×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

UK Moves To Allow Human Hybrid Experiments

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the be-afraid-oh-never-mind dept.

Biotech 284

penguin_dance writes "The UK is apparently rethinking its ban on human hybrid experiments. If approved by regulators, '[t]he move opens the door to experiments involving every known kind of human-animal hybrid. These could include both "cytoplasmic" embryos, which are 99.9% human, and "true hybrids" carrying both human and animal genes.' Previous calls for an outright ban on all human-animal embryos outraged scientists, according to the article, who believe that 'work on human-animal hybrid embryos will greatly speed up progress in stem cell research.' The report claims there will be a provision for regulation of the research to incorporate any 'unforeseen developments.' Let the Island of Dr. Moreau comparisons begin!"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

284 comments

It will happen (5, Funny)

ebusinessmedia1 (561777) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908203)

Woof! er..... I meant "Hi"

Re:It will happen (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908405)

Kiiiilll meeeeeee... KILL MEEeeeEEeeee...!!

Re:It will happen (3, Insightful)

duggi (1114563) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908539)

I am really interested to see the results, jokes apart, cures for some major aliments can be found. This is a really good step taken, but I doubt its success , there will be lot many failures before we get to see something remotely useful. I doubt what average joe's reaction to medicine(or the product for curing a disease) would be.

Here comes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908205)

Bat boy!

Re:Here comes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908317)

And Cat Girl! =^.^=

There's no need (3, Funny)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908209)

Given my experience on most Friday nights, animal-women hybrids already exist.

I'm such a bitch...

Re:There's no need (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908323)

Given my experience on most Friday nights, animal-women hybrids already exist.

Yeah, well, the average non-slashdot-reader spends his Friday nights in a bar, not in the MMORPG where you live.

Re:There's no need (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908327)

Given my experience on most Friday nights, animal-women hybrids already exist.

Come on, you know you want it that way
         

Instant dates. (1, Troll)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908965)

I'd buy an animal-woman hybrid if they can produce the body of a teenage girl with the brain of say a cat. Finally a date that is impressed by going to a buffet and that just wants to go home and spend some time licking and petting.

Okay - so I'm married now so I guess I couldn't buy one. I just don't think my wife would let me keep a pet that looked human and especially not one that tended towards being an attractive nude female. It'd be awful hard to explain to the kids too.

Re:Instant dates. (0, Troll)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20909073)

>the body of a teenage girl with the brain of say a cat
I'm struggling as to whether I should make a pun based on pussy or to say all they'd do is lie around all day licking you and how good that sounds. Choices, choices.

Dibs on Crab People. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908221)

I call dibs on the first of the Crab/Human hybrid.

(taste like crab, talk like people)

Re:Dibs on Crab People. (5, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908285)

I call dibs on the first of the Crab/Human hybrid.

Sorry, Dick Cheney is prior art

-1 Flamebait
       

Re:Dibs on Crab People. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908415)

Brains, Gov'ner?

Re:Dibs on Crab People. (1)

eclectro (227083) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908515)

Sorry, Dick Cheney is prior art
Actually see that buzzard with a 24 foot wingspan circling above your place? That's him now.

Re:Dibs on Crab People. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908561)

Yuch. Chowing on someone who tastes like crab is not pleasant.

Re:Dibs on Crab People. (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908793)

>Yuch. Chowing on someone who tastes like crab is not pleasant.
Girls get really offended when you crack out the Thousand Island Dressing, no idea why.

Transhuman critters for all? (5, Interesting)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908235)

Reminds me of Patricia Piccinini, an Australian artist who made a a set of sculptures called "The Young Family".
http://www.roslynoxley9.com.au/artists/31/Patricia_Piccinini/249/ [roslynoxley9.com.au]

Re:Transhuman critters for all? (1)

alltollz (1169801) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908371)

The one pic of that dude with 6 nipples and a giant, 3-foot dick sticking out his ass was particularly good. I viewed it to the tune of "Hot Shot City."

