|
Ogmius815 posted:You guys are idiots. I'm going to get You'll be singing a different tune when we need to blow an asteroid out of the sky.
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:40
|
|
again for this but this is the same kind of reasoning that lead to the creation of the hydrogen bomb. No doubt you people would probably support that too because 
it lead to some useful technologies 
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
Volcott posted:You'll be singing a different tune when we need to blow an asteroid out of the sky. This post is great because bullshit science fiction scenarios are literally the best point you guys have been able to make.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Oh my god the bomb, this is the result of scientists running amok. Not a massive security state and military-industrial complex, somebody let the white coats run wild and now look, nukes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Oh my god the bomb, this is the result of scientists running amok. Not a massive security state and military-industrial complex, somebody let the white coats run wild and now look, nukes. But the continued existence of smallpox actually has the same reasoning. The people who hold the reins don't give a poo poo about science, they just want to keep their toy because the Russians have it too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
Well, due to the advent of really big bombs, bio-weapons are pretty much useless now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:You guys are idiots. I'm going to get The hydrogen bomb was a good thing to create, why do you hate it? Were you a few hundred square kilometers of barren tundra in a past life or something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:ITT people literally tell me that science doesn't need a conscience , then complain about "Threading the NEIDL": http://www.twiv.tv/threading-the-neidl/ I'd also recommend reading the Shooter Report, which covers the investigation of the smallpox accident of 1979 that occurred in Britain. Labs back in the day were crazy in how relaxed they were around really scary substances. The contrast between then and today is fun to look at. Both of these are free to watch and look at by the way. The Shooter Report: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228654/0668.pdf.pdf I think you would really enjoy both of these. Tell me if you'd like to know anything else about virology and microbiology in general. I'm not officially educated, but hopefully I can point you towards interesting reading material and videos. Edit: BSL-4 not BLS, sorry Cercadelmar fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Just The Facts posted:It did. Well, no, actually with the Hobby Lobby case the SCOTUS actually allowed business owners to refuse to provide types of medical care that they believe violate their conscience. They tried to narrowly contain it to contraception because they realize there will be consequences when people like Christian Scientists try to make these claims, but they provided no basis for doing so and it's almost certainly not going to hold up in future cases.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:You guys are idiots. I'm going to get We understand how the hydrogen bomb is created. We understand what we need to create it, and thus can watch for others trying to make their own hydrogen bombs, and understand how to counter it. You seem to believe that all research is strictly "How to make a really big boom" and nothing else. You're asking us to willfully incapacitate our capability to study stuff. Yes, we'll learn how to create bigger and potentially more deadly things, but there's a flipside to that. If you understand how something works, you know how to make it *not* work. You know how to stop it. You know how to disrupt it and possibly save billions of lives. You're saying we shouldn't know gently caress about it, even if we can actually use that knowledge to defend against it. You're making the arguments that all scientists are Frankenstien, and to be quite honest that's like something from Dees or the anti-vaxxers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
E-Tank posted:If you understand how something works, you know how to make it *not* work. You know how to stop it. You know how to disrupt it and possibly save billions of lives. You're saying we shouldn't know gently caress about it, even if we can actually use that knowledge to defend against it. You're making the arguments that all scientists are Frankenstien, and to be quite honest that's like something from Dees or the anti-vaxxers. Yes, but we can do all those things with cowpox, because there's a century-plus of research showing that anything that kills one kills the other, and unlike with smallpox we don't need to infect humans to do research with cowpox. Smallpox doesn't even work in other animals and is far too dangerous to use on humans. You seem to think he's arguing against viral research as a whole, and he's not. There's just not any good reason to keep smallpox in particular around, none of the research being done on it is very significant or promising and it's an incredibly virulent and deadly pathogen which most of the population is no longer vaccinated against. The idea that weighing risk and benefit makes you anti-science is absolutely ludicrous. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Yes, but we can do all those things with cowpox Prove it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Prove it. quote:ACVVR at its 15th meeting discussed the need to retain live variola virus for drug development. Proponents of retention argued the uncertainty of regulatory approval of the two lead compounds and the possible need for additional antiviral agents to be developed, which would require thorough testing (including the use of live variola virus. Some participants maintained that the development of an animal model of smallpox was highly desirable. Opponents of retention argued that regulatory approval of tecovirimat and brincidofovir was highly unlikely to fail and, if needed, suitable surrogate orthopoxvirus infection models could be used for drug testing and development. The WHO's AGIES committee: You can't perform research on something that doesn't behave the same in animals as in humans, other poxviruses have always been used instead and will continue to be used in the future, and in the event we really did need specifically Smallpox for an absurd fight-the-martians scenario we could synthesize live virus from DNA stores. Given that there's 300+ years of research using surrogate poxviruses and they are the scientific norm, maybe you should give some examples of possible cases where the usage of surrogates wouldn't be appropriate. