Scientific miracle? Abomination?
- Thread starter frocher
- Start date
Paramnesia
Well-known member
Quote:
I fully agree. I'm all for advances in science but this is something I don't think should/needs to be done. I'm against designer dogs, I think that's wrong. So this is COMPLETELY wrong in my eyes.
Originally Posted by Shimmer
I don't know that I would take the Catholic route on the idea, but... No. There are some things that shouldn't be done. This is one of them, IMO. |
I fully agree. I'm all for advances in science but this is something I don't think should/needs to be done. I'm against designer dogs, I think that's wrong. So this is COMPLETELY wrong in my eyes.
*Stargazer*
Well-known member
This doesn't bother me so much if it stays in the petri dish, KWIM?
purrtykitty
Well-known member
Kinda creepy I say, and taking this whole thing a bit far.
Paramnesia
Well-known member
I really just don't think it needs to be done, but unfortunately the egos of scientists can go to far. As I said before I'm all for scientific advances, I'm a 3rd year science student but the outcomes could be insanely disastrous.
Babylard
Well-known member
just frightening. i am all for medical and scientific research, but this is a taboo. humans should stay humans. animals should stay animals...if one thing isn't gonna kill us, it will be something else that has evolved...
even in a petri dish.. i can't help it but think that some crazy obsessed scientist doesn't want his hard work to go to waste and steals it. he then goes to continue the project in his basement....................................
when i read this, those creepy zombies from I Am Legend came to mind. i find unnatural creatures frightening because they are unnatural....
this scares me as much as biological warfare
absolutely frightening...
even in a petri dish.. i can't help it but think that some crazy obsessed scientist doesn't want his hard work to go to waste and steals it. he then goes to continue the project in his basement....................................
when i read this, those creepy zombies from I Am Legend came to mind. i find unnatural creatures frightening because they are unnatural....
this scares me as much as biological warfare
absolutely frightening...
j_absinthe
Well-known member
I actually thought of "The Island of Dr. Moreau". Either way, I can't wait to see how it turns out, even if it is an abomination against the world.
redambition
Well-known member
i want to know what they want to use these embryos for.
is it for testing new medical theories? looking for ways to cure illness through genetics? from what frocher has posted it doesn't sound like they want to create a human/animal hybrid. they want to create an embryo they can use in the lab.
it does sound odd and a bit unnecessary, but what are the alternatives for doctors and scientists to get embryos for research purposes? from what i know, there's very little out there.
i don't think i agree with what they are doing, but i'd like to know more about why they are creating these hybrid embryos before i make my judgement.
is it for testing new medical theories? looking for ways to cure illness through genetics? from what frocher has posted it doesn't sound like they want to create a human/animal hybrid. they want to create an embryo they can use in the lab.
it does sound odd and a bit unnecessary, but what are the alternatives for doctors and scientists to get embryos for research purposes? from what i know, there's very little out there.
i don't think i agree with what they are doing, but i'd like to know more about why they are creating these hybrid embryos before i make my judgement.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
Finally a reasonable response! I totally applaud you. I looked for some answers for you:
Possible types of animal/human hybrid embryos
Uses of the embryos
Researchers say the work is needed to advance the understanding of complex diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and Motor Neurone Disease.
Why use animal eggs?
The creation of hybrid human-animal embryos was first suggested as a way of addressing the shortage of human eggs available for research.
Also, experts say using human-animal mixes rather than human eggs to get the stem cells makes sense because the process is less cumbersome and yields better results.
How could this help find disease cures?
Scientists say they can use embryonic stem cells to study different disease processes.
For example, they could take genetic material from a person with Parkinson's disease and put it into an empty animal egg to make stem cells that will carry the same genetic defects that cause Parkinson's.
Stem cells also have the potential to grow into different tissues, so in the future it might be possible to transplant cells cloned from individual patients to cure diseases.
What are the concerns about the work?
Opponents say this is tampering with nature and is unethical.
Critics say they are repulsed by the idea and there must be no creation of an animal-human hybrid.
It is already illegal to implant human-animal embryos in the womb or bring them to term.
One of the scientists applying to do hybrid work, Professor Chris Shaw from Kings College London, stressed: "We think there is nothing illegal, immoral or unethical about this.
"While we understand the concerns, we think they are largely founded on misinformation.
"People think we are generating some sort of hybrid animal. This is just cells, just for science. No animal is ever going to be created."
