RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong?

RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

atursvcMaam -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 11:41:27 AM)
The title brought out my snarky side: how many miles a gallon can you get out of the result. in a less P.C. world, "human embryonic material" has a tendency to refer to unborn children. imho, trading one life for another tends to go against my grain. my humble apologies if one has a family member who is suffering. i share your pain. in a very quiet scream, and in my tiny little mind, i have had the wonder that if i could change a life for my loved one's that i might think of that. i then realize the only place that i would feel comfortable with that is if it was my own life. now in a reasoned and rational frame of mind, i would not ask anyone else to sacrifice their loved one for my loved one. there are also very few people i would ask to give up a kidney, liver or heart for me or my loved one. my concern is that if this became reality my rational and reasonable mind might get overwhelmed by the emotional side. There are those in this world that would have no hesitation.

Rule -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 11:42:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly we are not zebras, Rule Hinduists disagree.

kittinSol -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 11:47:10 AM)
The thing is, they hardly killed anybody for this particular scientific achievement. All they did was to insert the human genetic material into a hollowed out cow's egg, thus making "cytoplasmic hybrids". A little like pushing some silly putty inside a condom, I suppose. The things in question aren't being grown into full-blown creatures. It's not like they crossed a pig and a human being (though sometimes, looking around me, I wonder whether this feat hasn't been carried out already).

sirsholly -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 11:48:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly we are not zebras, Rule Hinduists disagree. oh please

seeksfemslave -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 11:57:23 AM)
In principle I cant see anything wrong with this kind of research but I certainly wouldn't put too much credence on what scientists think they may discover as a result. Thats just a sales pitch. Why dont they just leave it at the basic truth that this is the only way to get access to cells at the crucial time when the embryo is unstructured and waiting to shape into the complex bio chemical miracle that is life as we see it. In fact I really carnt see anything wrong with using human eggs. So I say go for it lads. Just think, Kittensol's eggs and my tadpoles....the sky's the limit.

kittinSol -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 12:00:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Just think, Kittensol's eggs and my tadpoles....the sky's the limit. Nice offer, Seeks - but you forget that I'm already half Frog.

rook42 -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 12:29:04 PM)
Note: They ARE researching the root cause. The stated purpose of this technique is to help understand the process of the disease. They need embryonic stem cells to do that. The purpose is NOT to find a cureall pill to pop for it. Primary topic: The use of a cow egg was just a method to circumvent the lack of a human egg, not an attempt at creating another Janet Reno. This is really just about easily producing stem cells. 32 cells- i'd like to see the argument for sentience there(Not really, I've already seen it, and the argument is stupid). Reality has brought up some very good points, that aren't addressed. Side-Topics: Avoid the human rights issues; once someone is alive, don't go around trying to sustain methods for them to die "naturally" by. Just prevent them from being alive to begin with. Wrap it up, kids! The long run is over generations, not over a lifetime. Also, Malthus was a bit off... his model does NOT work. With education, technology, etc... You can increase the carrying capacity of the system. War, along with disesase, has a negative impact on economy/growth/quality of life, since it reduces the overall carrying capacity with a couple externalities; the old wives' tale to the contrary is not quite accurate. Rule has a point- is the value of a life greater than the quality of that life? Humans are not zebras... but why should zebras get better treatment? Because they are cute? At no point did he advocate KILLING people, or throwing them away for lions to devour (Although the imagery is funny... might have PETA* on you when your alzheimer's patient strangles the lion to death, though). He advocated ALLOWING them to die. It's selfish and ignorant to nonconsensually prolong their life for one's own sake- it will in no way increase the net quality of life for anyone. Whew... This topic is actually covering more bases than can be responded to easily :) Economics, recombinant biotech, population control, assisted suicide... geez. I'm tagging out. Edit: Pigs can climax for over 30 minutes, kittin... Not a bad idea to hybridize, kind of wish they could do some somatic engineering with me, now :P

atursvcMaam -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 1:03:06 PM)
Hmmm when the words change, i tend to get confused. the change from embryonic cells to genetic material changes what you said into a more politically correct phrase. the "hardly" scared the crap out of me, though. An "embryo" by definition, is a fertilized egg, which is a potential human. as for "quality of life" there are a number of possible answers. i don't really care to have anyone else decide on the "quality" of my life. (it feels pretty lousy some days) any more than i want to decide whether the elderly widow next door with the heart problems and the breathing tube deserves to continue.

abird -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 1:16:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RealityLicks The Catholic church is against it, calling them "Frankenstein" creatures, which leads you to think that they could grow into -- what? Minotaurs? Hellboy lookalikes? it matters not what they could grow into, because they wont be growing long enough to grow into anything more than cells.

