All things CoronaVirus

[old salt]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

I'm still not sure what your point is. Mine is -- gain of function research on these covid strains is too dangerous to be done because of :
1) the risk of accidental release
2) potential for use as a bio weapon.

[old salt]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

Shouldn’t you have quote OS when you wrote that?

He was referring to Gen Milley, in the WP quote.

[old salt]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

Yeah on OS gain of research I know f**k-all (technical term) about physical science in general but I know statistics and understanding scientific inquiry enough to know that research is supposed to be done for research’s sake. Just like space exploration. Things deemed a failure are actually more of a success because we can say with certainty something doesn’t work but successful testing of a thesis doesn’t prove anything at all.

No doubt that post has intent behind it, specifically an anti China bias. But trying to avoid dealing with that however think it should be pointed out that this concept of “gain of use” research is intellectually bankrupt as research carries gain, and more when tests fail, at all times. Anyone who’s experimented at all should know this intuitively.

Now do I think there was a more nefarious intent? Probably, but as PS stated we will never know. Trust but verify, empirical skepticism.

China decided to screw the USA with COVID. I read it on Fanlax.

Or read it in the WP post in YA's link.

[Farfromgeneva]

I believe you refer to that as “Fake News”

[old salt]

I believe you refer to that as “Fake News”

How 'bout you stop telling me what I believe.

[Farfromgeneva]

When did “I believe“ become “you believe”?

Never mind you just called me a crybaby within the last 48hrs...

[MDlaxfan76]

The only notion that I object to is the notion that any of us on here have denied that there is a "REAL possibility" that it could have been out of a lab. Of course it should be "considered".

But it shouldn't be assumed, nor be a political bludgeon.

What I do think should be "assumed" is that because there's at least such a possibility, safety protocols should be a priority. How do we better ensure that any labs involved are super safe?

The bigger issue is even doing gain-of-function research & why.
No matter the rationale, it still can be used as a bio-weapon.
The same result if there is an accidental release.
The benefit does not justify the risk or the potential for misuse.
It's just too much of a coincidence that the outbreak was in Wuhan.

Tell it Ft. Dietrich.
I don't agree re the research, but I'd note that neither of us is an expert in this field.

I attended a 1 month Army NBC Warfare Officer course at Ft McClennan. ...guess what the B stands for.

One of my jobs was to prepare our base for NBC defense, how to react to attacks, triage, treat & decontaninate.,

Well, I haven't even stayed in a Holiday Inn recently...but yeah, that doesn't make you an expert either.

[MDlaxfan76]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

I'm still not sure what your point is. Mine is -- gain of function research on these covid strains is too dangerous to be done because of :
1) the risk of accidental release
2) potential for use as a bio weapon.

It's a perfectly reasonable opinion...trust me, I've understood your logic.

Not sure you're understood mine, though.

[old salt]

The only notion that I object to is the notion that any of us on here have denied that there is a "REAL possibility" that it could have been out of a lab. Of course it should be "considered".

But it shouldn't be assumed, nor be a political bludgeon.

What I do think should be "assumed" is that because there's at least such a possibility, safety protocols should be a priority. How do we better ensure that any labs involved are super safe?

The bigger issue is even doing gain-of-function research & why.
No matter the rationale, it still can be used as a bio-weapon.
The same result if there is an accidental release.
The benefit does not justify the risk or the potential for misuse.
It's just too much of a coincidence that the outbreak was in Wuhan.

Tell it Ft. Dietrich.
I don't agree re the research, but I'd note that neither of us is an expert in this field.

I attended a 1 month Army NBC Warfare Officer course at Ft McClennan. ...guess what the B stands for.

One of my jobs was to prepare our base for NBC defense, how to react to attacks, triage, treat & decontaminate.,

Well, I haven't even stayed in a Holiday Inn recently...but yeah, that doesn't make you an expert either.

I was trained on bio-weapons. Expert enough that it was part of my "job description". Anthrax was big then.

[old salt]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

I'm still not sure what your point is. Mine is -- gain of function research on these covid strains is too dangerous to be done because of :
1) the risk of accidental release
2) potential for use as a bio weapon.

It's a perfectly reasonable opinion...trust me, I've understood your logic.

Not sure you're understood mine, though.

