Slack / Private Message Drop — page 763

[2021-05-07 17:02:23] [Kristian Andersen] True. Might also just be better to leave it - it's shockingly hateful. I'm wondering if I should ping Jesse to warn him about this article since his Science commentary will be mixed up with Wade's article AND Jesse may well not read the Wade piece in detail and not realize what it actually says. [2021-05-07 17:14:13] [Eddie Holmes] No, Jesse has made his own bed - let him lie in it [2021-05-07 17:17:04] [Eddie Holmes] My advice is to do nothing: just focus on doing the best science you can Jesse is old enough to look after himself [2021-05-07 17:19:48] [Kristian Andersen] Yeah, fair points. And yeah - I'll let this one lie (although I will talk to Jon next week, although not about the Wade piece specifically) [2021-05-07 17:23:50] [Eddie Holmes] Good plan The only way through this in the long term is getting more data. I'm doing my best on that front. Focus on the science. The rest is noise. [2021-05-07 17:27:55] [Kristian Andersen] Couldn't agree more. It's really shocking to see a former NYT journalist write something this hateful though - with completely flawed 'science' thrown in. Plenty of scientists are sharing this article - I'm wondering if they're realizing exactly what he wrote... Oh well. Time for beer. [2021-05-08 05:43:30] [Robert Garry] Let's see if RelBloom actually say anything specific tomorrow. I'm betting on more of the same nonspecific arm waving - look:face_with_rolling_eyes: there's a lab [a big one with spacesuits] in Wuhan and they did [maybe dangerous] experiments with [gasp] coronaviruses. [2021-05-08 05:47:58] [Robert Garry] Important article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airborne-transmission.html [2021-05-08 06:03:52] [Robert Garry] The airborne story is a big one IMO. And, a reminder that when it comes to science that truth takes longer to spread - but it does find a way. [shared file(s): image.png, image.png, image.png] [2021-05-08 06:31:11] [Robert Garry] I'm hoping RelBloom do something like Relman did here: https://www.pnas.org/content/117/47/29246 "Some have argued that a deliberate engineering scenario is unlikely because one would not have had the insight _a priori_ to design the current pandemic virus (*3*). This argument fails to acknowledge the possibility that two or more as yet