Human-animal embryos - What are the implications of this?

[flowperson]

Juan...At the risk of repeating myself (which you know I detest) we are all already unwillingly/unwittingly participating in genome alteration experimentation by eating the food we eat, by drinking the water we drink, and by breathing the air we breath. A large amount of research data has shown the importance of the planet's environments ongoing effects upon the evolvement/devolvement of living genomes. Bar code length arguments and priorities concerning experimentation subjects are a specious distraction from the main issue.

The issue is, now we are accelerating and compounding the existing incidences of risk/change by directly and mechanistically altering the genomes of life in purposeful experimentation, and through the irresponsible release of the results of that experimentation into our common environments. I believe that your picking nits over just who should suffer such pin cushion/lab rat indignities are inappropriate.

THE COW'S ARE OUT OF THE BARN. THE TOOTHPASTE IS OUT OF THE TUBE FOR EVERYONE ON THE PLANET. AND NANOTECHNOLOGY WILL ONLY HASTEN THESE EFFECTS.

Rent copies of Gattica and AI-Artificial Intelligence for realistic societal longer term scenarios regarding this process.

There...I feel better at least.

flow....

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Flow!

Originally Posted by flowperson

Rent copies of Gattica and AI-Artificial Intelligence for realistic societal longer term scenarios regarding this process.

No need to rent, I own both, and have for some time now. Enough so that I referenced GATTACA in a paper in a medical ethics class, an elective class I took, for my Associate's Degree, before my Bachelor's. Personally, I like these two movies, and agree they provide a great deal of food for thought *if* one takes the concepts to deeper levels. (Far more insightful was the roundtable discussion on PBS entitled "Our genes, our choices." I have referenced before here in another thread on genetics.) I was personally disappointed with AI, with all the hype about Spielberg it was not one of his better efforts. I do so wish Stanley Kubrick had directed instead, as was the original plan prior to his untimely death. Of course, I am not sure I see the direct association between the movie AI and genomic manipulation... HAL 9000, on the other hand, Besides, there are data mining AI robots in use by business that control our everyday lives and have for a few years now...perhaps that is what you were driving at?

Alas, perhaps I should be silent, and so promote open-minded discussion by allowing only those voices that are in agreement to continue discussions such as this... *shrugs* We all know the voice of dissent must be silenced, especially if it is the voice of conscience, yes?

[flowperson]

No No Juan...without dissent there is never any forward progress. On the contrary... your concerns are valid and genuine. Sorry for my over use of Caps.

Here are a couple of links that bring these ideas into a more contemporary focus and reality. I just posted the second link on the "Nephilim" thread also to get the biblical side of this all perhaps moving again. I have been saying to myself for sometime now that "the past and the present are in the future, and the past is the future".

Roll with it all, and as you observed Gattica and AI were adequate artistic projections for their eras, but not as strange as it's all probably going to wind up. In order to get to a future that is viable for our children and theirs, we all need to debate and think deeply about all of these issues. It is all so huge it sometimes seems better to throw up our hands in despair, but the good of it all is there somewhere...we just need to discover it. But then again, maybe all we're doing is enabling those who wish to create Jurassic Park scenarios.

Peace, Love....flow....

Techies Ponder Computers Smarter Than Us | LiveScience

RaidersNewsNetwork.com – Breaking News, U.S., World, Science, and Mystery

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Flow!

Originally Posted by flowperson

Techies Ponder Computers Smarter Than Us | LiveScience

RaidersNewsNetwork.com – Breaking News, U.S., World, Science, and Mystery

Interesting links. The cyborg stuff is actually pretty old thinking, just a matter of "when." At some point we are bound to try to merge HAL 9000 with the Six Million Dollar Man, at which point why bother with organics? Organics wear out, subject to disease and injury, etc. So why not simply build a robot that resembles a human? It would certainly short cut the process of building a super race of sub-servient morons all living in the artificial "peace" of conformity or else. Prepare to be assimilated. Resistance is futile. Sounds like utopia to me...*not.*

The trouble I see, is that Asimov's three laws of robotics will be ignored in all of the AI and other artificial life processes, especially as these come into commercial application. The three laws should be hard wired programming that cannot be erased or countervented in all robotic applications, in my opinion. Even though this presents its own perils, I think the perils presented by this dilemma are far more tolerable than the alternative.

My favorite line from Jurassic Park, "just because we can, doesn't mean we should."

As for the Nephilim / chimera subject, first I thank you for supporting my long standing contention here that the line we call "species" is not so defined as we kid ourselves about. Transpecies genetic manipulation is again old news (the whole Frankenfood debate is at root this very thing), what is remarkable is that the technology has advanced to a point where we are beginning to seriously discuss application to human genetics with no really distinct reason. Sure, reasons can be invented, but what could we possible hope to gain by inserting dog or cat genes into the human genome? On the other hand, I can see inserting Gorilla genes in an effort to create an inordinately strong human...the challenge being creating such a creature that will still obey orders and not think for itself!