From 2015. Prophetic.

https://www.nature.com/news/engineered- ... %201.18787

Regarding politics -- the US imposed a 3 year moratorium on US g o f research in 2014 (Obama Admin). It was allowed to resume in 2017 (Trump Admin)

[Typical Lax Dad]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

Yeah on OS gain of research I know f**k-all (technical term) about physical science in general but I know statistics and understanding scientific inquiry enough to know that research is supposed to be done for research’s sake. Just like space exploration. Things deemed a failure are actually more of a success because we can say with certainty something doesn’t work but successful testing of a thesis doesn’t prove anything at all.

No doubt that post has intent behind it, specifically an anti China bias. But trying to avoid dealing with that however think it should be pointed out that this concept of “gain of use” research is intellectually bankrupt as research carries gain, and more when tests fail, at all times. Anyone who’s experimented at all should know this intuitively.

Now do I think there was a more nefarious intent? Probably, but as PS stated we will never know. Trust but verify, empirical skepticism.

China decided to screw the USA with COVID. I read it on Fanlax.

Or read it in the WP post in YA's link.

Or you can go by your cultural leader

[old salt]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

Yeah on OS gain of research I know f**k-all (technical term) about physical science in general but I know statistics and understanding scientific inquiry enough to know that research is supposed to be done for research’s sake. Just like space exploration. Things deemed a failure are actually more of a success because we can say with certainty something doesn’t work but successful testing of a thesis doesn’t prove anything at all.

No doubt that post has intent behind it, specifically an anti China bias. But trying to avoid dealing with that however think it should be pointed out that this concept of “gain of use” research is intellectually bankrupt as research carries gain, and more when tests fail, at all times. Anyone who’s experimented at all should know this intuitively.

Now do I think there was a more nefarious intent? Probably, but as PS stated we will never know. Trust but verify, empirical skepticism.

China decided to screw the USA with COVID. I read it on Fanlax.

Or read it in the WP post in YA's link.

Or you can go by your cultural leader

The video troll is back. So much for rational discussion.

[Typical Lax Dad]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

Yeah on OS gain of research I know f**k-all (technical term) about physical science in general but I know statistics and understanding scientific inquiry enough to know that research is supposed to be done for research’s sake. Just like space exploration. Things deemed a failure are actually more of a success because we can say with certainty something doesn’t work but successful testing of a thesis doesn’t prove anything at all.

No doubt that post has intent behind it, specifically an anti China bias. But trying to avoid dealing with that however think it should be pointed out that this concept of “gain of use” research is intellectually bankrupt as research carries gain, and more when tests fail, at all times. Anyone who’s experimented at all should know this intuitively.

Now do I think there was a more nefarious intent? Probably, but as PS stated we will never know. Trust but verify, empirical skepticism.

China decided to screw the USA with COVID. I read it on Fanlax.

Or read it in the WP post in YA's link.

Or you can go by your cultural leader

The video troll is back. So much for rational discussion.

You motivated me.

[MDlaxfan76]

The only notion that I object to is the notion that any of us on here have denied that there is a "REAL possibility" that it could have been out of a lab. Of course it should be "considered".

But it shouldn't be assumed, nor be a political bludgeon.

What I do think should be "assumed" is that because there's at least such a possibility, safety protocols should be a priority. How do we better ensure that any labs involved are super safe?

The bigger issue is even doing gain-of-function research & why.
No matter the rationale, it still can be used as a bio-weapon.
The same result if there is an accidental release.
The benefit does not justify the risk or the potential for misuse.
It's just too much of a coincidence that the outbreak was in Wuhan.

Tell it Ft. Dietrich.
I don't agree re the research, but I'd note that neither of us is an expert in this field.

I attended a 1 month Army NBC Warfare Officer course at Ft McClennan. ...guess what the B stands for.

One of my jobs was to prepare our base for NBC defense, how to react to attacks, triage, treat & decontaminate.,

Well, I haven't even stayed in a Holiday Inn recently...but yeah, that doesn't make you an expert either.

I was trained on bio-weapons. Expert enough that it was part of my "job description". Anthrax was big then.

"gain of function" research...I'm from Missouri that you were trained in that area of science, its benefits and risks. Bio-weapon response is another matter, and I'm confident you know why it's such a serious issue for concern. In no way denigrating that perspective. It's an important one.

I have a couple of decades of VC background in the biotech space, but I'm not claiming that I'm an "expert" on the next biotech breakthrough. On the other hand, I do have some perspective on why it's so valuable to do basic, as well as applied, research, pushing the frontiers of what we understand.