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/97034/1/WHO_HSE_PED_CED_2013.3_eng.pdf The CDC and their equivalent in Russia disagree.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:The CDC and their equivalent in Russia disagree. Both of which are policy instruments of their respective governments. Yes, the owners of weapons of mass destruction frequently do disagree about whether or not they should be allowed to keep them. Pretty common behavior all the way down to your garden-variety gun nuts. Those two countries also happen to be the only countries who show significant opposition to destruction of live smallpox, not coincidentally. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Both of which are policy instruments of their respective governments. Smallpox isn't a weapon of mass destruction.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Smallpox isn't a weapon of mass destruction. Sure it is. quote:U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 113B › § 2332a Biological agents are absolutely weapons of mass destruction, the traditional definition is "nuclear, biological, and chemical" weapons. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Sure it is. Except it's currently impossible to use it as such, for multiple reasons starting with a lack of a way to produce it into large quantities and reliably deliver it. PS: if you actually cared about smallpox as a means of creating a weapon of mass destruction, you would have to admit that complete sequencing of several strains of it means it's possible to create weapons out of it without any samples being held.  But you don't actually care about it, it just rages you that some vials are kept somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Yes, but we can do all those things with cowpox, because there's a century-plus of research showing that anything that kills one kills the other, and unlike with smallpox we don't need to infect humans to do research with cowpox. Smallpox doesn't even work in other animals and is far too dangerous to use on humans. which raised some good arguments. Are We There Yet? posted:Despite this changing landscape, the WHO-approved research agenda has largely become conscribed to the needs of finalizing the work on the remaining antiviral product issues. Fundamental research has been greatly limited over the past decade. Thus, basic variola virus research projects that could potentially lead to other advances in public health efforts have become increasingly absent from the list of WHO-approved projects. It should be noted that the international scientific community has fully complied with these WHO strictures for conducting work with live variola virus. Also, input from various external bodies, such as the Institute of Medicine, has been received and considered by the WHO in order to develop a coherent research agenda for live variola virus. Unique amongst orthopoxviruses, which are largely zoonotic pathogens, variola is known to be a sole human pathogen. The viral and host factors responsible for this specific tropism remain essentially unknown, although the current genomic information database across orthopoxviruses makes hypothesis-driven experimental design using functional genomic approaches more feasible than in the past. We recognize that ultimate proof of such hypotheses will be challenging, as current animal models using variola virus do not faithfully recapitulate the human clinical disease process or immune responses [26], and recombinant genetic modification approaches are not condoned in use of variola. We recommend that the scientific and world community re-engage to discuss future research potential with live variola virus to improve disease interventions by advancing our understanding of the virus and its relationship with its human host. EDIT: Also yeah, if we wanted to weaponize smallpox it would be done in a place like USAMRIID and would be kept hidden. You're arguing against keeping vials in a mostly transparent secure environment. I don't actually understand what you're arguing for since, as I said, the CDC wouldn't be involved in biowarfare since that's more of a military facility thing. Cercadelmar fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Both of which are policy instruments of their respective governments. You're being willfully disingenuous, and it's sentences like the one that you wrote that lead to people becoming anti-vaxxers. The CDC is just an arm of BIG GOVERNMENT trying to interfere with my life, my kids don't need no loving measles vaccine! You may as well throw away all of those studies showing that vaccines don't cause autism, they were funding by government research dollars and are therefore tainted
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:But the continued existence of smallpox actually has the same reasoning. The people who hold the reins don't give a poo poo about science, they just want to keep their toy because the Russians have it too. Except that there are a lot of scientists who don't give a poo poo about policy and who want to keep smallpox around for future potential research applications. You don't actually have a counterargument to this, so you keep implying that the argument is invalid because you have a poor understanding of some literature that you've probably never even read. I think that you might be the densest person on Earth. You could hold the key to all sorts of amazing neurological breakthroughs!