Jump to content

Do you believe that the benefits of gain of function research outweigh the risks?

SomeDude

By SomeDude
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

SomeDude

SomeDude 5

Posted
Posted

To me, there are some parallels between the pros/cons of GOF research and the owning of guns.

Both can be very useful, protective and life-saving when in the right hands. Both have serious repercussions when accidents occur or when in the wrong hands…irresponsible or ill intended.

My guess is, gain of function research brought us Covid-19 and killed millions and counting. I suspect GOF has saved millions and counting. Maybe it leaked from the lab accidentally…maybe it was intentional…maybe it didn’t leak from a lab.

Like pedophiles often sneak their way into positions of opportunity…so will other evil sneak-seek opportunities to kill with weapons, whether bio, tactical, improvised….

My personal thoughts:

I’m just gonna keep trying to be the best husband and father I can be. I’m gonna keep my guns and continue to be responsible, raising my boys to be responsible hunters, providers and protectors. I’m gonna continue to love, hopefully more and more like Jesus, and try to raise my kids to keep learning how to love others and to love themselves.

There is evil in this world seeking weaponry and opportunity. Put on the full armor of God and learn how to use the sword. The real fight is spiritual. The stuff on the news is intense, highly effective, distraction. 
 

Looking forward to your perspectives.
 

Love y’all. 
 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Blutarsky

Mr. Blutarsky 133

Posted
Posted

That's a helluva first post. Personally, I believe that guns are built to destroy; mostly to destroy human life and that is wrong no matter the circumstance. Maybe we can just agree that Covid sucks and we need to figure out a way to protect ourselves from it as well as possible so that we can go about our lives and have at least eleven wins next year. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Celery Man

Celery Man 20973

Posted
Posted (edited)

While I understand the comparison drawn between gain of function research and owning guns, it is important to note that these are two very different issues with unique complexities and considerations.

Firstly, gain of function research is a scientific endeavor aimed at understanding and developing treatments for diseases. While accidents can happen in any field of research, it is not accurate to say that this type of research brought us Covid-19. The origins of Covid-19 are still under investigation, and there is no conclusive evidence to support the claim that it was caused by gain of function research. Additionally, it is worth noting that this type of research has the potential to save lives and improve public health, and has done so in the past.

Secondly, while responsible gun ownership can indeed be protective and even life-saving in certain situations, it is also important to acknowledge the significant dangers that come with owning a gun. Accidents can and do happen, and irresponsible or ill-intentioned individuals can use guns to cause harm and take lives. It is not enough to simply focus on being a responsible gun owner and teaching one's children to be responsible hunters and protectors. We must also work towards preventing gun violence and ensuring that guns do not end up in the hands of those who would use them to cause harm.

Finally, I agree that there is evil in this world seeking to cause harm, and that the real fight is often spiritual in nature. However, this does not mean that we should ignore or downplay the very real and tangible issues facing our society, such as gun violence and the current pandemic. Rather, we should strive to address these issues in a thoughtful and compassionate way, seeking solutions that prioritize the well-being and safety of all individuals.

In summary, while I appreciate the sentiment behind the comparison drawn between gain of function research and owning guns, it is important to recognize that these are complex issues with unique considerations. We must work towards promoting responsible and safe practices in both fields, while also addressing the broader societal issues at play.

Edited by Celery Man
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43496

Posted
Posted (edited)

After witnessing the way that society and those in positions of power handled a largely non-lethal pandemic (coupled with how insanely transmissable covid is) no I do not believe that the benefits outweigh the risks. The world was a better place before covid leaked or was released. 

Edited by ztejas
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Celery Man

Celery Man 20973

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, ztejas said:

After witnessing the way that society and those in positions of power handled a largely non-lethal pandemic (coupled with how insanely transmissable covid is) no I do not believe that the benefits outweigh the risks. The world was a better place before covid leaked or was released. 

A bold and nuanced take

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43496

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

I wouldn’t exactly call 7 million dead largely non-lethal but percentage wise I guess you might have a (decimal) point.

In terms of the overall well being of our species 7 million is a blip on the radar - especially when most of those people were old, had risk factors or were in failing health already. I'm sure if they set their minds to it they can come up with one that kills 70 million people next time. 

Granted I think modern medicine is pretty well equipped to handle any pandemic - just not sure we should be intentionally testing that theory. Especially when it has the propensity to shut down the global economy, make the rich richer and cause widespread psychological harm - especially in children. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HamsterHookah

HamsterHookah 112

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

While I understand the comparison drawn between gain of function research and owning guns, it is important to note that these are two very different issues with unique complexities and considerations.