The ethical issue at root is about responsibility. Scientific responsibility. The technology exists, in both cases, or is so very close as to make these individuals believe they can attempt these efforts. But at what point does the detriment outweigh the benefit, and who then is to be responsible? I am not talking about financial responsibility, that is yet another smoke screen, the lawyers recommend throwing a few bucks around to cover the casualties...I am not speaking of this. I am speaking of the moral obligation to our fellow human beings to do ultimately what is best and right in and on their behalf...even and especially if that actually means ceasing in our tracks from careening down an uncharted path, at midnight, with no lights on, blindfolded, a stuck throttle and no brakes. I seriously question how well many of these adventurous technologists consider the ramifications of their activities. I really think that ego aggrandizement clouds better judgement, at least as well as the carrot of huge amounts of money and the stick of threat of loss of reputation and employment.

[flowperson]

Hi Juan:

The singularity conference in SF was a significant event in that these people are now starting to confront, for real, what the moral and real world implications of what is coming and what they are doing. No more delaying tactics. No more rationalizations. No more obfuscating the issues with money inducements. What is to be done to deal with the stupendous repercussions of what they are creating ?

Bet you a few bucks that there weren't any theologians there because they would have said,"There's something profoundly wrong with a society that wants to build robots that are more like humans, and that attempts to coerce humans into behaving more like robots." I've been in meetings where these issues were seriously ventilated... 20 years ago...and here we are again...for real.

As far as brother Issac, yes he was a physicist, and a wonderful writer. But his three laws were only suggestions to the future which the real future is ignoring. I'm sure Asimov is spinning counterclockwise wherever he rests

I am firmly in the belief that the period for choosing an appropriate path to pursue these technologies was over sometime ago, and that power and the greedy lust for money and ultimate control of human life has already won the argument. The real issues are, how do people of moral foundation and sacred belief react in protest, for that must surely come ?

It's going to be quite a ride. Gotta go... the wireless receiver/transmitter biochip behind my right ear is starting to itch and my tinnitus is beginning to increase in intensity.

flow....

[flowperson]

Well, I thought that this thread would go on to die the lingering death that it so richly deserved, but it was a stimulating discussion while it lasted. And then...this little item popped up in the news today.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070918...6HIGU0XD2s0NUE

Which all automatically reminded me of some of my misspent youth and the films that inspired some of us on to rewarding careers in science and technology *heh,heh*.

flow....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwHU3rCu2Yc

[fourgrtkidos]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Over the pond here in the UK we do have a debate on the ethics of such issues but unlike the US it will not be a "pro-life" dominated demonstration of emotion over facts. The purpose of such research is to provide relief or even cure for some of the diseases that stubbornly resist any conventional treatments and if there is hope that they will work they should be tried. Creating Chimera stem cells may well be regarded as playing god but we have the ability to try such things and we should. Pushing the boundaries of the possible is what being human is all about.

Tao

If we would collect the cord blood of every baby born- we would have plenty of stem cells without spending the money developing hybrid genetically engineered embryos or challenging any ethics. For every baby born, enough blood can be collected from the cord to treat 4 people on average........ however, we rarely do it. It should be standard procedure in every childbirth.

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by fourgrtkidos

If we would collect the cord blood of every baby born- we would have plenty of stem cells without spending the money developing hybrid genetically engineered embryos or challenging any ethics. For every baby born, enough blood can be collected from the cord to treat 4 people on average........ however, we rarely do it. It should be standard procedure in every childbirth.

Good point, yes it should.

[flowperson]

Hi... The ancient Greeks called the umbilical "the twin". What are the implications of that... knowing what we now know ?

flow....

[flowperson]

Time that we resurrect this thread I believe.

Now, I think I agree with this to some extent, but I think this guy's got the timeline all wrong. Looks to me more like 2,400 when the differences he predicts are so evident. Already, while the obesity epidemic is raging, children and young adults each generation in the Netherlands are getting very much taller than their parents on average.

Interesting stuff, but I think he may have watched too many HG Wells stories set to film while young.

flow....

BBC NEWS | UK | Human species 'may split in two'

[flowperson]

OH, OH !!!

flow....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7094215.stm

[flowperson]

My opinion is, when articles such as this are being published, this is all coming very soon...or it's already happened, which makes objections sort of moot...doesn't it ?

flow....

http://www.livescience.com/health/07...an-clones.html

[flowperson]

Not getting a whole lot of discussion on the postings to this thread. That surprises me since we are beginning to fully experience the realities of what some saw coming thirty years ago after the Asilomar conference on genetic modification.

Here is an excellent article which comes at the dilemma from the direction of religious belief. Not surprisingly, the beliefs of people with regard to the science also influences their opinions regarding the realities which come out of the scientific applications. Quelle surprise !

flow....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/sc...2ec&ei=5087%0A

[Tao_Equus]

Hi Flow,

I am sorry I do not always respond to what you are posting but would like to assure you I do look regularly and follow your links!! I simply do not have time to respond to every thread I would like to at the moment. Keep posting tho...they are appreciated

Tao