Gain of Function Research on Forbidden Planet

Letter to Ephesians: Altho a skeptic of RFK, Jr.’s relentless skepticism on vaccines, I agree with the Secretary when he suggests that too often “science says whatever money wants it to say.” A post by Camus opines RFK has also now exposed “the terrifying professional incentives driving gain-of-function research.”

The post argues “the line between groundbreaking science and catastrophic hubris has been crossed. In a “stunning commentary,” we’re told, RFK “highlights a critical case [of] scientists who actively engineered an avian flu virus with mammalian transmissibility.” The question posed, is “Why?” Suggested answers include, “For career advancement, funding, and the prestige of being first. They then published their blueprint, bragging of a breakthrough that could wipe out humanity.” In his critique, “RFK, Jr. identifies a disturbing ‘God complex’ within this field – a pursuit of omnipotence through the creation of existential threats.” He argues, “This isn’t just science; it’s a dangerous game played with the fate of our species, where the ultimate price for professional glory is a pandemic.” Ever hear of the Wuhan Flu?

The hyperbole on both sides of the scientific debate aside, it’s fair to say many scientists who on balance favor careful gain of function research, have shared serious concerns over its potential for abuse. Similar debates are emerging over the potential for catastrophic consequences resulting from the cynical abuse of artificial intelligence. These modern-day debates mirror the 1950’s & 60’s worries over nuclear power. Of course, the Hollywood movies are cashing in now as then (Watch “Forbidden Planet.”). As such, Camus’s updated question as to, “Why would anyone invite such a catastrophe?” is a fair if not common sense/necessary ask.

Davd Soul