Currently getting a master's in genomics at Oxford. My thesis is focused on optimizing probe design for bait capture sequencing for infectious disease diagnostics/surveillance. Worked on biosecurity research around far-UVC safety @SecureBio. Organized EA Munich for >2 years and did some EA community building in Germany. Studied 3 years of clinical medicine.
Sometimes, I write about meditation and other stuff. You can find my writing on my website or Substack: https://glozematrix.substack.com/
Feel free to reach out to me at my email address, and let me know if you’d like to chat: hello [at] maxgoerlitz [dot] com
(last updated in March 2024)
Very useful comment, thanks!
hedging against uncertainty: we're just very uncertain about what a future pandemic might look like and where it will come from
I fully agree with this; I think this was an implicit premise of mine that I failed to point out explicitly.
... though I think for it to work you have to also add a premise about the relative risk of substitution, right?
Great point that I actually haven't considered so far. I would need to think about this more before giving my opinion. It seems really context-dependent, though, and hard to determine with any confidence.
Also, the Maginot line analogy is cool; I hadn't seen that before. (I guess I really should read more of your report 🙂)
Basically like "What Success Looks Like" (which is about transformative AI) but instead about what a world would look like that is really well protected from catastrophic pandemics.
It could be set in e.g. 2035, and describe what technologies and (political) mechanisms have been implemented to make the world "biosafe"—i.e. safe from global catastrophic biological risks.
I could even imagine versions of this that are a fictional story, maybe describing the life of someone living in that potential future.
I think it would be cool to have an overview of how different organizations think about their theory of change and how they present it. This would be helpful for organizations that don't yet have a public theory of change but would like to create one. It would also be useful for getting a clearer picture of what the high-level plans of different orgs are.
I want to see high-level abstract research what it would take to eliminate all infectious disease by a certain date, e.g. 2050 or 2080
I really liked "10 technologies that won't exist in 5 years" by Jacob Trefethen, and this post would have a similar vibe.
do some very rough BOTECs
This will likely be part of my lit review of my master's thesis and should also make an interesting blog post.
I am unsure whether to call it massively parallelised or massively multiplexed bait capture sequencing when you use on the order of 105-106 probes at the same time
What is agnostic metagenomic sequencing? https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.00119-22
What is massively multiplexed bait capture sequencing? https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00612-23
What are the pros and cons of the different approaches?
examples of Pros of bait capture sequencing
How are these methods different from similar, commercially available products?
(e.g., https://www.twistbioscience.com/products/ngs/fixed-panels/comprehensive-viral-research-panel)
Could you elaborate on what you mean by this?
Thanks for referring to these blog posts!