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 1:43:10 PM)
~ FR~ Chromosome 6 by Robin Cook... My answer...it is wrong. Just because we can does not mean that we should. For now, some seem to feel that it is no big deal and that is is not going to grow beyond a few cells. Well, *will it stop there*? Go to the library and check out the book. It is fiction but it is a good read.

Crush -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 2:20:29 PM)
all joking aside.....(snarf, sniggle...chort) Ahem, ah, err..I know that in some countries they've tried for centuries to crossbreed humans and sheep... Oh god, not a serious bone in my body today..... Just can't do it....[image]http://elouai.com/images/yahoo/a37.gif[/image]

Aneirin -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 2:25:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RealityLicks I'm wondering what your thoughts are on scientific research using cow cells fused with human embryonic material. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/02/medicalresearch.ethicsofscience The University of Newcastle has started this work with the aim of curing things like Parkinson's and motor neurone disease. Owing to the shortage of human ones, they are taking eggs from cows and putting in a nucleus taken from embyronic human cells. The Catholic church is against it, calling them "Frankenstein" creatures, which leads you to think that they could grow into -- what? Minotaurs? Hellboy lookalikes? More seriously, wondered what the views are on the ethics of this - the churches say its wrong to create human life in a petri dish which intersects with pro-life debates - but what if you have a loved one whose life is threatened by disease? Should there be limits on research and if so, what should they be? Personally, I am against this, why, because it feels wrong, that is enough for me.But no matter what my feelings are, or that of any other person, organisation, religion or authority, it will happen. The possibilities are too tempting for those that are interested to leave alone, law or no law, licensed or not, they will carry on.For this to be an issue where a government gives the go ahead, there has got to be illegal activities in the past to lobby a government for the legal right to carry on. So, it is under the guise of helping mankind, an honourable cause, but one does wonder at what other projects might be in mind for less palatable reasons. Now in answer to the second part of the question, what would be my answer if a member of my family was inflicted with an incurrable ailment, why ,I bet that is much the same argument the scientists put to further their goal, preying on a person's feelings to their own. I am inclined to say let nature take it's course.

thornhappy -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 3:29:48 PM)
[quick reply] They've been doing this for years with pigs. As a matter of fact, hybrid pig islet cells have been transplanted into humans to help alleviate or cure type I diabetes. Pig heart valves are also used to replace human heart valves. thornhappy

luckydog1 -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 9:06:36 PM)
This is a very sticky issue. My first thought is that I don't like it for several reasons. But secondly, it really can't be stopped. We could stop it here in America or the EU for the most part, but not world wide. So it can only be regulated and debated. People should be able to stop projects through the political process, but ultimatley they can't. Just the way the world is made. I do not like the Idea of GM food, and GM people literally scares me. We have no idea what we are doing. And it is much easier to break something than to improve or fix. Just think about that, much easier to break than fix, it applies to everything. It's like a semi literate person with poor math skills, deciding to fix his computers BIOS. Just start changing the code and see what will happen.... I work with a friends father who has Parkinsons. I have been watching him deteriorate in front of my eyes. He's not my Bio family, but he is familly to me. It's horrifying. If killing 3 people would cure him, I would do it. But when I rationally think about it, it's a very sketchy slope type issue. And sketchy slopes require planning and saftey equipment. And even the best of experts doing everything right, go down in an avalanche occassionally. We are talking about genetics. We can deal with Global warming, can we deal with a Genetic crisis? Or perhaps GM life will be the solution to Global warming and pollution, nightmare scenarios that are the best of the available options abound... But hey, its what we did with Nuclear technology, and fossil fuels (think about how many lives were saved and improved by the use of Oil, but we pay a cost for it)....Really the argument could be taken back to the idea of Agriculture or taming the of fire. It seems to be in the drive of Humanity to do such things. And banning won't work, at best it would drive it underground. So I don't advocate that. It seems pointless to be a luddite on the idea, and so many people have a real emotional stake in the issue that it is impossible to argue with them on it. To me that is a red flag on an issue, shaping it so if you oppose, you don't want to help people (and the fammilies of) with terrible diseases, you get called a monster. But we really do have to step back and look at what we are really doing. Genes jump around in ways (and do things) we barely even have a clue about. That has to be a part of all these discussions. In a way it is very exploitive of the suffering. The research should be able to stand with out emotional (or political) ideology proping it up. But for the love of God or Humanity, or anything. Let's please go slow, before we really fuck things up. For all we know the genes that cause Alzhiemers in older people are very important reccessive genes in young people, and eliminating it will destroy humanity, and spread to other species. We really have no idea how this stuff works. And that doesn't even address the issues realted to intentional use for power aquisition....

angelbluewingsz -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/2/2008 9:24:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ..i know you have said some things i don't agree with....but this? This is insensitive to the point of inhumanity. i second that It is a quick and dignified death instead of months or years of degrading, abject suffering. I suppose that when a zebra is old, has two broken legs and has to drag itself across the savanne, and teeth that are so worn that it cannot eat grass any more and consequently has to starve to death, and is riddled by diseases, that you will scare off for months, extending the zebra's suffering, the lion that would honorably kill it within half a minute? Sure, I am insensitive - but you bleeding hearts are far worse, horrendously worse. I would rather meet the lion any time of the day than fall into your sweaty hands. I am all in - Dr. Kevorkian is my hero. I work at PetSmart as the Specialty Manager when not on an active duty call. I make the hard choices of chucking small fuzzies into the freezer rather than letting them suffer to die slowly.... I know what you are saying, a pet isn't a person. Well, yes you are correct. I like pets better :)

farglebargle -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/3/2008 4:21:22 AM)
Pets have real, cash value while People don't.... Human Hybrid Research: It can't end well -- BUT -- if you actually try to stop people, you'll drive them underground, muttering "... and they called me MAD! " and shit.... Can't have that in this post 9/11 world, can we? Cops would be all "Meth Lab" and shit! ( Unless they guy could pass for an arab -- THEN it's all "Terrorist!" and shit... So, it's going to happen -- might as well be organized...

LadyEllen -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/3/2008 5:10:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Pets have real, cash value while People don't.... That is the real, wider question. If we are just animals as science indicates, then there is no reason to treat people differently to how we treat animals, aside from our own personal preferences and attachments - all other beliefs are merely the deluded conjurings of an animal brain. Thus it becomes possible to buy and sell people just as one would animals. It becomes possible to decide if and when a person or a whole population may be killed for our benefit. Human life takes on a relative value - this person is far more valuable and may eat, this person has lesser value and may not, this person is very valuable and must be worshipped, this person is scum and must be eradicated. Or we could hold that animals ought to be treated with the same respect for the sanctity of their lives that we reserve for humans. But thats unlikely. One could argue that we have ever treated humans as animals, according to our personal preferences, attachments and as it affects our interests. Some humans we treat with kindness and consideration and they are very valuable to us. Some humans we despise and are indifferent to their suffering. Some humans we neither love nor despise. One could say that we have always had such a utilitarian approach out of necessity. The danger though is in producing a creed, arising from a pure science approach, that such utilitarian treatment of others is right. E

chellekitty -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/3/2008 6:03:50 AM)
damn, i thought this was going to be the thread that would tell me how to realize my true self - a human-cat hybrid....

farglebargle -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/3/2008 3:18:09 PM)
quote: Thus it becomes possible to buy and sell people just as one would animals. It becomes possible to decide if and when a person or a whole population may be killed for our benefit. That is, of course, the inevitable result of UNREGULATED Capitalism. Human Meat at the butchers, and Human Slaves on the auction block.

Leatherist -> RE: Human Hybrid Research - right or wrong? (4/3/2008 3:19:41 PM)
They'll just use monkey genes instead. Planet of the apes-here we come!!!!!![;)]

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125