What do you think of biohazard labs?

[AviatorTom]

There are many biohazard labs around the world that work with dangerous and highly transmissible diseases for which there are no vaccines or treatments. The map shows where these labs are:

* Blue dots are Biosafety Level 4 labs; Red dots are Biosafety Level 3+ labs

* Paw prints are Animal Biosafety Level 4 labs; Insects are Arthropod Biosafety Level 4 Labs

* The country colors indicate the country's Biorisk Management, from Red (0%) to Green (100%)

There's an interactive map here: https://www.globalbiolabs.org/map

Some believe that it is important to study these diseases, while others feel that the risk may outweigh the benefits.

What do you think?

Keep Biohazard labs - it's important to understand diseases and possibly develop cures

Keep Biohazard labs - increase their management to reduce the risks

Get rid of Biohazard labs - they are too risky

Something else - please tell us

[AimeeKyle]

I clicked the wrong one…. I meant to say, keep open / increase management…. The key is to not fund research in areas with little / stringent controls / oversight who are not 100% transparent with their reporting/communication (I. e. China). by the way, I’m still not sold that this was caused by negligent lab personnel (not saying it isn’t, that is the easy answer…. or was it equipment (HVAC or other ventilation systems) failure…. or could it have been a purposeful leak?)

Besides the mismanagement (at best), inadequate equipment, the real issue is the lack of regulation / controls / oversight of gain of function research (in certain parts of the world).

More about gain of function: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gain-of-function_research

Unfortunately the US and other highly regulated countries/regions end up paying to have research carried out/performed elsewhere (with less regulation, oversight, non litigious regions/countries)…. It goes the same with torture or low cost / slave manufacturing too (among other things).

Some additional info: https://theintercept.com/2021/11/03/coronavirus-research-ecohealth-nih-emails

[OlderAndWiser]

Unfortunately, the only people who are truly in a postion to understand everything that would go into a risk/benefit analysis would be the people who work in those labs, and they would have an extreme bias in answering this question, as their livelihood depends on keeping those labs open.

[purplepoppy]

Porton down, England is the one most people think of in the UK because it does biological weapons testing. Quite a few people have died there in human trials. There are of course a few less known biohazard labs scattered around that aren't linked to the military.

The reality is a disease can easily be brought into the uk by wildlife or tourists plus they're constantly mutating. I'd rather have people researching them so we can react quickly if there is an outbreak or a terrorist attack.

[EmmaMary]

@purplepoppy

Thank you darling for saving me the time in typing virtually the same answer.

[Amy10223]

I think we should keep them open. I'm sure scientists take all precautions necessary to avoid anything dangerous being let out from the labs. After all--aren't the diseases that we and current babies are vaccinated for once a threat? If we were to close them--then there would be a possibility that those diseases would eventually make their way around the globe and kill more people.

[AviatorTom]

Amy, you do know that the likely source of COVID-19 was a biohazard lab in Wuhan China, possibly by a overly tired technician.

[Amy10223]

Yes I do know that. But my nephew, an immunologist who works in a lab, would say it's better to keep them open than closed. Where else would they be able to protect us from others, if not in labs?

[exitseven]

We do not need anyore new deadly viruses and mankind already has plenty of ways to kill each other.

[Guy13]

That the homeland or domestic terrorists it the Chinese will blow them up as an attack upon this nation.

[Jmmmfi4]

Why would I think anything about them at all