tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post1212358476084505254..comments2024-03-24T11:01:27.668-04:00Comments on Resource Insights: Debate over origin of COVID highlights catastrophic systemic risksKurt Cobbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05330759091950742285noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-62331719077180454582021-06-04T10:46:26.021-04:002021-06-04T10:46:26.021-04:00Excellent, as usual, Kurt.
Thanks!!
~ Michael Dow...Excellent, as usual, Kurt. <br />Thanks!!<br />~ Michael Dowd and Connie BarlowMichael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16915893031346978453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-77613501201038410542021-05-31T11:32:17.249-04:002021-05-31T11:32:17.249-04:00the first i heard of this technology was in the 70...the first i heard of this technology was in the 70s, i imagine sometime after the Asilomar Conference, when the debate came into public view...that conference was called to discuss issues surrounding recombinant DNA, ie:<br /><br /><i>In the summer of 1971, experiments were planned to introduce SV40 DNA into an E. coli cell. This was of concern because SV40 is a monkey virus that can transform monkey as well as human cell lines into a cancerous state.</i><br /><br />https://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~mcclean/plsc431/debate/debate3.htm<br /><br />as i recall, they were going to use E. coli for those experiments because they believed it was harmless and unable to result in a transferable infection..<br /><br />it's now 50 years later...we're just damn lucky it's taken this long for the genie to get out of the bottle..rjshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15681812432224138582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-44583195187657473522021-05-31T08:51:32.266-04:002021-05-31T08:51:32.266-04:00Systemic risks. Yes, it is an issue we avoid like ...Systemic risks. Yes, it is an issue we avoid like the 'plague'. We could likely create a long list of processes and projects humanity pursues that severely underestimates or ignores the inherent risks. <br /><br />Here is what I just finished writing as commentary on an article from a Canadian online news site (https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2021/06/01/COVID-19-Lab-Leak-Wuhan-Story/): <br /><br />"The 'gain of function' research on coronaviruses has an interesting history. It has been supported and carried out by a number of nations, China and the US included. Do and can accidents happen in biosafety labs? Absolutely. Do China and the US compete and accuse each other of misdeeds? All the time. <br /><br />What I've read about this incident is not so much about geopolitical intrigue as some are making it to be (that seems to be just a leveraging of evidence to support political ends which is what the political/ruling class does all the time), but about scientists intent on continuing research in spite of warnings and criticisms of the dangers. There is good evidence that US interests (including Dr Anthony Fauci’s NIH) helped to fund the Chinese research because it had been discontinued in the US. In fact, Dr Fauci wrote several articles a number of years ago arguing for the research to continue despite the moratorium (see this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3484390/).<br /><br />The assumptions that the Chinese are going to be transparent and forthcoming in their investigations about the origins of the virus are naive at best. Governments (all) are rarely if ever transparent and forthcoming about anything, anytime. To believe otherwise is just foolhardy in my opinion and serve mostly to support a particularly narrative. <br /><br />I also disagree that we will find out eventually where this coronavirus mutation originated given how political the entire situation has become. There will likely be a camp who believe it originated naturally and a camp who believe it was manufactured by humans—even among scientists. Obfuscation is the hallmark of politics, especially with the importance of propaganda to control narratives and populations; and disagreement and cantankerous debates over interpretation of evidence permeates all science. Beyond some politicians leveraging the incident for political ends, there are a number of US researchers who don't want the trail of breadcrumbs about the continuing gain of function research leading to them to be discovered--listen to what Dr. Rand Paul has accused Dr. Fauci of; he's not accusing China, he's accusing researchers like Fauci and EcoAlliance's Peter Daszek of helping to pursue and fund gain of function research. <br /><br />Finally, I think we'd be better to try and close down safely all the biolabs, worldwide. Just as we should try to decommission all our nuclear plants and weapons. The hubris we display to believe we can control the negative consequences of these dangerous practices is phenomenal and will surely be our undoing--or at least, the undoing of future generations who will have to deal with the banquet of consequences of our dangerous ways." <br /><br /><br /> Steve Bullhttps://olduvai.canoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-30640729353878971262021-05-31T05:13:41.706-04:002021-05-31T05:13:41.706-04:00Hello Kurt, not related to this post but you may b...Hello Kurt, not related to this post but you may be interested in Simon Michaux's latest report 'The Mining of Minerals and the Limits to Growth.' Simon works for the Geological Survey of Finland. The report can be found here: https://tupa.gtk.fi/raportti/arkisto/16_2021.pdfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8861605.post-66032480235319122212021-05-30T13:57:58.247-04:002021-05-30T13:57:58.247-04:00Excellent article and great analogies, Kurt. Thank...Excellent article and great analogies, Kurt. Thanks so much and keep up the great work.Frank Warnockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11325908927984960623noreply@blogger.com