from March 2019

That said, all this conspiracy discussion is giving the research a bad taste. I mean they cannot build up a lab in a bat cave or ignore the whole issue. And this is not the first epidemic/pandemic of this sort.

[go to top]