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

Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

irishtimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 527 posts

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#91

Post by LAC-Tech »

foo92691 wrote: post #17
emptyparadise wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>“The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University. “We are not in the business of sorting sinners from saints. Crime is a legal matter.” This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that.

"The New York Post (NY Post) is a conservative[8] daily tabloid newspaper published in New York City. The Post also operates NYPost.com, the celebrity gossip site PageSix.com, and the entertainment site Decider.com." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post

What was the purpose of posting this?

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#93

Post by repiret »

ekianjo wrote: post #89
foo92691 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The New York Post (NY Post) is a conservative[8] daily tabloid newspaper published in New York City. The Post also operates NYPost.com, the celebrity gossip site PageSix.com, and the entertainment site Decider.com." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post

Quoted post unavailable.

Well there is this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involv...

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#94

Post by cyral »

giantg2 wrote: post #7
benatkin wrote: post #5

His victim's family (yes, really) doesn't like that he was the first to get a heart transplant. https://nypost.com/2022/01/13/historic-pig-heart-recipient-w... PETA doesn't like that anyone got a pig heart transplant. https://www.peta.org/media/news-releases/first-heart-transpl...

"...and a tremendous waste of resources that could be used to fund research that might actually help humans." Hey PETA, source?

..but, this does help humans? (Or at least one so far).

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#96

Post by corobo »

smrtinsert wrote: post #79
emptyparadise wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>“The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University. “We are not in the business of sorting sinners from saints. Crime is a legal matter.” This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that.

Is there a limit to this impartiality? Should we have saved Hitlers life with a breakthrough transplant?

What happens if you decide to not transplant because of their past but it turned out they were wrongfully convicted?

To the top of the transplant list immediately pushing others down or “ohh.. awkward. we’ll treat you fairly from now on”?

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#97

Post by corobo »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #69
mlyle wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that. Even if one were to consider moral character when allocating organs in general: the researchers needed someone who was sick and likely to die, ineligible for human organ transplant (here, because of severity of condition), and not so sick that there was no chance of success or useful data. So, we're already pi…

Yeah, the Post complaint (echoed elsewhere) is basically a call for having a social credit score that can say “you’re not a good person, so we’re not going to let the doctors save you.”

There was an episode of Star Trek Voyager that had this system in place, ep 7x5 Critical Care

Naturally it was corrupt

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#98

Post by nautilius »

graderjs wrote: post #88
burrows wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are. The victims family is saying “Our principle is that people who stab Ed should not get a heart, therefore David should not get a heart.” The doctor is saying “Our principle is that we don’t use the patient’s past violence or convictions to determine whether they should get a heart or not, so the stabbing doesn’t disqualify Davi…

The weird thing about saying "Do not save those who took another's life" is that you are saying, "The person took a life. That's bad. We should punish them for the bad thing." Then saying, "Let's take their life to punish them." (not saving a life you could being essentially the same as life taking, to me, here). To me, you are undermining your view that life-taking is bad, by engaging in it yourselves. To me, this i…

So, thieves cannot be fined for their crimes (take their money after they took someone else's), kidnappers cannot go to jail (take their freedom after they took someone else's) - because it would undermine, what exactly? That makes no sense.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#99

Post by dghlsakjg »

smrtinsert wrote: post #79
emptyparadise wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>“The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University. “We are not in the business of sorting sinners from saints. Crime is a legal matter.” This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that.

Is there a limit to this impartiality? Should we have saved Hitlers life with a breakthrough transplant?

If he follows the same protocol and gets considered under the same criteria, yes.

Doctors making moral judgements and withholding treatments based on their patients lifestyle has a pretty ugly history.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#100

Post by skissane »

burrows wrote: post #50
emptyparadise wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>“The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University. “We are not in the business of sorting sinners from saints. Crime is a legal matter.” This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that.

> The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are. The victims family is saying “Our principle is that people who stab Ed should not get a heart, therefore David should not get a heart.” The doctor is saying “Our principle is that we don’t use the patient’s past violence or convictions to determine whether they should get a heart or not, so the stabbing doesn’t disqualify Davi…

> Neither party can offer a valid argument as to why their principle is true, because both of their principles are normative.

Can you offer a valid argument for the truth of your own principle, that it is impossible to offer a valid argument for the truth of any normative principle? I think your own position is a normative principle, and hence your position is self-refuting.

To call an argument "valid" is to make a normative claim; it is to claim that a rational agent ought to accept it. To call an argument invalid is to claim that a rational agent ought not accept it. Rationality has as much oughtness as morality does, and hence is a normative discipline just as morality is.

Post reply on HN