/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11815819]

How long until we are able to grow patient matched organs outside of the human body for later transplantation? I'd like to purchase a megacock for myself

[Anonymous No.11815881]

For the umpteenth time.

It's already available but research was cut due to ethical concerns

It went like this
>project presents the idea of taking stem cells from a patient who need new organs
>modify a pig fetus to grow the needed organ with the DNA of the patient
>inject it to a sow
>raise and harvest
The plan was expected to cost just 1/3 of standard donated organs but they cut it at the stage of modifying pig fetus because someone had the bright idea to ask:
"What if it grew a human brain? Is it still a pig?"
"What if it had 50% human organs? Is it still a pig?"

Morality sure is an annoyance, isn't it?
If not for morals, we could have made orks destroying mankind right now

[Anonymous No.11815915]

>>11815881
I'm no expert but maybe it's possible to stop the differentiation of a head/brain structure on the donor fetus with some sort of substance, like how thalidomide blocked arms from developing fully. If the donating fetus has no brain, it can't be argued that it is alive or can feel pain and it would then be okay to harvest the organs.

[Anonymous No.11816042]

>>11815915
Yeah, but now you have to answer to Animal Rights.
Is it ethical to purposely create brain dead animals for the sake of organs?

Normal answer would be yes but remember: people who are cruel to animals have a strong correlation with psychopathy and sociopath. Such is why FBI are always monitoring animal abusers

[Anonymous No.11816093]

>>11815881
So it basically got shelved because jews would refuse the procedure?

[Anonymous No.11816133]

>>11815881
>wow guys look we can do the science and make the organ
>oh uh guys except we can’t do the science without hi-jacking the biology of some retarded pig-hybrid because we actually still don’t know the science

>Is it ethical to purposely create brain dead animals for the sake of organs?
>Normal answer would be yes
Modern “science” everyone

[Anonymous No.11816149]

>>11816133
We know and we can, kid
But it comes at a huge cost in terms of cultural, societal, and governmental impact.

The constitution would have to be revised to involve discussing subhuman races raised only for organs - what rights they have, where we draw the line, and if it is even constitutional to start with.

But I guess you should just head back to /pol/ or some other brainlet board

[Anonymous No.11817781]

>>11816149
I’m thank god everyday I don’t have the mindset of a raging liberal smoothbrain . Thx for reminding me

[Anonymous No.11818095]

>>11816149
Bioethics are a meme and i lie through my teeth everytime i have to interact with the ethics committee

[Anonymous No.11818259]

>>11816149
constitution a big gay
i want offshore organ farms

[Anonymous No.11818356]

>>11816042
>Is it ethical to purposely create brain dead animals for the sake of organs?
If it's "ethical" to create millions of non-brain dead animals for the sake of eating them, then yes.

[Anonymous No.11818397]

>>11818356
Those animals are under the protection of animal rights
We are talking about creating animals that are more humans than animal. The impact it would cause may not be worth the saving

[Anonymous No.11818436]

>>11818397
>Those animals are under the protection of animal rights
So have the same racket "protect" these as well.

>We are talking about creating animals that are more humans than animal.
If it is prevented from developing a brain by design, then it's not. If it was possible to cut off someone's head yet keep the body on life support somehow would that still be a human? As opposed to most of a human's body? If yes then this is just an organ transplantation topic. If no then there is no problem whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.11818444]

>>11815881
can’t a group of scientists do this in a third world shithole that doesn’t care about ethics, normalize it there and then do it in richer countries

[Anonymous No.11818460]

>>11818436
You made a subhuman fetus
You intentionally destroyed its brain before it could be born

By definition alone, that is dystopian logic.
It would absolutely question our definition of what makes a human

Is it even subhuman to start with?
What if it's capable of grow with 90% human organs?
What if its human brain showed signs of sapience?

Our history is fucked with many events of genocide done because we dehumanized our enemies because it was convenient. This time we are making our own enemies for profit. And our enemy is our own humanity

[Anonymous No.11818463]

>>11818444
China harvests organs from their own political prisoners, so yeah.

[Anonymous No.11819629]

>>11818436
What if I grow your mom's vagina for the purpose of the sex?

[Anonymous No.11820115]

>>11818463
That's a lie made up by the scammers who need to explain where they get organs from.

[Anonymous No.11820120]

>>11820115
.t chang

[Anonymous No.11820129]

>>11815819
>like to purchase a megacock for myself
That's a bad idea. While we will reach the point at which we can manipulate the growth pattern of a given organ, your body is adapted to the exact size you develop with. Short of correcting a developmental deformity, an unnaturally large appendage would upset your natural equilibrium.

[Anonymous No.11820138]

>>11820120
Well the only group who complains about it is the scammers.

[Anonymous No.11820144]

>>11815881
Competition will stamp this moral quandry right on out, e.g when chinese life expectancy goes to 140 via such "unethical" means

[Anonymous No.11820159]

>>11818397
No one wants pigs with human brains
We want pigs with lungs we can swap our own out with, and then eat the bacon while recuperating from surgery.

[Anonymous No.11820166]

>>11820129
>sorry, you dont qualify for the big dick upgrade

[Anonymous No.11820232]

>>11820144
Realistically, society that rejected ethics and morals are completely dystopian and always at the brink of collapse from rebellion from the people.