From here: BBC NEWS | Health | Q&A: Hybrid embryos
| Originally Posted by redambition
i want to know what they want to use these embryos for. is it for testing new medical theories? looking for ways to cure illness through genetics? from what frocher has posted it doesn't sound like they want to create a human/animal hybrid. they want to create an embryo they can use in the lab. it does sound odd and a bit unnecessary, but what are the alternatives for doctors and scientists to get embryos for research purposes? from what i know, there's very little out there. i don't think i agree with what they are doing, but i'd like to know more about why they are creating these hybrid embryos before i make my judgement. |
Finally a reasonable response! I totally applaud you. I looked for some answers for you:
Possible types of animal/human hybrid embryos
- Cytoplasmic hybrid embryos: embryos created through cell nuclear replacement using animal eggs
- Hybrid embryos: embryos created by mixing human sperm and animal eggs or human eggs and animal sperm
- Human chimera embryos: human embryos which have animal cells added to them during early development
- Animal chimera embryos: animal embryos which have human cells added to them during early development
- Transgenic human embryos: human embryos which have animal genes inserted into them during early development
Uses of the embryos
Researchers say the work is needed to advance the understanding of complex diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and Motor Neurone Disease.
Why use animal eggs?
The creation of hybrid human-animal embryos was first suggested as a way of addressing the shortage of human eggs available for research.
Also, experts say using human-animal mixes rather than human eggs to get the stem cells makes sense because the process is less cumbersome and yields better results.
How could this help find disease cures?
Scientists say they can use embryonic stem cells to study different disease processes.
For example, they could take genetic material from a person with Parkinson's disease and put it into an empty animal egg to make stem cells that will carry the same genetic defects that cause Parkinson's.
Stem cells also have the potential to grow into different tissues, so in the future it might be possible to transplant cells cloned from individual patients to cure diseases.
What are the concerns about the work?
Opponents say this is tampering with nature and is unethical.
Critics say they are repulsed by the idea and there must be no creation of an animal-human hybrid.
It is already illegal to implant human-animal embryos in the womb or bring them to term.
One of the scientists applying to do hybrid work, Professor Chris Shaw from Kings College London, stressed: "We think there is nothing illegal, immoral or unethical about this.
"While we understand the concerns, we think they are largely founded on misinformation.
"People think we are generating some sort of hybrid animal. This is just cells, just for science. No animal is ever going to be created."
From here: BBC NEWS | Health | Q&A: Hybrid embryos
ratmist
Well-known member
It's all condemnation until you or a family member is suffering from one of those diseases that could benefit enormously from stem cell research. I'm all for this research. Family members of mine suffer from Alzheimers and other neurological problems. This research is vital to finding cures.
Those that are so afraid of what scientists are up to have probably never known a scientist or been involved in science. Hollywood has as much to blame for the misunderstanding of scientific research as the media and outspoken critics within the Catholic Church. Going by the Catholic Church in Africa, condoms don't work either and are an abomination. I think sometimes it's best not to think on the grounds of one's absolute morality, which changes from person to person and culture to culture. That sentiment goes double for the latest blockbuster script.
There are hundreds of millions of discoveries made by science that have benefited every single one of us. Hell, all the cosmetic products we love so dearly came off the back of scientific research, most of it conducted on cute fluffy animals.
Those that are so afraid of what scientists are up to have probably never known a scientist or been involved in science. Hollywood has as much to blame for the misunderstanding of scientific research as the media and outspoken critics within the Catholic Church. Going by the Catholic Church in Africa, condoms don't work either and are an abomination. I think sometimes it's best not to think on the grounds of one's absolute morality, which changes from person to person and culture to culture. That sentiment goes double for the latest blockbuster script.
There are hundreds of millions of discoveries made by science that have benefited every single one of us. Hell, all the cosmetic products we love so dearly came off the back of scientific research, most of it conducted on cute fluffy animals.
Paramnesia
Well-known member
Quote:
I'm against it and I'm a 3rd year Biological Science student. I was actually going to major in genetics.
I understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the technology will be abused. I'm all for stem cell research, even embryonic. I just don't think animals need to be used as vectors in such a way, to study diseases.
| Those that are so afraid of what scientists are up to have probably never known a scientist or been involved in science |
I'm against it and I'm a 3rd year Biological Science student. I was actually going to major in genetics.
I understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the technology will be abused. I'm all for stem cell research, even embryonic. I just don't think animals need to be used as vectors in such a way, to study diseases.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
It's not animals, it's animal tissue. And anyway, scientists who have spent decades focused on the diseases in question disagree with you. Wouldn't it be wise to judge the evidence based on how they actually study and treat those diseases?
