Comment

Comment on He made beer that’s also a vaccine. Now controversy is brewing

But he did it on personal time, with personal resources, under the purview of a non-profit totally unrelated to his employer. He didn’t use their name/brand, so there’s no defamation here either is there?

I understand the fear of some rogue ‘mad scientist’ doing something stupid but this really doesn’t seem to be that situation here.

source

Sort:hotnew top

SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Every institution has strict rules for research ethics on any human, and this would not pass ethics.

Let’s state the fucking obvious: some researcher injects himself with a virus or bacteria to make a vaccine and the strain mutates to be more infectious and virulent. Stupid. Full stop.

source
WolfLink@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Running a study that’s unethical and scientifically rigorous and pushing the results, is a mark of a bad scientist.

This is rather similar to how the “vaccines cause autism” myth started.

source
- Arghblarg@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  
  Running a study that’s unethical
  
  You’re assuming the conclusion though – that it’s unethical. The argument here is that he tested it on himself specifically in order not to endanger others – as that would be unethical.
  
  If, as some would hope, other scientists try to reproduce the results then it’ll get corroboration, or be shot down.
  
  If the brews contain only safe test viruses, it should ethically be a safe experiment. Test for antibodies to the innocuous viruses and thee mechanism is proven or disproven.
  
  source
  - SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    
    You’re assuming the conclusion though – that it’s unethical.
    
    I sit on an institutional REB. This is unethical. There’s a long list of accidental deaths in history from medical “geniuses” and if left unchecked, eventually we could get more virulent infectious agents from idiots trying to CRISPR edit themselves in their garage.
    
    source