This is powerful. It's such simple (and blatant) 'framing' ... and yet it really does make me feel better about considering whether the world is (much) worse than I now believe.
You are pointing out real costs to this idea and I don't disagree that what you describe are real risks.
But it seems extremely unlikely – effectively impossible – that anything like this would ever be approved by an "ethics board" so seeking approval would be a waste of resources.
Someone, or some group of people, being prosecuted or risking being prosecuted would potentially be a heroic sacrifice – not a flagrant mistake.
That's a good idea, but it doesn't seem like tests will be widespread anytime soon, and maybe not available to individuals for even longer (or ever).
But the video idea is good. And maybe it could be used for participants to rehearse both the testing and variolation protocols before performing them for real.
The reason not to do something like this is because it wouldn't work, not because it's not approved by an official "ethics board".
Informing volunteers would be relatively easy and I definitely don't think the post author was proposing not informing participants of the risks.
I do agree that this should be its own project, separate from this site.
I also don't think this would likely produce good-enough data. I'm not confident that enough participants could be found, and verified, as having followed any protocol that could be designed (e.g. provide sufficient evidence of them being infected and at a low dose).
Another highlight around 32:40:
Another highlight around 29:05:
Another highlight around 23:20:
Another highlight, around 20 minutes:
I'm listening to it now myself but I thought his episode with Joe Rogan was good enough to recommend this first.
An early highlight:
Maybe people should, after removing a mask, wash their hands, then their faces (with a cloth too perhaps), and then their hands again?