Re:Transhuman critters for all? (1)

MrConspiracy (1169829) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908581)

I saw those at MassMoCA.They're fairly interesting, but I'm not especially worried about a new generation of anthro pigs being born. Actually, if the furries got that into their heads...

Re:Transhuman critters for all? (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908995)

I'm not especially worried about a new generation of anthro pigs being born
Me neither, but don't try patenting them - there's prior art [wikipedia.org]

What on Earth does it mean (0, Troll)

Flying pig (925874) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908237)

What is a "human-animal hybrid"? Scientists haven't believed that human beings aren't animals since before Harvey. That's like putting a VW engine into a Ford and calling it a "Ford-car hybrid".

The standard of science reporting is now so low that journalists should be deprived of access to modern medicine and technology until they do better, though given the usual standard of their education they would just end up banging rocks together and trying to brew cider from windfalls till the end of time.

Rant over, this is about hybrids between human beings and _other_ species. Nothing new. Visit any UK city centre on a Friday or Saturday night (don't forget flak jacket and bodyguards) and you will believe this kind of thing has been going on for years.

Re:What on Earth does it mean (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908347)

The standard of science reporting is now so low that journalists should be deprived of access to modern medicine and technology until they do better, though given the usual standard of their education they would just end up banging rocks together and trying to brew cider from windfalls till the end of time.

One of the funniest comments I've ever seen on slashdot. I've thought the same thing myself, if a bit less eloquently, far too many times to count.

Re:What on Earth does it mean (5, Insightful)

glwtta (532858) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908399)

In common speech the word "animal" is used to refer to animals that are not humans. There is really no way that anyone did not understand what they meant.

You really are just trying too hard.

Re:What on Earth does it mean (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908559)

You'd like to think the common man hadn't infiltrated slashdot yet. I'd go as far as to wager that if you asked the common man if human beings were animals they would say no.

Re:What on Earth does it mean (1)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908837)

Technically they're not hybrids either, because they just mix up the starting stem cells and don't actually mix up DNA. So they're not animal-human and not hybrids.

Let's just call them FRANKENSTEINS, or ABOMINATIONS (caps are mandatory).

Re:What on Earth does it mean (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 6 years ago | (#20909105)

Technically they're not hybrids either, because they just mix up the starting stem cells and don't actually mix up DNA.

TFA seems to be talking about actual hybrids (they mention that chimeras will be allowed as well, though).

Does it occur to you (4, Insightful)

Flying pig (925874) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908989)

That in fact the description is intended to be sensationalist? That it plays to the religious fundamentalists who want to stop biological research? That it is NOT an accurate description of what is being done? And that some of us actually are of have been working scientists or heads of research departments, and care about accuracy of reporting because we don't like having our work, or that of others, misrepresented?

Recently we had the case of journos talking up Craig Venter's research as producing "artificial life". I had to read his own original comments to see that he never made that claim, and in fact his own comments agreed with my own Slashdot posting on the subject.

Science is not common speech, and attempts to make it so result in misunderstanding and sensationalism. I don't know who modded this "informative" (presumably the same people who moderated me "overrated" because that doesn't get metamoderated, but whoever you are, you clearly know diddly squit about biology.

Re:What on Earth does it mean (1)

ZombieWomble (893157) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908531)

The goal of a science journalist is to communicate information. "Human-animal hybrid" pretty much perfectly describes what is going on here to the majority of people, and I'm sure nobody who isn't trying damn hard to be pedantic would bat an eye at the slightly non-technical definition.

You knew it was coming... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908243)

Alright, lets just get this one out of the way: I, for one, welcome our new human-animal embryonic hybrid overlords!

Bushism comes true? (2, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908251)

That comment from G.W. Bush on human-animal hybrids was kind of dismissed as whimsical religious paranoia. However, maybe the man had a point after all.

The next generation of terrorists may have tentacles.

   

Re:Bushism comes true? (4, Funny)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908329)

The next generation of terrorists may have tentacles.
I think it's rather unlikely that the next generation of terrorists will come from Japan.