As for abuse, what exactly do you mean? Can you be specific, because otherwise it sounds like fear-mongering. Nuclear research was used to bomb the hell out of Japan, and we could still use it to blow up the entire world many times over, but it's also the basis of numerous medical technologies and energy technologies. All science is double-edged, but that doesn't mean one should become paralysed in fear of it.
| Originally Posted by Paramnesia
I'm against it and I'm a 3rd year Biological Science student. I was actually going to major in genetics. I understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the technology will be abused. I'm all for stem cell research, even embryonic. I just don't think animals need to be used as vectors in such a way, to study diseases. |
It's not animals, it's animal tissue. And anyway, scientists who have spent decades focused on the diseases in question disagree with you. Wouldn't it be wise to judge the evidence based on how they actually study and treat those diseases?
As for abuse, what exactly do you mean? Can you be specific, because otherwise it sounds like fear-mongering. Nuclear research was used to bomb the hell out of Japan, and we could still use it to blow up the entire world many times over, but it's also the basis of numerous medical technologies and energy technologies. All science is double-edged, but that doesn't mean one should become paralysed in fear of it.
redambition
Well-known member
thanks for posting that extra information ratmist!
i'm torn on this one. on one level i find it a bit of an abomination - it's my mind and morals telling me that the meshing of human and bovine just... don't go together.
on the other hand - scientists have really been left with very few options for some forms of research... research that could start providing us with answers and cures for many serious illnesses, along with providing us with a greater understanding of how we (as human beings) work. on this level, i'd support it.
i know several people who suffer from different neurological conditions. if this kind of research could eventually help develop more effective treatments and help them manage their conditions better (or even reverse the condition), then i'd have a hard time being against it, even if it is questionable by my personal moral code.
i'm torn on this one. on one level i find it a bit of an abomination - it's my mind and morals telling me that the meshing of human and bovine just... don't go together.
on the other hand - scientists have really been left with very few options for some forms of research... research that could start providing us with answers and cures for many serious illnesses, along with providing us with a greater understanding of how we (as human beings) work. on this level, i'd support it.
i know several people who suffer from different neurological conditions. if this kind of research could eventually help develop more effective treatments and help them manage their conditions better (or even reverse the condition), then i'd have a hard time being against it, even if it is questionable by my personal moral code.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
You're welcome!
I think that if there was another way, scientists would go for it. But unfortunately, research is expensive and you have to justify the methods by the results you reap. Otherwise funding is denied and research becomes extremely slow-paced.
Also, I think you hit the nail on the head with the last sentence you gave. Just because it's against someone's personal moral code doesn't mean it's against the moral codes of others. Whose morality should win? Science is not a democracy.
I think that's why issues like this really wind me up. Whether intended or not, I often hear 'entitlement' behind moral opinions given as facts, as though one's morality is somehow better than someone else's. That kind of attitude ends up feeling like an end-game justification, which isn't true or fair.
| Originally Posted by redambition
thanks for posting that extra information ratmist!
i'm torn on this one. on one level i find it a bit of an abomination - it's my mind and morals telling me that the meshing of human and bovine just... don't go together. on the other hand - scientists have really been left with very few options for some forms of research... research that could start providing us with answers and cures for many serious illnesses, along with providing us with a greater understanding of how we (as human beings) work. on this level, i'd support it. i know several people who suffer from different neurological conditions. if this kind of research could eventually help develop more effective treatments and help them manage their conditions better (or even reverse the condition), then i'd have a hard time being against it, even if it is questionable by my personal moral code. |
You're welcome!
Also, I think you hit the nail on the head with the last sentence you gave. Just because it's against someone's personal moral code doesn't mean it's against the moral codes of others. Whose morality should win? Science is not a democracy.
I think that's why issues like this really wind me up. Whether intended or not, I often hear 'entitlement' behind moral opinions given as facts, as though one's morality is somehow better than someone else's. That kind of attitude ends up feeling like an end-game justification, which isn't true or fair.
Paramnesia
Well-known member
Quote:
Yes currently its animal tissue but I disagree with using the technology to produce human and other animal hybrids. I'm sure the scientific community is divided on whether the technology is acceptable. Everybody has the right to have their own opinion, this is just mine and you have yours.
I rather not be patronized like that, just because I disagree with the use of such technology doesn't mean it couldn't be a wonderful means of studying a variety of diseases.
