Ascendental

Scientists put starfish showing symptoms in tanks with starfish not showing symptoms but from the same area. The apparently healthy starfish died, but no faster than if they were in a tank without sick ones. Does this mean literally all of the starfish collected died? Have they not found any resistant to the syndrome?

Also, have they put starfish from other areas (perhaps other countries) which haven't yet had die-offs in tanks with sick starfish? Assuming it is a pathogen it would be important to know if any other starfish have resistance to it.

Okay, so plenty of other species of sea stars haven't been affected yet - but does the fatality rate appear to be 100% in the species which are affected?

Do you have any thoughts on finding the balance between supporting short-term charitable projects (such as disaster relief) and long-term projects (such as medical research)?

When trying to estimate the amount of good you can do with a certain budget the short-term projects are generally much easier to assess, whereas many long-term projects have multiple uncertainties, but the potential to do a lot more good in the long run. How do you deal with that? How do you compare the value of saving a life now with the chance of saving two in the future?

Discussion here.