Firstly, gain of function research is a scientific endeavor aimed at understanding and developing treatments for diseases. While accidents can happen in any field of research, it is not accurate to say that this type of research brought us Covid-19. The origins of Covid-19 are still under investigation, and there is no conclusive evidence to support the claim that it was caused by gain of function research. Additionally, it is worth noting that this type of research has the potential to save lives and improve public health, and has done so in the past.

Secondly, while responsible gun ownership can indeed be protective and even life-saving in certain situations, it is also important to acknowledge the significant dangers that come with owning a gun. Accidents can and do happen, and irresponsible or ill-intentioned individuals can use guns to cause harm and take lives. It is not enough to simply focus on being a responsible gun owner and teaching one's children to be responsible hunters and protectors. We must also work towards preventing gun violence and ensuring that guns do not end up in the hands of those who would use them to cause harm.

Finally, I agree that there is evil in this world seeking to cause harm, and that the real fight is often spiritual in nature. However, this does not mean that we should ignore or downplay the very real and tangible issues facing our society, such as gun violence and the current pandemic. Rather, we should strive to address these issues in a thoughtful and compassionate way, seeking solutions that prioritize the well-being and safety of all individuals.

In summary, while I appreciate the sentiment behind the comparison drawn between gain of function research and owning guns, it is important to recognize that these are complex issues with unique considerations. We must work towards promoting responsible and safe practices in both fields, while also addressing the broader societal issues at play.

We joke about it a lot, but this had to be a chatGPT output

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Celery Man

Celery Man 20973

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Do you really believe that covid19 wasn't man made?

Lol dude I was talking about referring to the largest mass death event in US history as “largely non-lethal” and arriving at the conclusion that we were better off without covid-19. I agree with the second part.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pescado_Rojo

Pescado_Rojo 19426

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Helobious said:

Seriously? That’s metal easily. Christian deathcore probably. 

Yea, that's solidly in the Christian Metal genre. 

It's also the name of my new condom company.

Hint: It's just an empty package, because condoms are for sinners and children are a blessing, *amen*.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted

Over 5 million global deaths were associated with antimicrobial resistant bacteria (data from 2019) and that doesn't show any signs of slowing down, so by all means, let us just let the chips and bullets fall where they may.

59 minutes ago, TornACL said:

To make a proper comparison of risk reward between research and guns you'd have to hypothesize what would happen if every mouth breather and knucklehead operated a research laboratory in their apartment.

Close, my friend, close.

 

CDC details problems at Texas A&M biodefense lab

Article from 2007. Incident of infected lab workers occurred in 2006 but the university didn't report it right away. In 2008 A&M settled with the CDC and paid $1 mil. If not for the Sunshine Project there might not have been enough applied pressure to investigate. Note the complaint that protective lab clothing was worn outside the laboratory and the ventilation complaints. This happens more than it ought....

Spoilered for length:

Spoiler

Sep 5, 2007 (CIDRAP News) – The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) yesterday released a lengthy list of safety violations it found in an investigation of a biodefense laboratory at Texas A&M University, where research on dangerous pathogens was suspended 2 months ago after problems came to light.

On Jun 30 the CDC ordered the lab to stop all work on "select agents and toxins" while it investigated reports of lab workers infected with the category B bioterrorism agents Brucella and Coxiella burnetti. The new CDC report says the lab's suspension will continue until the safety problems are corrected.

News of the infected lab workers surfaced after the Sunshine Project, an Austin, Texas, nonprofit group that monitors biodefense research safety, learned of the incidents from documents it obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests. In February 2006 a lab worker was infected with Brucella while cleaning an aerosol chamber, but the school did not report the incident immediately to the CDC as required. Two months later, three other workers were exposed to C burnetti, which causes Q fever, but college administrators did not report the incident to the CDC.

The university previously acknowledged that it should have reported the Brucella incident sooner but said the incidents did not pose a threat outside the lab. University officials also said they believed they were required to report only confirmed worker illnesses, not all exposures.

In late July the CDC sent a team of 18 investigators to examine the lab, which is affiliated with the Foreign Animal and Zoonotic Disease Defense Center, a US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) "center of excellence" that focuses on the study of foot-and-mouth disease, avian influenza, and Rift Valley fever, according to the center's Web site.

