'Appalling irresponsibility': Senior scientists attack Chinese researchers for

Deuce said:

It is incredibly difficult for a virus to spread out of a laboratory. Life isn't a movie. Influenza is only airborne when aerosolized by a cough or sneeze. Petri dishes don't sneeze, even when you drop them on the floor. Even skin contact is insufficient, the virus pretty much has to enter the body through the mouth or nose. (or eyes I guess?) You'd basically have to spill the petri dish, get the stuff on your skin, and then touch your face with that exposed part.

Just how retarded do you think workers in a lab containing infectious diseases are?

Click to expand...

So, the accidental release of a deadly virus would be pretty unlikely.

What about the deliberate release?

Northern Light said:

The U.S. perfected small pox in a lab, making it 99% lethal. Then the Russians obtained some of that. Now some of it is missing and who knows who has it. We can't really point the finger.

Click to expand...

is there a cite for this?

Dittohead not! said:

So, the accidental release of a deadly virus would be pretty unlikely.

What about the deliberate release?

Click to expand...

What about deliberately crashing a plane into a building?

Look, influenza would be a poor choice for a bioweapon. It's generally only lethal to infants and the elderly, and we've been doing flu vaccines for so long that developing one is practically routine by now. And bioweapons are a poor choice for mass destruction because they're uncontrollable. People aren't comic book supervillains, generally speaking, and I suspect that medical researchers have a lower instance of that insanity.

Is it possible? Of course. But it's also possible that someone rams an airliner into a nuclear power plant that is across the street from an orphanage and Buffalo Wild Wings. At some point you have to just accept that a risk is sufficiently low, because nothing mankind does will ever be risk-free.

Deuce said:

What about deliberately crashing a plane into a building?

Look, influenza would be a poor choice for a bioweapon. It's generally only lethal to infants and the elderly, and we've been doing flu vaccines for so long that developing one is practically routine by now. And bioweapons are a poor choice for mass destruction because they're uncontrollable. People aren't comic book supervillains, generally speaking, and I suspect that medical researchers have a lower instance of that insanity.

Click to expand...

What could be the point of creating new strains in the laboratory, then?

Dittohead not! said:

What could be the point of creating new strains in the laboratory, then?

Click to expand...

Learning how strains evolve, finding better and faster ways to develop vaccines for them, preparing for a particular evolution that you anticipate could occur in the wild.

China is a nation of over a billion people and they have some enormous and very dense city areas. They have even greater motivation to research infectious disease than we do.

Deuce said:

It is incredibly difficult for a virus to spread out of a laboratory. Life isn't a movie. Influenza is only airborne when aerosolized by a cough or sneeze. Petri dishes don't sneeze, even when you drop them on the floor. Even skin contact is insufficient, the virus pretty much has to enter the body through the mouth or nose. (or eyes I guess?) You'd basically have to spill the petri dish, get the stuff on your skin, and then touch your face with that exposed part.

Just how retarded do you think workers in a lab containing infectious diseases are?

Click to expand...

Uh ya, they were testing the mutation by infecting animals...

And retarded enough that their actions were deemed "APPALLINGLY irresponsible"...

There's a reason why testing on airborne viruses are performed in bio safety level 3 or higher facilities.

It only needs to spread to a single farmer getting his pig looked at, and it's out in the wild.

Now, I'm not freaking out about this here, but at the same time to pretend these (shockingly common) occurrences are nothing to be concerned about, seems like the feeling of invincibility that one sees in a youth.

BmanMcfly said:

Uh ya, they were testing the mutation by infecting animals...

And retarded enough that their actions were deemed "APPALLINGLY irresponsible"...

There's a reason why testing on airborne viruses are performed in bio safety level 3 or higher facilities.

It only needs to spread to a single farmer getting his pig looked at, and it's out in the wild.

Now, I'm not freaking out about this here, but at the same time to pretend these (shockingly common) occurrences are nothing to be concerned about, seems like the feeling of invincibility that one sees in a youth.

Click to expand...

A different senior scientist told you global warming was a serious concern for humanity. Yet you seem to have come to a different conclusion.

Influenza isn't airborne unless it's made to be airborne. Via some sort of pressurized release like a cough or sneeze. It doesn't leap out of a petri dish into the air, it isn't capable of that.

Is the risk zero? No, of course not. The risk of falling down in your shower and sustaining a lethal head injury is also non-zero, but for some reason we all still have showers.

Deuce said:

A different senior scientist told you global warming was a serious concern for humanity. Yet you seem to have come to a different conclusion.

Click to expand...

You are comparing a real science (virology) to a pseudo-science...

Also, humanity has survived storms, droughts, and even deep freezes before, and often with casualties... But, since people can't control the weather.

Influenza isn't airborne unless it's made to be airborne. Via some sort of pressurized release like a cough or sneeze. It doesn't leap out of a petri dish into the air, it isn't capable of that.

Click to expand...

That's not the only way for a virus to spread beyond the facility, and most viruses in a lab for animals are viruses that cannot transmit to humans anyway.

Just the fact that it can be transmit to humans means the research needs to be in bio safety conditions, in the conditions it's bio safety level 3 lab as a requirement.

Is the risk zero? No, of course not. The risk of falling down in your shower and sustaining a lethal head injury is also non-zero, but for some reason we all still have showers.

Click to expand...

