All I can say is WOW.
I've been subscribed to the MIT Technology Review for some time - there is a paywall. This article is available as a podcast as well (and no, the links in this block below don't seem to work well or at all):
This interview is remarkable for several reasons.
One, it appears to be "outside" any sort of corporate control.
Two, it really sounds like a "data guy" just talking about random data (though not data that, if used incorrectly, could kill or injure someone).
And finally, it describe a "shoot from the hip, wild west" sort of business model that says "let's get our technology out the door cause it's gonna save everybody testing be damned" rather than something you might expect form the CDC, FDA or even run-of-the-mill "big pharma."
There is an interviewer, Jennifer Strong.
Here's a few quotes from the article (Dave Johnson speaking): "Let's take out decision making away from, you know, scientists who don't wanna just stare and look at data over and over and over again. But let's use their insights. Let's build models and algorithms to automate their analyses and, you know, do a much better job and much faster job of predicting outcomes and improving the quality of our, our data."
So the scientists, who understand this stuff, aren't needed?
"... so when this sequence [Covid] was first released by Chinese authorities, it was only 42 days for us to go from taking that sequence, identifying, you know, these are the mutations we wanna do. This is the protein we want to target."
Mutations? Of what exactly... Hmmm.
"Forty-two days from that point to actually building up clinical-grade, human safe manufacturing, batch, and shipping it off to the clinic—which is totally unprecedented. I think a lot of people were surprised by how fast it moved"
The article goes on to describe the studies, how the data "drove" the studies, how the studies were modified to "keep up" with the fast pace.
This is the most ridiculous nonsense I have ever heard.
The idea here was to basically use a bunch of data collected over a decade, take some AI, and whip up mRNA to inject in humans. In forty two (42) days no less.
Data and results not working out as planned?
(Dave Johnson speaking): "We got, I wanna say, maybe 80% of the way through the study. And we realized, look, we are not gonna meet our, our objectives because the level of volunteers aren't quite what we wanted [ Emphasis mine, what does this mean I wonder? ]. And so we made the, the really difficult decision to say, look, we need a throttle, some areas of the country and focus on outreach in different areas to get the right makeup so that the study was representative."
(Dave Johnson speaking): "We got, I wanna say, maybe 80% of the way through the study. And we realized, look, we are not gonna meet our, our objectives because the level of volunteers aren't quite what we wanted [ Emphasis mine, what does this mean I wonder? ]. And so we made the, the really difficult decision to say, look, we need a throttle, some areas of the country and focus on outreach in different areas to get the right makeup so that the study was representative."
This is not science at all. Neither is it medicine.
It's a badly run software/big data experiment with robots diddling vats of mRNA.
How long has Tesla been struggling with various autopilot efforts?
Would you want you child riding on a school bus with some AI developed "autonomous driving module" developed as described above?
"Hey, it's July 15th and school starts end of August. These test results aren't what we expected so let's run some different tests..."