Speaking of the Japanese... (2, Funny)

n dot l (1099033) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908651)

The next generation of terrorists may have tentacles.
I think it's rather unlikely that the next generation of terrorists will come from Japan.
Perhaps not, but I think we might be getting closer to who's actually in charge of Gundam here...

Re:Bushism comes true? (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908693)

Well, given that Bush appears as a religious fanatic (the textbook false prophet, if you ask me, but I digress) helps in dismissing his ramblings.
In fact my foremost objection to this kind of experimentation is philosophical, not religious.
If I experiment on my fellow humans' genome I'm going to sacrifice an embryo to do research. To save other people? That's what they say, but it really is "to save other people under our terms". Because profit will be made out of this research, because patents will decide who will benefit.
So essentially some slashdotters here are applauding yet another step forward of a world they despise.

Same for "lesser species": experimentation on animals and especially humans makes victims. It all ought to be done in the open, so to minimize the number of victims. Producing more pain than necessary is criminal, fullstop.

Making a religious fuss kinda helps the pro "life slaughtering for private profit" movement to get the sympathy of people who have enough of religious propaganda.

Hybrids (0, Flamebait)

SniperClops (776236) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908253)

I have no problem with hybrid embryos for testing purpose as I don't mind abortion within the first trimester. But allowing a human hybrid to come to term (If possible) I am against. Stem cell research should be legal and funded by the government because it has the potential to cure MANY diseases.

Re:Hybrids (1)

Smight (1099639) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908349)

In the U.S. stem cell research and cloning are perfectly legal. The ban is on federal funding because it is morally questionable.

Re:Hybrids (4, Interesting)

qc_dk (734452) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908357)

>But allowing a human hybrid to come to term (If possible) I am against.

I will never understand that point of view. If that being is secured a place in a good family (as pet or child), then what is the ethical problem?
Why is it more moral for a child to be created by rape? A crack whores illicit child? A drunken chance encounter? a one night stand?

What is it people abhor so much about a child or a new species created on purpose?

Re:Hybrids (2, Interesting)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908487)

Same here. It always struck me a bit like someone who'd prohibit minorities from having kids because they might face the hardships of racism. A kinder, gentler, eugenics movement. Though, even above that it always strikes me when people even think it's possible for it to happen in the conceivable future. The kind of hybrid's we're talking about aren't exactly the most viable fish in the sea.

Re:Hybrids (2, Insightful)

Broken scope (973885) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908535)

Who gets to decide what is a pet and what is a child?

Who gets to decide what is human and what is not?

Who gets to decide if its okay to use hybrids for testing purposes since they resemble humans so closely?

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I don't think humanity is currently ready to answer those questions. Maybe i'm just so cynical that I expect people to fear anything that is near human but not quite.

A child borne of a rape/one night stand is still a human.

Re:Hybrids (3, Insightful)

n dot l (1099033) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908963)

Who gets to decide what is a pet and what is a child?

Who gets to decide what is human and what is not?
I hate these arguments. I mean, who gets to decide whether the unusually intelligent should be given freedom or forced to invent things to service the rest of us? Who says the unusually strong shouldn't be forced to do manual labour? Who says slavery is wrong? Who gets to decide that people that suffer from deformities shouldn't be put on display and exploited for public entertainment? These are all things we've already worked out the answers to.

The real question should be: who gets to decide that a trait which has been added to the genome by scientists purposefully rearranging DNA is unnatural and makes something inhuman (and thus not subject to existing moral codes), while the odd mutations that have been caused by exposure to radiation, or pollution, or bad drugs, etc. are natural, and that those that bear said mutations are clearly still human?

Who gets to decide if its okay to use hybrids for testing purposes since they resemble humans so closely?
I always want to add, "Right. Who gets to decide that death row inmates, or the mentally retarded, or people who's skin color varies from our own should not be used for medical experiments?" to that one. This isn't anything new in terms of moral issues. Next!

