ADVERTISEMENT

Covid Virus Research at Boston University

Tulsaaggieson

All-American
Gold Member
Mar 29, 2010
4,811
7,419
113
Stillwater
Boston University Defends Controversial Study on COVID Hybrid Strain With ’80 Percent’ Mortality Rate in Mice

This may have already been posted, but it deserves a stand-alone thread.

“The research was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC), which consists of scientists as well as local community members,” the statement from Boston University said. “The Boston Public Health Commission also approved the research. Furthermore, this research mirrors and reinforces the findings of other, similar research performed by other organizations, including the FDA." - So not one "scientist" in this group can be a voice for reason? This may be more concerning than the story itself.

“We take our safety and security of how we handle pathogens seriously, and the virus does not leave the laboratory in which it’s being studied,” he said. “Our whole goal is for the public’s health. And this study was part of that, finding what part of the virus is responsible for causing severe disease. If we can understand that, we can then develop the tools that we need to develop better therapeutics.” - I am sure they do take their virus security very seriously, and I'm not being sarcastic about it. After that the science here can be the issue. In this case does the research that can help prevent a pandemic cause one?

At least one scientist took issue with the research:

“If they start having a dual purpose for research that has offensive military implications, that is the concern,” he said.

This is the part where people leave out the context. If you are doing research to prevent deadly viruses, then you are doing research on how to weaponize them. You can't separate the two. Say you want to protect yourself from future bird flus, you need to do research on how to make the virus stronger so you can research worse case scenarios. So, by trying to possibly prevent a pandemic we are creating a virus that could possibly create a pandemic. This is a catch-22 scenario, and one that potentially has worldwide destruction implications. If I don't create the virus and study it, when it happens in nature then I will not be prepared to stop it, but if I create the virus and it gets out then I have also destroyed the world that I was trying to protect in the first place. The second part places all the security on man, who given enough time, will eventually let the virus out, because the only surety in this scenario is that man makes mistakes. The final question will be: If both scenarios end in destruction, then why invite that ourselves?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ClintonDavidScott
Told y'all and told y'all we are at war they want to kill most off- they thought covid was going to be more lethal they want to unleash the next one- biggest reason Putin started taking up for themselves again NATO

Decertify And let's have a party against the left before they kill us all - we just sit back and take it all right now- y'all think that virus is for Someone other than WTP? Guess again
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT