Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 125 posts

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#91

Post by rajin444 »

notJim wrote: post #82
rajin444 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we'll finally start addressing real unearned privilege: genetic. Pro sports players didn't do anything to earn the genetic makeup which accounts for a significant portion of their ability, yet they aren't asked to acknowledge it and take steps to reduce its impact.

Isn't the point of pro sports to find and admire those incredibly genetically-gifted people? I think trying to inject some kind of pure meritocratic framework into it fundamentally misunderstands the point of sports. To me in a way it's like appreciating a beautiful landscape.

I agree! That's why I watch sports too. But the same arguments you're seeing about X privilege today will come into discussion once genetic editing is more advanced. Instead of rich parents paying for SAT prep, they'll be paying for brain power, height, etc.

Whether your parents paid for it you were born with it, you didn't earn it. We need to re assess why privilege is a bad thing or we need to get ready for an interesting future.

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#93

Post by cgriswald »

drenvuk wrote: post #65
newsbinator wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After all this time, I still have no idea how I feel about tortuous animal testing for medical breakthroughs. It's a trolley problem with an unknown number of people on Track A and an unknown number of animals on Track B. I don't even know how I feel about replacing animals in these experiments with human violent offenders. Can we justify experimenting on a known serial killer if the experiment will save a million ch…

>Can we justify experimenting on a known serial killer if the experiment will save a million children's lives in the next 10 years? I don't know. How is that a question? Of course it's justifiable. Valuing the life of someone who only sees humans as play things rather than a collective is silly. Remove them for the greater good. >If an alien species were using us for their medical experiments, under the same circumst…

Being found guilty of serial murder implies neither actual guilt nor, if actually guilty, that the murderer views other humans as playthings. A murderer may, in fact, believe they themselves are removing such people from the world.

It’s probably also better if potential jurors don’t have the thought, “Well, I have some doubt but if this guy dies and I’m wrong, at least it’ll do a lot of good.”

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#95

Post by poidos »

nonameiguess wrote: post #57
poidos wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back when I was a pre-med, my first summer research internship was in a cancer lab. After a couple of weeks of cell culture and autoclaving stuff, they let me start working with the mice. They were inducing lung cancer in them to test some novel compound that was supposed to cure the cancer. Every day, I'd have to go to the mice room, swap in fresh water and food, and then bag all the dead mice individually in rubber…

I was originally a biology in major in college. In Cell Bio, we had a lab that involved attempting to examine one of the circulatory subsystems of a limpet, but in vivo, so the idea was to chemically paralyze it and then dissect while it was still alive. I am certain to this day that I jacked it up somehow, because that poor limpet was absolutely not paralyzed and was squirming the entire time I was trying to cut it…

That sounds horrible. :(

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#96

Post by barbazoo »

bourgwaletariat wrote: post #87
barbazoo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can we justify experimenting on a known serial killer if the experiment will save a million children's lives in the next 10 years? Not in a civilized society with a rule of law

This is a terminological problem then, because many, many people argue "we" are neither civilized nor ruled by law. Furthermore, you could just write a law that says experimenting on serial killers is legal. You'd have to explain how that suddenly makes such a society uncivil, so either civility is the requirement or the law is the requirement, but not both. So really, you're saying, "not according to our laws" which…

Sure, so we can't justify it based on our current laws. To change those laws is indirectly up to the people electing lawmakers. So it's up to people's opinion and how they view people who are convicted of serious serious crimes such as murder. Luckily, at least in the countries that I'm familiar with, people still mostly believe in rehabilitation and do not believe in any kind of eye for an eye punishment so I think we're good there. At least for a while.

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#97

Post by drenvuk »

cgriswald wrote: post #93
drenvuk wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Can we justify experimenting on a known serial killer if the experiment will save a million children's lives in the next 10 years? I don't know. How is that a question? Of course it's justifiable. Valuing the life of someone who only sees humans as play things rather than a collective is silly. Remove them for the greater good. >If an alien species were using us for their medical experiments, under the same circumst…

Being found guilty of serial murder implies neither actual guilt nor, if actually guilty, that the murderer views other humans as playthings. A murderer may, in fact, believe they themselves are removing such people from the world. It’s probably also better if potential jurors don’t have the thought, “Well, I have some doubt but if this guy dies and I’m wrong, at least it’ll do a lot of good.”

The parent comment said "known serial killer". There was no discussion of guilt. I may be wrong about the play thing bit so to revise and be more specific in my stance;

1. If they have no issue with killing people.

2. have killed people

3. will continue to kill people

If all or even most of those victims being people who do not harm others then I'm alright with the murderers being used in experiments or killed themselves.

I don't care about them being found guilty or not, this is hypothetical and there are a number of ways that they could be found guilty when they haven't done it or not guilty when they have. Getting to the point where you can know without a single doubt that they in fact are serial killers is a different matter.

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#98

Post by barbazoo »

brandmeyer wrote: post #84
barbazoo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can we justify experimenting on a known serial killer if the experiment will save a million children's lives in the next 10 years? Not in a civilized society with a rule of law

Some closely related cases for thought: How about experimenting on cell cultures harvested from an adult who was executed by the state? How about experimenting on cell cultures harvested from an aborted human fetus? In both cases, the source of the cells doesn't give consent, but their designated caretaker does.

> How about experimenting on cell cultures harvested from an adult who was executed by the state?

Like many, I'm against capital punishment and wouldn't live in a jurisdiction that applies it so this is hard for me to even imagine.

I hope though that the philosophical aspect of the question doesn't distract us from the clear practical differences between killing a human being and using cells harvested in a questionable way.

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#99

Post by giardini »

ACAVJW4H wrote: post #10

When can we reasonably expect the “cyclist gets banned from tour de france after committee finds athlete installed enteric oxygenation device in the saddle” headline?

Yet another reason to give up bicycle racing. Back to swimming for me!

Re: Mammals can absorb oxygen through their intestines

#100

Post by zardo »

bosswipe wrote: post #92
root_axis wrote: post #48

Am I weird for thinking this is a cruel experiment?

I was thinking the same, asphyxiating pigs and mice to time how long until they die is just cruel.

I don't understand how suffocating animals to prove they will die can pass an ethics review.
Post reply on HN