Which is why my reaction is that the research is likely very important and valuable, but I totally agree with you about the risks, thus I want serious attention to reducing those risks, international transparency etc...all the more so because I have no belief that the research will stop, everywhere, just because we don't 'like' the risks.

so, for me, the question is how best to ensure attention to safety and transparency...finger pointing or international cooperation? Pretty clear where I come out on that.

[old salt]

The only notion that I object to is the notion that any of us on here have denied that there is a "REAL possibility" that it could have been out of a lab. Of course it should be "considered".

But it shouldn't be assumed, nor be a political bludgeon.

What I do think should be "assumed" is that because there's at least such a possibility, safety protocols should be a priority. How do we better ensure that any labs involved are super safe?

The bigger issue is even doing gain-of-function research & why.
No matter the rationale, it still can be used as a bio-weapon.
The same result if there is an accidental release.
The benefit does not justify the risk or the potential for misuse.
It's just too much of a coincidence that the outbreak was in Wuhan.

Tell it Ft. Dietrich.
I don't agree re the research, but I'd note that neither of us is an expert in this field.

I attended a 1 month Army NBC Warfare Officer course at Ft McClennan. ...guess what the B stands for.

One of my jobs was to prepare our base for NBC defense, how to react to attacks, triage, treat & decontaminate.,

Well, I haven't even stayed in a Holiday Inn recently...but yeah, that doesn't make you an expert either.

I was trained on bio-weapons. Expert enough that it was part of my "job description". Anthrax was big then.

"gain of function" research...I'm from Missouri that you were trained in that area of science, its benefits and risks. Bio-weapon response is another matter, and I'm confident you know why it's such a serious issue for concern. In no way denigrating that perspective.

I have a couple of decades of VC background in the biotech space, but I'm not claiming that I'm an "expert" on the next biotech breakthrough. On the other hand, I do have some perspective on why it's so valuable to do basic research, pushing the frontiers of what we understand.

I did not claim to be an expert. You challenged my basis to have an opinion. I am not a neophyte in the field. I've been trained, had to study the issue, prepare for it & be accountable. I regarded this threat a greater potential threat than the N & C threat components of my job description. That's probably why i am so risk averse on the issue. Whether intended or not -- COVID 19 is a potent bio weapon which we need to determine, with greater certainty, how it developed & was released, rather than dismiss the question for political reasons. I hope you are less condescending to the Holiday Inn Express staff.

[wgdsr]

We have a thread for this....and this is where the lab idea was poo-poo'd by a few...going as far as using a pull quote from a non-scientist (Top Brass) . Funny how we trust a military guy with science when it benefits our argument...I'll have to remember to do this more often.

Kind of neat to go back and read through some of this stuff as we were all sleuthing early on...

https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... ab#p136008

You are mischaracterizing the “quote from a non scientist”....he didn’t make the conclusion sport:

He said:
“US intelligence has looked into the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak could have started in a Chinese laboratory, but that the “weight of evidence” so far pointed towards “natural” origins.”

You also understand what “so far” means in this context? So far, I don’t know who is going to win the games today....Check back later. I probably won’t be able to tell you at halftime either.....

I may have assumed US intelligence included scientists but I could be wrong.

Yes, it is kind of "neat to go back and read through"...lemme just point out that Salty just made the argument that the research, if "gain of function", should not be allowed...because it could be for bio-weapon research...by the Chinese...

This is exactly the sort of argument I was warning and pushing back against back then, which others denied applied to any of our fellow FL posters, that this was being used to politically blame an "Other" country (China) and any thing involving international oversight (WHO), and to promote the anti-scientific bias of many in our country.

This research, carefully executed and with active international oversight and transparency, is tremendously important for the prevention of zoonotic pandemics...I noted at the time that we have had many zoonotic pandemics in human history (preceding any such research), but the risk of such pandemics has increased dramatically with human density and mobility.

So, the withdrawal of US engagement and the defunding of international oversight, is exactly the opposite direction we should have been going these past years, and year, and going forward. Alienating others in the international community on this topic is ridiculously stupid. Yet, that's exactly the point of the Trumpist, nativist, anti-science conspiracy mongers...it's all about manipulating domestic voters for a degenerate liar's authoritarian aims...and lots and lots of people line up to join in, amplify...whether that's their conscious intent or not.