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Just The Facts posted:I thought the courts have been ruling against that thought. Yeah but that's only because the anti-vaxxers haven't had the opportunity yet to tell Alito that vaccines cause abortions  But seriously I think those court cases only said the school district didn't have to accept kids-who-are-unvaccinated-due-to-stupid-parents, not that the parents had to vaccinate or that letting your kid get polio because Moses or Jenny McCarthy said a thing is child neglect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Except that there are a lot of scientists who don't give a poo poo about policy and who want to keep smallpox around for future potential research applications. You don't actually have a counterargument to this, so you keep implying that the argument is invalid because you have a poor understanding of some literature that you've probably never even read. But we must destroy the samples because otherwise ????? will happen. Sure I can't actually come up with a problem that will happen but it's still dangerous because eventually ????? will happen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:You guys are idiots. I'm going to get Yeah, gently caress physics research, we should just burn all of the textbooks that deal with matters beyond a 19th century understanding of the universe. Anyone researching the properties of the nucleus might accidentally discover that you can make a really big bomb, round up everyone with a degree in nuclear physics or high energy physics and put them in death camps. gently caress anything that was invented as a result of nuclear physics, quantum physics, or high energy physics research, my tiny brain is scared And actually, basic Newtonian physics led to horrible inventions like the crossbow and the trebuchet, so we'd probably be better off just taking our whole society back to the dark ages. We wouldn't want any research to accidentally lead to discoveries that could be used to build weapons. Gather together all of the engineers and physicists, it's for the greater good. e: Oh but wait, science is also responsible for the kinds of metallurgy that allowed us to make swords and poo poo, gently caress, well it's the stone ages for us, then! Burn all of the books and kill all of the smart people QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
Cercadelmar posted:You're arguing against keeping vials in a mostly transparent secure environment. Like a cardboard box in an unlocked storage room kept at above-freezing temperatures? Disclaimer: I'm not knowledgeable enough to come down on either side here, though I tend toward destroying the stocks despite an understanding that it will never happen due to any number of political and bureaucratic reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Like a cardboard box in an unlocked storage room kept at above-freezing temperatures? In a discussion about whether we should destroy all of the remaining smallpox samples, we obviously can't destroy the samples that we don't know about. e: Do you have a reason for supporting the destruction of the samples besides the fear of an incredibly improbable outbreak for which we already have a cure?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Like a cardboard box in an unlocked storage room kept at above-freezing temperatures? Those samples had been thought to be destroyed in the 1960s. If anything it's an argument against thinking you can just destroy all the known samples to get rid of it for good, seeing as ones that weren't deliberately hidden sat around for over half a century unnoticed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:But we must destroy the samples because otherwise ????? will happen. Sure I can't actually come up with a problem that will happen but it's still dangerous because eventually ????? will happen. He's given reasons, the problem is that his reasons are poo poo. He's terrified that there'll be an outbreak, which is drat near impossible due to the security around the viruses. Yes, there have been accidental exposures before. Security has tightened to the point that its virtually impossible. He's also terrified that it'll be used as a biological weapon, which makes no loving sense. The only idea of it is if you really don't give a gently caress if you and your people die just as much as the other people. You'd have to begin vaccinating your citizens against smallpox which is going to raise some alarm bells, and then if you drop smallpox somewhere, you'll get everybody on your rear end. It makes no sense to try and use barring some sort of 'gently caress it, we'll kill everyone, ourselves and them'. In which case nukes would be much better, easier, and has no vaccine to protect victims.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:In a discussion about whether we should destroy all of the remaining smallpox samples, we obviously can't destroy the samples that we don't know about. I take your first point. I only brought it up as a indicator that somebody in 2060 is going to find some stuff we didn't destroy today, so we should use that as a thought exercise. As to your second point: I was given to understand that we do not have a cure for smallpox, merely antivirals with some non-trivial failure rate. And if you have not been vaccinated (which I have not, nor has my infant son), then you're still looking at a mortality rate not to be sneezed at. If I'm wrong about any of that, I'm glad to concede. Mostly I think I support destruction because humans have a pretty solid track record of loving the football, and if it is indeed true that other poxviruses provide equal scientific benefit for research routes, the benefit to keeping variola around seems awfully minuscule to me. But as I said, I'm not rabid about it. More of a mild tendency.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Like a cardboard box in an unlocked storage room kept at above-freezing temperatures? Threading the NEIDL: http://www.virology.ws/threading-the-neidl/ Edit: though you meant the CDC samples. If you meant the recent ones that were found, that's a poo poo argument that's addressed already. For future reference those were samples from the 60's when regulation was a lot less strict. Cercadelmar fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Mostly I think I support destruction because humans have a pretty solid track record of loving the football, and if it is indeed true that other poxviruses provide equal scientific benefit for research routes, the benefit to keeping variola around seems awfully minuscule to me. http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1004108
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
I suppose a better way to say it is that I'm in favor of having destroyed those samples back then. If regulations and safety protocols are virtually foolproof now, then so be it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
