61–70 of 187 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps even further than that! It may make humanity realize that, just as oil is too valuable to burn, pigs are too valuable to use for bacon instead of life saving medical treatments.
Well, if you have to slaughter the pig to remove its human pancreas for transplant anyway , the ethical thing to do is extract as much value as you can by also using its delicious, delicious meat. (Which hopefully does not contain too many migrated human cells.)
grow human organs inside rats and? how does that work? i don't understand. meanwhile we are entering the sixt mass extinction event caused by a massive climate change. what good is this technology when you have failing crops, extreme weather, no electricity and mass immigration at your doorstep?
Presumably, the eventual goal is to grow full-sized organs inside some larger animal. Then the organ can be harvested and transplanted to a human who needs it. Per my understanding, medicine does a lot of work with rats because they're cheap and easy to work with, so any new technology of this type would be tried on rats first. By the way, my neutral explanation above doesn't mean that I approve of doing such things.…
Definitely not saying it shouldn't be that way; I'm kind of glad that we have some level of ethical rules for handling animals.
In my opinion this kind of research crosses some ethical lines that shouldn't be crossed. If one considers an embryo as an independent life, what species the embryo belongs to? Wouldn't be the ones in this experiment half humans with human rights? After all, the scientist doesn't know all, and the cells he put in could evolve to a chain reaction of the hybrid developing human conscious.
Just my opinion tho, as I know nothing about genetics and biology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I disagree with the US's stance, ignoring your morals because other countries are doing something would be a race to the bottom.
If significant % of the population doesn't think it's problematic it should be allowed as long as it doesn't influence lives of the other part. You can easily opt out of any stem cells based research or treatment, we can make it not state funded. Opposing that is the kind of self-righteous aggressive morality I despise. It's the same with abortion: about half the population thinks it's ok to let a woman decide. It do…
Yeah America has all the moral debates about genetics and experiments with embryos. But the bottom line is other countries are going to move forward no matter what America does.
You're also making the assumption that this is moving "forward" and that there won't be ramifications outside of external influence by other countries.
Good for mice i guess. Bad for rats.
When I heard Alex Jones on Joe Rogan saying that there was human-animal experiments being made I thought he was exaggerating. In my opinion this kind of research crosses some ethical lines that shouldn't be crossed. If one considers an embryo as an independent life, what species the embryo belongs to? Wouldn't be the ones in this experiment half humans with human rights? After all, the scientist doesn't know all, and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well exactly. If we are fine breeding so many for meat, breeding a few more to cure serious illnesses or even to save lives should not raise problems in public opinion.
Perhaps even further than that! It may make humanity realize that, just as oil is too valuable to burn, pigs are too valuable to use for bacon instead of life saving medical treatments.