I'm 100% in favor of the scientists who actually understand the research, its risks and misapplications, as well as the benefits...to focus on the safety and oversight necessary. Debate away experts, work hard on making sure any such is done safely...but those coming at this as an opportunity to "blame" an "Other" I reject 100% as well.

Yeah on OS gain of research I know f**k-all (technical term) about physical science in general but I know statistics and understanding scientific inquiry enough to know that research is supposed to be done for research’s sake. Just like space exploration. Things deemed a failure are actually more of a success because we can say with certainty something doesn’t work but successful testing of a thesis doesn’t prove anything at all.

No doubt that post has intent behind it, specifically an anti China bias. But trying to avoid dealing with that however think it should be pointed out that this concept of “gain of use” research is intellectually bankrupt as research carries gain, and more when tests fail, at all times. Anyone who’s experimented at all should know this intuitively.

Now do I think there was a more nefarious intent? Probably, but as PS stated we will never know. Trust but verify, empirical skepticism.

China decided to screw the USA with COVID. I read it on Fanlax.

Or read it in the WP post in YA's link.

Or you can go by your cultural leader

The video troll is back. So much for rational discussion.

although i've enjoyed tld's youtubes, since my phone software updated, i can no longer see them on fanlax (nor copy a link without turning phone off and on).

just on fanlax is the issue.

android software update.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The only notion that I object to is the notion that any of us on here have denied that there is a "REAL possibility" that it could have been out of a lab. Of course it should be "considered".

But it shouldn't be assumed, nor be a political bludgeon.

What I do think should be "assumed" is that because there's at least such a possibility, safety protocols should be a priority. How do we better ensure that any labs involved are super safe?

The bigger issue is even doing gain-of-function research & why.
No matter the rationale, it still can be used as a bio-weapon.
The same result if there is an accidental release.
The benefit does not justify the risk or the potential for misuse.
It's just too much of a coincidence that the outbreak was in Wuhan.

Tell it Ft. Dietrich.
I don't agree re the research, but I'd note that neither of us is an expert in this field.

I attended a 1 month Army NBC Warfare Officer course at Ft McClennan. ...guess what the B stands for.

One of my jobs was to prepare our base for NBC defense, how to react to attacks, triage, treat & decontaminate.,

Well, I haven't even stayed in a Holiday Inn recently...but yeah, that doesn't make you an expert either.

I was trained on bio-weapons. Expert enough that it was part of my "job description". Anthrax was big then.

"gain of function" research...I'm from Missouri that you were trained in that area of science, its benefits and risks. Bio-weapon response is another matter, and I'm confident you know why it's such a serious issue for concern. In no way denigrating that perspective.

I have a couple of decades of VC background in the biotech space, but I'm not claiming that I'm an "expert" on the next biotech breakthrough. On the other hand, I do have some perspective on why it's so valuable to do basic research, pushing the frontiers of what we understand.

I did not claim to be an expert. You challenged my basis to have an opinion. I am not a neophyte in the field. I've been trained, had to study the issue, prepare for it & be accountable. I regarded this threat a greater potential threat than the N & C threat components of my job description. That's probably why i am so risk averse on the issue. Whether intended or not -- COVID 19 is a potent bio weapon which we need to determine, with greater certainty, how it developed & was released, rather than dismiss the question for political reasons. I hope you are less condescending to the Holiday Inn Express staff.

What evidence do you have that it was developed and released?....you imply that being developed and released is certain....Not what Xi told your guy.

[old salt]

The video troll is back. So much for rational discussion.

although i've enjoyed tld's youtubes, since my phone software updated, i can no longer see them on fanlax (nor copy a link without turning phone off and on).

just on fanlax is the issue.

android software update.

Not missing anything. Reruns, as tedious as the Wet Teddy Bear commercials.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The video troll is back. So much for rational discussion.

although i've enjoyed tld's youtubes, since my phone software updated, i can no longer see them on fanlax (nor copy a link without turning phone off and on).

just on fanlax is the issue.

android software update.

Not missing anything. Reruns, as tedious as the Wet Teddy Bear commercials.

No....as tedious as this one



You didn’t answer my question. What evidence do you have of COVID-19 being developed and released?

[old salt]

What evidence do you have that it was developed and released?....you imply that being developed and released is certain....Not what Xi told your guy.

Too much of a coincidence that it broke out in Wuhan. Too far from the bat caves.