Maybe I'm just paranoid, but I don't think humanity is currently ready to answer those questions.
Humanity could answer those questions just fine if it could assert reason over the urge to declare everything an us or a them, often over the most trivial of differences...but I'm really not arguing with you because I don't have any faith in the general public's ability to think clearly about this.

Maybe i'm just so cynical that I expect people to fear anything that is near human but not quite.
Yeah. With you on the cynicism.

For the record, I don't think avoiding the issue is right either - regardless of the fact that, yes, we're going to screw things up no matter how we approach this (or any other) new field. I mean really, imagine where we'd be if mankind had just sat around discussing the ethical issues of fire, as opposed to learning what it is and how to harness it. True, we'd never have burned all those people at the stake, but...

A child borne of a rape/one night stand is still a human.
Obviously, I think this only gets dragged into the discussion to counter the argument that we shouldn't create creatures that could only face a life of pain and misery - because it's kind of obvious that we're already perfectly capable of taking care of even the most unwanted of our own, though we don't always choose to do so.

Re:Hybrids (1)

SniperClops (776236) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908551)

When you start adding things who knows what is going to happen, there could be unforeseen consequences that could make life very hard socially, physically and psychologically.

Re:Hybrids (4, Insightful)

stranger_to_himself (1132241) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908863)

What is it people abhor so much about a child or a new species created on purpose?

There are lots of good reasons to be worried about this. First, there's no way of knowing what the long term medical, biological, psychological etc outcomes would be for the child. There's clearly no medical need at the individual level for this sort of thing (there might be at the social level, but that doesn't count in medical ethics). There's also no notion of consent, you couldn't retrospectivly ask the child whether they agree to be an experiment. So ethically, at the moment at least, it's a non-starter, even within the existing rules of medical ethics.

I agree though that the "ewww" reaction and the 'abhorrence' is a bit irrational and is not a good basis for policy.

Having said all this, medical and biological sciences will advance, and one day we're going to have to deal with this sort of thing as a real possibility. We should be starting to get the ethics sorted out now.

Re:Hybrids (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908627)

If you look at humanity as a whole, you will realize that diseases are actually a good thing, which eliminate the weak links. Imagine sudden improvment in medical science, where there are affordable cures for all diseases - human population would skyrocket and would (in the long run) hurt us even more.
I believe we should focus with genetics on making better humans. Human 2.0. And main focus should not be longevity, but rather intelligence.

Re:Hybrids (1)

stranger_to_himself (1132241) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908807)

I don't like abortion at all, but as far as I understand there's no suggestion that these embryos will even be implanted or allowed to get past a few cell divisions.

Re:Hybrids (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20909041)

It should be legal, but NOT funded by illegally and unconstitutionally stolen tax dollars. It is not the government's place to forcibly separate somebody from their hard earned income and use it for a cause that they may find offensive. The private sector is capable of raising more than enough money to fund this research, along with all other research that is currently funded by a run amok government. I resent my money being stolen every pay check. I resent the hell out of it.

There goes the animal metaphors. (4, Funny)

Solokron (198043) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908259)

He is hung like a horse! No, I really mean it Tiffany!

Re:There goes the animal metaphors. (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908289)

He is hung like a horse! No, I really mean it Tiffany!

What would really piss off Tiffany is if the horse is hung like a human.
       

So finally... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908277)

Spiderman is legal?

Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908279)

I bags the horse penis gene.

Oblig template (1, Redundant)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908301)

I for one welcome our new [insert zoo]-human-hybrid overlords.

Re:Oblig template (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908433)

KHHHHAAAANNNNNN!!!!

Yet more proof that the UK has gone mad (1, Insightful)

Lissajous (989738) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908315)

Let me get this straight.....I can fuse a human with a shark, but I can't pop down to Game (even if I *am* watched on CCTV every step of the way) and pick up a copy of Manhunt 2?

Boy, am I glad I fled that crazy, crazy country for a saner place to live.

Re:Yet more proof that the UK has gone mad (1, Troll)

backwardMechanic (959818) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908345)

I'm curious now, what sane place have you found to hide?

