The devil is in the details.....

ANGRYWOLF

ANGRYWOLF

Red Mage
Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2010
Messages
548
Age
67
Gil
0
bioterror-should-scientists-describe-how-to-make-a-man-made-killer-flu

The basic theme of the article is that biology researchers have found out how to make bird flu more communicable.Meaning that they have found a way to inhance its transmissibility from one person to another, making it much more infectious.

The US government is asking them now not to publish certain details about how they did this for fear that terrorists or hostile countries counld do this .

What do you think ?:hal:


Years ago I read Stephen Kings The Stand and a few years later I had the honor to actually meet Stephen King at a convention.
This sounds alot like it has the potential to be another Captain Trips to me.;)
 
Hmmm they could alter the swine flu as well. This is troublesome. If terrorists get a hold of this they could release it and the contamination area could spread faster and get bigger.

:hmmm: Interesting. Do you have some links by the way?
 
I heard about this.

The researcher found a way to make the virus airborne transmissable.

They say if it got loose, 50% of the people in the world would die from it.

:ohshit:
 
Better this way than the other way around, but I agree on the fact it should be censored. This is some messed up shit. Humans always altering with things they should just leave the fuck alone. It might bite ya in the ass. We could be the victims. Bio terrorisme.


It might seem crazy that researchers are even carrying out such experiments, given the risk — however small — that an engineered and efficient H5N1 could escape the lab and trigger a pandemic out of a Stephen King novel. But, as NSABB acknowledged, such studies are important for helping scientists better understand a virus, which then helps them better understand how to fight it.
Click to expand...

​
 
The wrong person behind the wheel of a car can be dangerous but, for the largest part of the world, a car is nothing but beneficial.

The results from this study could potentially enhance our understanding of transmission, virulence and, consequently, preventions and cures. Most of the world will use this information for good. A few cunts might one day engineer a strain of the virus that COULD be harmful.

It's more unethical to censor this, to be honest. I look forward to reading it in Nature.
 
Kerrigan said:
The results from this study could potentially enhance our understanding of transmission, virulence and, consequently, preventions and cures.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't know that it does any of those things. :ohshit:

1. Methods of transmission are known & can be studied without engineering apocalyptic viruses.

2. Virulence and mortality rates are known. There isn't necessarily anything to be gained here.

3. Prevention and cure are relatively well known and can be studied without this.

Under the heading that says: what do you hope to learn from this, I wonder if it can be justified.

I wonder if it isn't some fringe offshoot of Piankaism.
 
Richard B Riddick said:
1. Methods of transmission are known & can be studied without engineering apocalyptic viruses.

2. Virulence and mortality rates are known. There isn't necessarily anything to be gained here.

3. Prevention and cure are relatively well known and can be studied without this.

Under the heading that says: what do you hope to learn from this, I wonder if it can be justified.

I wonder if it isn't some fringe offshoot of Piankaism.
Click to expand...

You learn about genetics my studying mutations. The scientists in the study were studying mutants to learn more about the function of genes in the virus. We have not learned everything about its genome yet. Studying the mutations that enhance transmission, pathogenicity and virulence can help us to better understand the virus - this might result in vaccines, pharmaceutical therapies. We could eradicate it before it happens in the first place.

That day you say "we've learned enough" in science is the day we should all start to feel really sad.
 
I love science....

as for God, well, that's another topic.:hal:


I don't agree that scientists doing this research shows anything worth that degree of risk.The threat/risk outweigh the potential gain.
It's what in legal term would be called a balancing test:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/balancing+test

This experimentation fails it.

Comperable to it would have been the above ground nuclear testing imo.
Bikini atoll.The French south pacific testing.The Soviet nuclear testing
with the abnormal children being born in that region.

The problems and potential problems outweighed the information gained in those and the risk in this flu experimentation outweighs the potential gains.
You risk making a real Captain Trips versus learning about a flu virus.
The Captain Trips could kill everybody.:hal:


There was a case a few months back where a researcher in Chicago caught the Plague and died.I will look for a link in case anyone wants to read about it.If one of the flu researchers had caught this new flu would the research team have known how to deal with it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...adaban-U-S-scientist-die-plague-50-years.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top