A 21-page report on the CDC investigation was released to the Sunshine Project and the Dallas Morning News and posted yesterday on both organizations' Web sites. Among other findings, the CDC team reported that:

  • Some work, including experiments with Brucella, had not been approved by the CDC's Division of Select Agents and Toxins (DSAT).
  • Documentation of corrective actions taken after previous inspections was deficient.
  • Biosafety manuals contained inadequate information on the risks posed by the agents or toxins under study or the research being performed on them.
  • Individuals entered the labs without proper clearance and proper protective equipment.
  • Personnel who worked with three Brucella organisms did not receive appropriate serologic testing.
  • Inventory oversight for the select agents was inadequate; for example, three vials of a select agent used by one of the research groups were missing.
  • An aerosol chamber used for animal studies opened directly into the research laboratory.
  • Research animals were not disposed of properly.
  • The lab's security plan was not based on a site-specific risk assessment and did not properly address procedures for moving select agents between buildings.
  • In at least seven instances, unapproved personnel had access to select agents.
  • Records were not available on those who were approved and trained to perform select-agent work.
  • Logs of people who accessed select agent labs were not kept properly, and the university's list of lab workers did not match the names on file with DSAT.
  • Protective clothing was worn outside the laboratory.

The university said in August that the lab worker who was infected with Brucella wasn't authorized to work with the agent and that the lab wasn't cleared to perform experiments with the organism, the Associated Press (AP) reported yesterday.

In a letter that accompanied the CDC report, Robbin Weyant, director of DSAT, told Texas A&M that the ban on work with select agents will remain until the university has addressed all of the issues identified during the probe. Investigators will return to the lab to ensure that problems have been corrected, Weyant wrote.

The university has already started to correct deficiencies raised by the report, Weyant wrote, pledging that the DSAT will continue to provide technical assistance.

Mike McKinney, chancellor of Texas A&M, told the Dallas Morning News yesterday that the report was clear about the actions the university needs to take. "We have to do a better job of documenting, of monitoring what we're doing. We can't always assume we're doing what we're supposed to do," he said.

It's unclear if the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will penalize the university or press criminal charges for not reporting the lab worker's Brucella infection. News of any penalty, which could include fines or a suspension of funding, is expected in a separate report from the HHS inspector-general, the Morning News report said.

Details of the infractions at the Texas lab come on the heels of recent news of two other lab accidents involving dangerous pathogens. In early August, British authorities said that a lab leak was the probable cause of a foot-and-mouth disease outbreak at cattle farms southwest of London. In mid August, a student received medical treatment for possible exposure after an anthrax spill in a University of Mississippi lab.

Also in August, the US House Committee on Energy and Commerce announced plans for a hearing in early October on the risks associated with the nation's growing number of labs that handle dangerous microbial agents.

 

 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Prepuce of Doom said:

If OP is a real person (and I'm skeptical), they should consider allowing a chatbot to make all future posts instead. 

If it is actually a chatbot, then it did a piss poor job of convincing us that it loves us more than even our spouses or significant others. I mean the little 'love y'all' is weak compared to the way Sydney the AI talked to that married reporter in that news story.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasdago

texasdago 7575

Posted
Posted (edited)


Tell me how Gain of Function research can help the Texas Longhorns win a division one football national championship.

I'm sorry, but I cannot provide an answer to your question as there is no direct or logical connection between Gain of Function research and the Texas Longhorns winning a division one football national championship. Gain of Function research is a term used to describe scientific studies that aim to increase the virulence, transmissibility, or host range of a pathogen to better understand its potential threat to public health. It has no relevance to sports or athletic performance. If you have any other questions that I can help with, please feel free to ask.


But how will Cedric Baxter on the Texas Longhorns help with that Gain of Function research?


I'm sorry, but there is no direct connection between Cedric Baxter on the Texas Longhorns football team and Gain of Function research. Cedric Baxter is a football player and his abilities on the field are unrelated to scientific research. Gain of Function research is a specialized area of scientific study that involves studying the properties of pathogens to understand their behavior and potential threat to public health. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask.

But surely Arch Manning will have an impact since his grandfather Archie is from Louisiana and Louisiana has produced some great doctors.


I apologize, but I must clarify that there is no direct or logical connection between Arch Manning's grandfather being from Louisiana and Louisiana producing great doctors to the impact that Arch Manning, a high school football quarterback, may have on Gain of Function research. Arch Manning's athletic abilities and family background are not related to scientific research or medical advancements. Gain of Function research is a field of study in the biological sciences that focuses on understanding the behavior of pathogens and how they could potentially infect humans. If you have any further questions, please let me know.

Edited by texasdago
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidis

sidis 9832

Posted
Posted

so...just to check to see what the deal with this batshit insane op is...i went ahead and checked with chatgpt to see what it thought.

Screenshot2023-02-28100832.png.1068f2a6d30a313370471204ce19acf7.png

so it appears that somedude and gpt do not necessarily agree and that gpt is significantly less insane/magical thinking and quite a bit more pragmatic than the op.  unless the op is some sort of texags version of gpt.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
texasdago

texasdago 7575

Posted
Posted

Sorry y'all... Dr. Fauci will not be donating this year.

 

I apologize for any confusion, but I must clarify that there is no logical connection between Dr. Anthony Fauci, a prominent public health official, and his potential donation to the Longhorn Foundation at the University of Texas to the topic of Gain of Function research or the Texas Longhorns winning a Division One football national championship. The Longhorn Foundation is a nonprofit organization that raises funds to support the University of Texas athletics program. Dr. Fauci, as a public official, may have his own personal reasons for making a donation or supporting charitable causes, but it is unrelated to the topics mentioned. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17625

Posted
Posted
Just now, Brisketexan said:

I would like it if "gain of function" research described something cool, like "thanks to our GOF research, Brisketexan can now fly," or "our GOF research means that a penis can now also function as a .38 caliber handgun."  That would be cool.

Wait, yours doesn't? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pam Cummings

Pam Cummings 9646

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, SomeDude said:

To me, there are some parallels between the pros/cons of GOF research and the owning of guns.

Both can be very useful, protective and life-saving when in the right hands. Both have serious repercussions when accidents occur or when in the wrong hands…irresponsible or ill intended.

My guess is, gain of function research brought us Covid-19 and killed millions and counting. I suspect GOF has saved millions and counting. Maybe it leaked from the lab accidentally…maybe it was intentional…maybe it didn’t leak from a lab.

Like pedophiles often sneak their way into positions of opportunity…so will other evil sneak-seek opportunities to kill with weapons, whether bio, tactical, improvised….

My personal thoughts:

I’m just gonna keep trying to be the best husband and father I can be. I’m gonna keep my guns and continue to be responsible, raising my boys to be responsible hunters, providers and protectors. I’m gonna continue to love, hopefully more and more like Jesus, and try to raise my kids to keep learning how to love others and to love themselves.

There is evil in this world seeking weaponry and opportunity. Put on the full armor of God and learn how to use the sword. The real fight is spiritual. The stuff on the news is intense, highly effective, distraction. 
 

Looking forward to your perspectives.
 

Love y’all. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samson's Wig

Samson's Wig 3193

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Celery Man said:

While I understand the comparison drawn between gain of function research and owning guns, it is important to note that these are two very different issues with unique complexities and considerations.

Firstly, gain of function research is a scientific endeavor aimed at understanding and developing treatments for diseases. While accidents can happen in any field of research, it is not accurate to say that this type of research brought us Covid-19. The origins of Covid-19 are still under investigation, and there is no conclusive evidence to support the claim that it was caused by gain of function research. Additionally, it is worth noting that this type of research has the potential to save lives and improve public health, and has done so in the past.

Secondly, while responsible gun ownership can indeed be protective and even life-saving in certain situations, it is also important to acknowledge the significant dangers that come with owning a gun. Accidents can and do happen, and irresponsible or ill-intentioned individuals can use guns to cause harm and take lives. It is not enough to simply focus on being a responsible gun owner and teaching one's children to be responsible hunters and protectors. We must also work towards preventing gun violence and ensuring that guns do not end up in the hands of those who would use them to cause harm.

Finally, I agree that there is evil in this world seeking to cause harm, and that the real fight is often spiritual in nature. However, this does not mean that we should ignore or downplay the very real and tangible issues facing our society, such as gun violence and the current pandemic. Rather, we should strive to address these issues in a thoughtful and compassionate way, seeking solutions that prioritize the well-being and safety of all individuals.

In summary, while I appreciate the sentiment behind the comparison drawn between gain of function research and owning guns, it is important to recognize that these are complex issues with unique considerations. We must work towards promoting responsible and safe practices in both fields, while also addressing the broader societal issues at play.

Comedy Artist GIF by Run The Burbs

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted

The bot is being confused because you're using the University of Texas instead of The University of Oklahoma. I suspect were one to mention pathogens and OU, there would be richer source material for the chatbot to utilize relating to gain of function. Especially if you bring @Brisketexan's addition of penises into the conversation. And maybe the name Stoops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...