An interesting post! It seems like the post is doing several things:
(1) positing some potential problems and gaps in current efforts in biosecurity.
(2) suggesting some possible steps that could be taken to address them.
(3) suggesting or arguing that engineers and materials scientists would be well-placed to undertake or contribute to these steps.
Your comments on all three seem plausible to me (a non-expert). But you seem to provide more links and evidence for (2) than (1) or (3).
Since (2) and (3) are dependent upon (1) being correct, I’d be interested in what sorts of evidence you have for it. E.g. what has led you to make the following claims?
The whole of “the problem” section, especially “Unfortunately, people with these backgrounds are currently severely lacking in biosecurity.”
“PPE that was highly effective, easy to use, and cheap to distribute… is currently laughably neglected.”
“relatively little time and money have gone into either implementing these technologies or identifying promising alternatives.”
Regarding (3), I have similar but lower priority questions. That case seems more intuitive to me.
An interesting post! It seems like the post is doing several things:
(1) positing some potential problems and gaps in current efforts in biosecurity. (2) suggesting some possible steps that could be taken to address them. (3) suggesting or arguing that engineers and materials scientists would be well-placed to undertake or contribute to these steps.
Your comments on all three seem plausible to me (a non-expert). But you seem to provide more links and evidence for (2) than (1) or (3).
Since (2) and (3) are dependent upon (1) being correct, I’d be interested in what sorts of evidence you have for it. E.g. what has led you to make the following claims?
The whole of “the problem” section, especially “Unfortunately, people with these backgrounds are currently severely lacking in biosecurity.”
“PPE that was highly effective, easy to use, and cheap to distribute… is currently laughably neglected.”
“relatively little time and money have gone into either implementing these technologies or identifying promising alternatives.”
Regarding (3), I have similar but lower priority questions. That case seems more intuitive to me.