There's more to GoF research than developing vaccines. Sometimes its trying to understand host virus interaction, virus evolution, zoonotic events. The list goes on. The majority of primary research is not at all interested in vaccine development.
For coronaviruses they're a huge family of viruses. Sometimes it's not transferable between species
Re:Publish and Perish
by TazeTSchnitzel on Sunday June 06, 2021 @09:40AM
(#27413071)
The argument the post is presenting seems like it could be a straw man. Gain-of-function research would surely be useful to things other than vaccines, which might even be more important than vaccines? For example, figuring out in what conditions viruses jump hosts and therefore how to reduce the likelihood of new epidemics.
Re:Publish and Perish
by onlyrealcuzzo on Sunday June 06, 2021 @11:24AM
(#27413786)
Why wouldn't Gain-of-Function be helpful for research on oncolytic viruses (viruses that target cancer cells)?
I've been wondering about this for the last few months, I feel like this "better prepare for future viruses" argument is substantially weaker now — coronaviruses were a well-known group of viruses, there was already research directed at gain-of-function work for this family of viruses, and yet as far as I'm aware the mRNA vaccines that were developed derived no benefit from any of that research. So whether or not the virus came from a lab, why should we fund this kind of work since it seems not to be very useful?