51–60 of 105 posts
This technology doesn't seem to be limited to existing limbs and organs. After replacing a missing arm you could add a third arm. A man could grow a uterus since he has the X chromosomes and with a transplant that includes Y chromosomes, a woman could grow testes. Parthenogenesis could become a choice. Another head seems possible. The limits are more likely to come from regulation than a reluctance of people to trans…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. What's being discussed here has nothing to do with the pseudoscience of chi or chakras.
OMG here we go with the marginalization term "Pseudoscience". Stereotyping things you don't understand doesn't make you a smart person.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, AFAIK Becker's "The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life" is pretty much all there was until Michael Levin came along and picked up the torch. IMO it's one of those weird "holes": why so little interest in human tissue regeneration?
Because there’s no immediate and clear plan for a return on the investment due to how speculative things are, private funding is scant. Because we (the USA) are spending most of our money on the insane military complex there is little extra public funding for actually beneficial R&D. Edit: grammar.
The US DOD budget was 753B USD for the same year.
The US Medicare program was 747B USD; with another 45B USD for NIH.
So the US actually spends about equal amounts on military and healthcare, at the federal level — about 11.5% on each.
A better question might be why the US gets so little ROI on its healthcare spending.
DNA is the blueprint for how the body builds itself. I wish them well in exploring this and figuring out how to more effectively foster advanced healing of serious damage, but the body already has this info.
/2 cents from a person who no longer has a hole in her lung
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This implies that your brain could handle 4 arms. Chances are they would just be dead limbs.
So I wonder how much brain power (if any significant) is being taken up by the uterus during pregnancy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, AFAIK Becker's "The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life" is pretty much all there was until Michael Levin came along and picked up the torch. IMO it's one of those weird "holes": why so little interest in human tissue regeneration?
Because there’s no immediate and clear plan for a return on the investment due to how speculative things are, private funding is scant. Because we (the USA) are spending most of our money on the insane military complex there is little extra public funding for actually beneficial R&D. Edit: grammar.
This simply isn't true at all. The US doesn't spend that much money on the military compared to other countries. Go look at federal expenditures; most are for entitlements: social security, medicare, etc.
As a percentage of GDP, US expenditure on the military is nothing unusual, and even a little low compared to many countries like Israel, Russia, probably Saudi Arabia, etc. It only seems huge because the US is huge, and has an enormous GDP, so of course it can afford to spend a lot more than a country like Italy for instance.
As the sibling comment said, look at how much the US spends for healthcare (not just federal expenditures, but total spent in the economy), and then ask why the US gets so little for its money there.
The problem in the US isn't spending money, it's how the money is spent and where it goes. Most of it seems to go into a black hole. Just look at how expensive it is to build anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, AFAIK Becker's "The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life" is pretty much all there was until Michael Levin came along and picked up the torch. IMO it's one of those weird "holes": why so little interest in human tissue regeneration?
Because there’s no immediate and clear plan for a return on the investment due to how speculative things are, private funding is scant. Because we (the USA) are spending most of our money on the insane military complex there is little extra public funding for actually beneficial R&D. Edit: grammar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there’s no immediate and clear plan for a return on the investment due to how speculative things are, private funding is scant. Because we (the USA) are spending most of our money on the insane military complex there is little extra public funding for actually beneficial R&D. Edit: grammar.
The US budget is 6.5T USD for 2022. The US DOD budget was 753B USD for the same year. The US Medicare program was 747B USD; with another 45B USD for NIH. So the US actually spends about equal amounts on military and healthcare, at the federal level — about 11.5% on each. A better question might be why the US gets so little ROI on its healthcare spending.
E.g., DARPA vs NIH, not DoD vs Medicare or DoD vs NIH.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're seeing how the west is discovering those "chakras" and unlike the east, where the understanding of this topic is very broad and fuzzy, due to lack of experience in most cases, the west will develop a very narrow, but very sharp knowledge. Pair that with the thick dark cloud of nihilism enveloping the west today, and it's not hard to see where this will end up. Levin seems to have discovered what the east calls…
Can you explain what you mean by "a very narrow, but very sharp knowledge"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there’s no immediate and clear plan for a return on the investment due to how speculative things are, private funding is scant. Because we (the USA) are spending most of our money on the insane military complex there is little extra public funding for actually beneficial R&D. Edit: grammar.
The US budget is 6.5T USD for 2022. The US DOD budget was 753B USD for the same year. The US Medicare program was 747B USD; with another 45B USD for NIH. So the US actually spends about equal amounts on military and healthcare, at the federal level — about 11.5% on each. A better question might be why the US gets so little ROI on its healthcare spending.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-is-discretionary-spe...