mdemone posted:I take your first point. I only brought it up as a indicator that somebody in 2060 is going to find some stuff we didn't destroy today, so we should use that as a thought exercise. The thing is that the presence of smallpox samples doesn't make it any more or less likely for your and your kid to get exposed to smallpox. There is 0 danger of accidental leakage of it to spread out side of the containment facilities, and meanwhile their presence doesn't make creating smallpox as a weapon easier as for that you can construct the virus anew from the genetic sequencing already done on several strains. mdemone posted:I suppose a better way to say it is that I'm in favor of having destroyed those samples back then. If regulations and safety protocols are virtually foolproof now, then so be it. The samples recently found were supposed to be destroyed back then in the first place. But as you can see, even though they were sitting in a mostly unsecured facility with little more than some glass vials and a cardboard box to protect them from breakage and spread, they never got anyone infected.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:This post is great because bullshit science fiction scenarios are literally the best point you guys have been able to make.  Which of these threats to mankind has been observed to happen, or to have happened, with devastating effects on the biosphere? * runaway climate change * pandemics * getting smashed by asteroids all of them
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:29
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Cercadelmar posted:Edit: though you meant the CDC samples. If you meant the recent ones that were found, that's a poo poo argument that's addressed already. For future reference those were samples from the 60's when regulation was a lot less strict. My colleagues will also find random isotopes that someone from the 50s decided to put in a drawer and forget about because no one gave a poo poo. Everyone doing work in the proper areas then ends up getting shut down for a few weeks for reasons? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
You guys know that smallpox has actually caused accidents and killed people since it's eradication right? It's happened. I posted an article in the chat thread today about the CDC accidentally loving up and sending Anthrax and superflu viruses to labs where they didn't belong. Those incidents didn't lead to any exposure, but forgive me if I don't have unlimited faith in human beings not to gently caress up. That doesn't mean we shouldn't ever study dangerous pathogens, but there had better be some clear idea of a payoff. Don't pretend that there isn't any risk. The idea that weighing risks against possible rewards somehow makes me an anti-science crazy is just precious. What benefit weighs against that risk? You haven't a loving clue. Ogmius815 fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:You guys know that smallpox has actually caused accidents and killed people since it's eradication right? It's happened. I posted an article in the chat thread today about the CDC accidentally loving up and sending Anthrax and superflu viruses to labs where they didn't belong. Those incidents didn't lead to any exposure, but forgive me if I don't have unlimited faith in human beings not to gently caress up. That doesn't mean we shouldn't ever study dangerous pathogens, but there had better be some clear idea of a payoff. Don't pretend that there isn't any risk. The idea that weighing risks against possible rewards somehow makes me an anti-science crazy is precious though. Once again the smallpox lab accident happened in 1978 Britain. Not only is that not relevant to today, the 1978 accident is what led to stricter regulations and better protection in the first place. These in turn have led to the advanced BSL-4 facilities I've been harping on about. If you'd like to learn more about the Birmingham, Britain incident I've already suggested the Shooter Report which is right here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228654/0668.pdf.pdf The CDC mixup has also led to more regulation on how microbes are handled. Also you neglected to add that it ended in both the labs and the CDC noticing and rectifying the problem without any infections. Also I get the feeling you haven't been reading what I've been linking onto here. There has been a very clear outline on what research is being done in my previous posts. Article I'm talking about : http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1004108 e-typo
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
I enjoy watching people spend their time worrying about catastrophic pandemics caused by samples escaping the CDC, and given the actual risk is 0 then it would appear that the benefits do outweigh the risks. It's been decades since anyone has died from lab exposure. Besides, what do you have against Hydrogen bombs? Shouldn't you be upset about landmines, or cluster bombs, or something that actually gets used and kills people? Does the thought of vials in labs and missiles in silos, covered in dust and cobwebs really scare you that much? Who are you to decide if it's too risky or not? Are you a scientist? A doctor? How can you go and say people don't have any clue of the risks and prattle on and on about holding science accountable to some sort of self defined utility when you aren't even in the field? Oh, and 1978 was the last person killed, and that was 2 years before it was declared eradicated. So it hasn't killed anyone since it was eradicated. Killer-of-Lawyers fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:You guys know that smallpox has actually caused accidents and killed people since it's eradication right? It's happened. Actually it hasn't. And the last case of smallpox from a lab accident was in a country that does not have smallpox samples now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 22:17
|
|
|
The risks are tiny, but the benefits are nonexistent - live smallpox virus isn't actually needed for smallpox research.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The risks are tiny, but the benefits are nonexistent - live smallpox virus isn't actually needed for smallpox research. Actually it is, according to scientists. And the risks are 0.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 22:24
|
|