Ya, when the consequences of accidental screwup could mean the deaths of millions then how much risk are you willing to put up with??

Are you familiar with the track records of these companies making drugs and vaccines for viruses??

Let's say it's not good under strict conditions, what are you going to expect from people who are used to working with viruses that typically only infect animals?

What's worse, let's say the virus starts out, as not being serious, it is possible, though equally unlikely, that the virus could mutate from the wild to become more virulent... But it was all from an "accident" that they didn't realize they caused.

There's a certain level of risk that is simply unacceptable, that's why there's legislation and standards set to ensure that the work can be done with minimal risk beyond the lab.

What kind of extra risks do you feel should be acceptable while working with viruses and mutations that can cross infect between animals and people with no vaccine available??

Like, if the lab was studying airborne Ebola from a hospitals general bathroom, how concerned would you be?

I'm just curious at what point this nonchalance would shift into modest concern?

BmanMcfly said:

You are comparing a real science (virology) to a pseudo-science...

Also, humanity has survived storms, droughts, and even deep freezes before, and often with casualties... But, since people can't control the weather.

Click to expand...

Humanity has also survived disease. This doesn't mean we can just ignore disease. Which is important, I'm not suggesting we be cavalier with research on infectious diseases. Just that the risk isn't as severe as many are thinking in this thread.

That's not the only way for a virus to spread beyond the facility, and most viruses in a lab for animals are viruses that cannot transmit to humans anyway.

Just the fact that it can be transmit to humans means the research needs to be in bio safety conditions, in the conditions it's bio safety level 3 lab as a requirement.



Ya, when the consequences of accidental screwup could mean the deaths of millions then how much risk are you willing to put up with??

Are you familiar with the track records of these companies making drugs and vaccines for viruses??

Let's say it's not good under strict conditions, what are you going to expect from people who are used to working with viruses that typically only infect animals?

What's worse, let's say the virus starts out, as not being serious, it is possible, though equally unlikely, that the virus could mutate from the wild to become more virulent... But it was all from an "accident" that they didn't realize they caused.

There's a certain level of risk that is simply unacceptable, that's why there's legislation and standards set to ensure that the work can be done with minimal risk beyond the lab.

What kind of extra risks do you feel should be acceptable while working with viruses and mutations that can cross infect between animals and people with no vaccine available??

Like, if the lab was studying airborne Ebola from a hospitals general bathroom, how concerned would you be?

I'm just curious at what point this nonchalance would shift into modest concern?

Click to expand...

When a lab starts studying diseases that don't exist in ridiculous manners, I'll definitely be concerned! But let's stick to reality, shall we?

A nuclear reactor is physically capable of melting down. However, modern reactors are treated very carefully. Substantial design effort is put into making sure that it doesn't, and a lot of oversight is involved. Plans exist in case something does go wrong.

An outbreak from this lab is very unlikely, and plans are in place to deal with it if something does go wrong. I'm not being nonchalant. This is something we can handle. We've handled worse diseases successfully.

I don't think the worst case scenario is millions of deaths. A particularly dangerous strain would be dealt with via stronger vaccination efforts long before it came to that. The flu has been around for a very long time, we're getting pretty good at reacting to it.

This is a research effort that deserves scrutiny and care. It's not a ticking time bomb that is likely to doom us all.

The study, which was carried out in a laboratory with the second highest security level to prevent accidental escape, resulted in 127 different viral hybrids between H5N1 and H1N1, five of which were able to pass by airborne transmission between laboratory guinea pigs.

Click to expand...

Can you tell me what this means? What procedures are in place?
Because best as I can tell, this means level 3 biosafety. Exactly the level you specified as being a requirement.



How likely is this guy to be infected?

Deuce said:

Humanity has also survived disease. This doesn't mean we can just ignore disease. Which is important, I'm not suggesting we be cavalier with research on infectious diseases. Just that the risk isn't as severe as many are thinking in this thread.





When a lab starts studying diseases that don't exist in ridiculous manners, I'll definitely be concerned! But let's stick to reality, shall we?

A nuclear reactor is physically capable of melting down. However, modern reactors are treated very carefully. Substantial design effort is put into making sure that it doesn't, and a lot of oversight is involved. Plans exist in case something does go wrong.

An outbreak from this lab is very unlikely, and plans are in place to deal with it if something does go wrong. I'm not being nonchalant. This is something we can handle. We've handled worse diseases successfully.

I don't think the worst case scenario is millions of deaths. A particularly dangerous strain would be dealt with via stronger vaccination efforts long before it came to that. The flu has been around for a very long time, we're getting pretty good at reacting to it.

This is a research effort that deserves scrutiny and care. It's not a ticking time bomb that is likely to doom us all.



Can you tell me what this means? What procedures are in place?
Because best as I can tell, this means level 3 biosafety. Exactly the level you specified as being a requirement.

View attachment 67147327

How likely is this guy to be infected?

Click to expand...

What it means is that I was misreading the irresponsible factor... And that we have been much closer to the same page than I had thought prior.

Last year was a ferret that had saved humanity, this time is transmission studies using ferrets that are the issue.

Anything else I was going to add is moot due to what I had misread, which was creating novel viruses for testing in labs not equipped to handle the task (level 1 facilities), as opposed to transmission studies, which is quite similar to your nuclear facility analogy.

That said, my position was on the basis of other examples of irresponsibility coming out of bio labs.