greenbamboo

You probably can’t stop other people from using words you believe or even know to be inappropriate. Thankfully it’s sometimes easy to spot science that’s not really science. It’s the stuff that seems legit but isn’t that’s a problem. I’d say the problem is actually bigger in harder sciences. Anybody can look at most social science research and see it’s dodgy. Collusion rings in comp sci research are harder to detect, just to pick an example.

The sexualization happens downstream on social media. See for instance the pole vaulting videos on YouTube.

Well incentives matter. The government has its incentives, so do drug makers, so do fda members and so do you. Always consider how incentives impact information you receive. Medical textbooks have optimal incentives if you are trying to learn. Media, government and drug makers maybe not.

So it’s only gof if it results in a viable virus? That makes sense. I guess there’s no real danger of a lab escape as long as it’s not a viable virus, but then I do wonder why the backtracking on the lab escape investigation? Was WIC maybe doing gof research and not telling people?

“ they spliced off its spike protein and fused it to the backbone before exposing it to human cells in lab dishes to see if it would grow”

As a lay person, this is how I understand gof, based on articles in the popular press over the past decade or so. Maybe the press has been wrong, they often are, but this strikes me, again a layperson, as an obvious redefinition of gof.