Like you said "All science is double-edged" that's all I meant to say, I'm not "fear-mongering".
I respect you have your opinion and as I've started before this technology could be the new way of studying disease, but I PERSONALLY do not agree with such techniques.
| Originally Posted by ratmist
It's not animals, it's animal tissue. And anyway, scientists who have spent decades focused on the diseases in question disagree with you. Wouldn't it be wise to judge the evidence based on how they actually study and treat those diseases? As for abuse, what exactly do you mean? Can you be specific, because otherwise it sounds like fear-mongering. Nuclear research was used to bomb the hell out of Japan, and we could still use it to blow up the entire world many times over, but it's also the basis of numerous medical technologies and energy technologies. All science is double-edged, but that doesn't mean one should become paralysed in fear of it. |
Yes currently its animal tissue but I disagree with using the technology to produce human and other animal hybrids. I'm sure the scientific community is divided on whether the technology is acceptable. Everybody has the right to have their own opinion, this is just mine and you have yours.
I rather not be patronized like that, just because I disagree with the use of such technology doesn't mean it couldn't be a wonderful means of studying a variety of diseases.
Like you said "All science is double-edged" that's all I meant to say, I'm not "fear-mongering".
I respect you have your opinion and as I've started before this technology could be the new way of studying disease, but I PERSONALLY do not agree with such techniques.
ratmist
Well-known member
Quote:
Absolutely. I have not argued that opinions don't matter, or that your opinion in particular is wrong. I simply questioned what you wrote, taking issue with the statement, "I understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the technology will be abused." That doesn't come off as an opinion. That comes off as a statement of fact, which you perhaps did not intend.
Quote:
Reading back on your comment, it is difficult for me to understand exactly what sentiment you were trying to produce with the comment, "I understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the technology will be abused." I would like to state for the record that I am not attacking you though. I know tone doesn't come through very well on the internet, so please read my tone as 'dispassionate', not 'virulent' or 'abusive'. I truly do not intend to offend you.
Quote:
Considering your previous remark about how you do support stem cell research, even embryonic, am I right to assume you are okay with pure human embryos used for scientific research?
If so, what do you think scientists should do when there is a lack of human embryos for this research? (There is, which is why the hybrids were suggested in the first place.)
Secondly, are there any uses of animals - whether in part or in whole - that you feel are appropriate in scientific research for the purposes of bettering human health?
| Originally Posted by Paramnesia
Yes currently its animal tissue but I disagree with using the technology to produce human and other animal hybrids. Everybody has the right to have their own opinion, this is just mine and you have yours. |
Absolutely. I have not argued that opinions don't matter, or that your opinion in particular is wrong. I simply questioned what you wrote, taking issue with the statement, "I understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the technology will be abused." That doesn't come off as an opinion. That comes off as a statement of fact, which you perhaps did not intend.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Paramnesia
Like you said "All science is double-edged" that's all I meant to say, I'm not "fear-mongering". |
Reading back on your comment, it is difficult for me to understand exactly what sentiment you were trying to produce with the comment, "I understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the technology will be abused." I would like to state for the record that I am not attacking you though. I know tone doesn't come through very well on the internet, so please read my tone as 'dispassionate', not 'virulent' or 'abusive'. I truly do not intend to offend you.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Paramnesia
I respect you have your opinion and as I've started before this technology could be the new way of studying disease, but I PERSONALLY do not agree with such techniques. |
Considering your previous remark about how you do support stem cell research, even embryonic, am I right to assume you are okay with pure human embryos used for scientific research?
If so, what do you think scientists should do when there is a lack of human embryos for this research? (There is, which is why the hybrids were suggested in the first place.)
Secondly, are there any uses of animals - whether in part or in whole - that you feel are appropriate in scientific research for the purposes of bettering human health?
redambition
Well-known member
Quote:
it is a very tricky subject. science is always challenging us and our view of the world - not always in a moral sense, but it's a challenge nonetheless.
| Originally Posted by ratmist
You're welcome!
Also, I think you hit the nail on the head with the last sentence you gave. Just because it's against someone's personal moral code doesn't mean it's against the moral codes of others. Whose morality should win? Science is not a democracy. I think that's why issues like this really wind me up. Whether intended or not, I often hear 'entitlement' behind moral opinions given as facts, as though one's morality is somehow better than someone else's. That kind of attitude ends up feeling like an end-game justification, which isn't true or fair. |
it is a very tricky subject. science is always challenging us and our view of the world - not always in a moral sense, but it's a challenge nonetheless.