Re:Yet more proof that the UK has gone mad (1)

Dr. Stavros (808432) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908677)

FYI, based on their previous posts, Denmark.

[By the way, I recently "fled" the U.K. to the Netherlands :) ]

Re:Yet more proof that the UK has gone mad (1)

gpt123 (1121555) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908723)

Try town centre drinking on a Friday/Saturday night. You will see there are already more than enough 'Manimals' here in the UK.

Re:Yet more proof that the UK has gone mad (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908423)

Let me get this straight.....I can fuse a human with a shark

I'm really curious to find out what your conception of a "human-animal hybrid embryo" is in this context.

Re:Yet more proof that the UK has gone mad (2, Interesting)

Frogbert (589961) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908865)

Furthermore once the biological hurdle is overcome would it then be possible graft some sort of "Freaking Laser" to the shark/human hybrid?

Finally! (1)

greenreaper (205818) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908331)

At last the species-dysmorphic among us will have some way of making things right. Plus it would be neat for those of us [wikia.com] who like the idea of anthropomorphic animals.

30 years from now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908333)

Looks like the dogman is complaining about his "rights" again, get the gun.

Better late than never (3, Informative)

jeremyp (130771) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908413)

I think kdawson needs to find a better news source. The BBC reported this story more than a month ago.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6978384.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Re:Better late than never (2, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908547)

It's worse than that, TFA in the original post is about them considering a route to authorising animal-human hybrids. We passed that stage a long time ago. "Olds for nerds"?

Re:Better late than never (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908757)

I submitted the bbc report on this to slashdot more than a month ago. I even finished up preempting the obligatory "Tauren Overlord" reference (the bbc article specifically mentioned human/bovine crosses for some reason).

Playing God.. (1)

RSA7474 (1163263) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908443)

This is the first step towards in what I think, will be the next human revolution. It is only a matter of time before this was going to happen. The human has almost evolved naturally to what it can be, we are almost as tall as we can sustain. Genetic engineering will be the next evolution, it will take us past what we, the human race, can evolve to. But is the human race ready to abandon morality? If we can live for extended period of years will we still reproduce, or if we can replicate. If we do so, will be helping the human race become better by remaining here for long periods of time, or hinder it because less people means less diversity in the ways we think. Does science end, when we can manipulate, create, and destroy any form of matter?

Re:Playing God.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908571)

The human has almost evolved naturally to what it can be, we are almost as tall as we can sustain.


WTF ???

How on Earth can you make such a statement? Maybe we should have quit when we got opposable thumbs?

Re:Playing God.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908583)

These sorts of rambling nonsensical drivilings are why humans have the capacity for internal-monolouge...

Humans used to be taller than they are now (although you are almost right in that we are the tallest homonid species yet known from the fossil record), so I think we could sustain a bit more shrinkage at this point eh?

"Does science end, when we can manipulate, create, and destroy any form of matter?" - WTF HAVE YOU BEEN SMOKING?!?

Who needs... (1)

cosmocain (1060326) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908447)

...human-animal hybrids if he could have sharks with lasers? i, for one, opt for shark-technology hybrids!

ManBearPig (0, Troll)

Brain Damaged Bogan (1006835) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908457)

I for one welcome our new half man, half bear, half pig overlords! At least Al Gore will be right about something for a change...

Re:ManBearPig (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908481)

Even better than merging species, we really can make 1.5=1 and change the whole system of mathematics while we are at it.

Yirmiyahu 31:26 (2, Informative)

Apple Acolyte (517892) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908483)

"Behold days are coming, says the Lord, and I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with seed of man and seed of beasts."

Re: Yirmiyahu 31:26 (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908683)

"Behold days are coming, says the Lord, and I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with seed of man and seed of beasts."
What has Onanism got to do with this story?

Are there no better ways to spend our money (2, Insightful)

tgv (254536) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908615)

The problems with this kind of research are ethical. So let us consider possible advantages. What is this research for?

a) Rare diseases. Many people die in poor countries because there is no proper health care. Why fund research with possibly far reaching ethical dilemmas that might one day cure some rare disease when there are millions to be saved?

b) Common causes of death. We now reach an average age of around 80. That's enough. There is no point in following Faust's example with the risk of getting us in troubled waters.

My conclusion: The disadvantages outway possible advantages. These outraged scientists (BTW, I am one, just in another field) just cry for more money. This line of research is not going to give us more insight into nature, nor is it morally acceptable at this point.

Re: Are there no better ways to spend our money (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908643)

This line of research is not going to give us more insight into nature, nor is it morally acceptable at this point.
I don't know about you, but for me a cell isn't a person.

Re:Are there no better ways to spend our money (1)

iceZebra (1148629) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908753)

Just what is it you find morally unacceptable about using cells for research? This particular group of scientists are usually outraged because some weak politician panders to the religious right and bans research for "ethical" reasons (read: God *sigh*). I personally feel this kind of research is especially valuable to our understanding of "nature" as you call it. Wouldn't it be a better idea to let the various research groups vie for funding and thus ensure that the winning piece of research is valuable, rather than just ban it all because we don't think it's any good? I seem to remember Gallileo having the same problem. Some nonsense about the sun.

Re:Are there no better ways to spend our money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908809)

Both of your arguments are based around opinions. Please don't try to make your opinions look like arguments. It only makes you look like an idiot.

My opinions:

a) Increasing scientific knowledge is a good thing (tm). However much or little knowledge we have, political reasons will ensure there are always "millions to be saved".

b) 80? Pfffffffft. Fuck you and fuck Faust.

Re:Are there no better ways to spend our money (4, Funny)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908843)

>What is this research for?
Might help find a cure for:
Elephantitus
Dog Breath
Catalepsy
Hare loss (work with me here)

Re:Are there no better ways to spend our money (2, Insightful)

stranger_to_himself (1132241) | more than 6 years ago | (#20909001)

a) Rare diseases. Many people die in poor countries because there is no proper health care. Why fund research with possibly far reaching ethical dilemmas that might one day cure some rare disease when there are millions to be saved?

That argument doesn't hold a lot of water. The reasons people die in poor countries are economic, not due to a lack medical knowledge, so by your logic, all medical research should stop until we've solved third world economics?

b) Common causes of death. We now reach an average age of around 80. That's enough. There is no point in following Faust's example with the risk of getting us in troubled waters.

This one makes a bit more sense, but most of this sort of research is about improving quality of life, that is in extending 'disability-free life', rather than extending lifespan itself.

Military Use (1)

radius1214 (1082581) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908739)

I bet the military would jump all over this if they could get some human/dog hybrids to sniff out terrorists, or human/eagle hybrids for enhanced eye sight, etc.

Re:Military Use (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908859)

>human/eagle hybrids
Suddenly our failed Olympic skier Eddie "The Eagle" Edwards makes sense - always looked like an experiment that went wrong.

let the Island of Dr. Moreau comparisons begin! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20908765)

Here is one :

If ever such a hybrid would become sentient would he than be considered a Human and protected like you and me currently are, or do we than have our next generation of slaves (Who do not have any rights and are conveniently considered property, to do with as we like) ?

You know it's true (4, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908771)

1. We're already experimenting with animals, including almost-humans (apes). They have similar self-appreciation, feelings, pain and confusion like you. We're only less sympathetic since they're not EXACTLY like us. But they are, in fact, more like us than we suspect.

2. Experimenting with human embyos, experimenting on people will dramatically further science and improve life for the rest of us (billions). It means we need to come to terms with the fact that humans are animals as any, and experimentation is required. But how do we do that without allowing for genocide? Not simple problem, but unless we solve it, we'll all be victims to save the few from being victims.

Uh oh... (1)

Debug0x2a (1015001) | more than 6 years ago | (#20908811)

I sense a great disturbance in the force... like a thousand raging furries just got one simultaneous hard-on... I for one welcome our new anthropomorphic overlords.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...