China's lack of ethics have caused a global pandemic. After this have ceased and vaccine distributed, there would be an increased hate for Chinese and anything associated with them

This is what it means with cultural impacts.
Science without Ethics would sound great on paper but actually enrage society and cause greater damage in the long run

[Anonymous No.11820234]

>>11820232
Damage is irrelevant. Science will move forward while your civilization falls. You'll need to vilify knowledge itself to make your point.

[Anonymous No.11820241]

>>11820234
You can't move science forward without funding from the government
Government cannot earn taxes from angry people.

Get out

[Anonymous No.11820245]

>>11820232
What is ethical about not helping people?

[Anonymous No.11820248]

>>11820241
>without funding from the government
This is the main false part but your other claim is wrong too. Corruption moves humanity forward when there's no other path.

[Anonymous No.11820253]

>>11818095
Based

[Anonymous No.11820263]

>>11820248
>when there's no other path.
Yeah, it's called the Dark Age where Roman discoveries got replaced by blood letting, whipping, and burning of witches and cats

[Anonymous No.11820284]

>>11820245
Road to hell is paved with good intentions
No one believes that they are the villains for we judge ourselves by our intentions while judging others for their actions

Life's cruel joke

[Anonymous No.11820453]

>>11820241
>You can't move science forward without funding from the government
Depending on the field you absolutely can

[Anonymous No.11820457]

>>11820453
Mathematics, I presume?

[Anonymous No.11820478]

>>11815819
Why bother growing one when China will just find a match and kill them for you

[Anonymous No.11820699]

>>11820284
>Road to hell is paved with good intentions
Maybe the 'ethics' that forbid you from developing it are those good intentions.

[Anonymous No.11820704]

>>11820478
They don't do it, it's a Falun Gong scam. You get no organ.

[Anonymous No.11820719]

>>11820699
Correct.

We all have good intentions.
Conflict arises on the proposed methods

Progress in science at the cost of social stability and cultural unrest is just not worth it. Depending on how bad it was, the country may even recieve economic sanctions and the scientists involve would get their license revoked,

[Anonymous No.11820765]

>>11820457
Mathematics absolutely and to a lesser extent biology in the context of plant breeding as they can be undertaken by a singular individual and as the technology increases genetic engineering is becoming much cheaper and equipment easier to obtain

[Anonymous No.11820797]

>>11820765
I mean...you are not wrong.

But thing is, it isn't going to be "just" budget cuts.
In a realistic sense, dark ages are literally death of knowledge because
1. No military to defend trade routes
2. No way to pay teachers
3. No government stockpile to provide in times of famine
4. No currency with stable monetary value, even

Just giving a bigger perspective.
Humanity have been through many different darkages and all of them were brutal.

Bronze Age collapse was the hardest for me because civilization used to have a universal written language - Linear B. It was forgotten until the Greeks introduced Alphabet

[Anonymous No.11820915]

Never. It's a meme.

>>11815881
Delusion.

[Anonymous No.11820946]

>>11820915
You're delusional. It'll happen as soon as moral cavemen die out and are replaced by spacemen. Manifest destiny is inevitable, you zero IQ tools.

[Anonymous No.11820978]

>>11820946
You shut up. It took us 10000 years of philosophical and societal progress to finally realize that racism and sexism is wrong.

We are not going to abandon all those and become a sci-fi dystopia just because you wanted some cheap organs

[Anonymous No.11821020]

[Anonymous No.11821034]

>>11815881
>If not for morals, we could have made orks destroying mankind right now
This is why the Chinese will rule the world

[Anonymous No.11821126]

>>11820946
Calling your politainment "enemies" cavemen won't stop organ growing from being a retarded pipe-dream

[Anonymous No.11821316]

>>11820284
What are your favourite philosophy books

[Anonymous No.11821417]

>>11818460
>What if it's capable of grow with 90% human organs?
As long as there is no human brain, there is no moral dilemma. Growing human bodies without a brain for the purpose of harvesting their organs doesn't inflict any suffering on anyone, on the contrary, it actually has the potential to remedy and prevent a lot of suffering. You can't inflict suffering on a being without a brain, there's no way that such a thing would be immoral.

[Anonymous No.11821433]

>>11821126
>Fertilize egg cell
>Block whatever substances promote differentiation of stem cells into head/brain
>When the body is birthed keep it supplemented with various hormones and nutrition so that it grows properly
>Harvest and transplant the organs when they're developed enough
Why couldn't it work? Doesn't seem very far fetched.

[Anonymous No.11821443]

>>11820719
Technology that allows for cheap organ transplants, saving thousands of people from otherwise terminal illnesses, isn't something that would cause social instability and unrest. At, most some religious nuts will oppose it, but they'll soon line up to support it when one of their loved ones is struck by a condition that could be alleviated with an organ transplant.

[Anonymous No.11821541]

>>11820797
I highly doubt society would collapse because people got disgruntled over some unethical scientists

[Anonymous No.11821822]

>>11816149
kys dumbass

[Anonymous No.11821826]

>>11818356
this

[Anonymous No.11821829]

>>11818397
>The impact it would cause may not be worth the saving
ooh just stfu

[Anonymous No.11822009]

>>11821417
False.
Much of abortion doctors suffer from ptsd and even retired to become activists against it.
By your logic, we should also harvest organs from the terminally ill and brain dead folks

[Anonymous No.11822014]

>>11822009
We do harvest from people dying or have very recently died

[Anonymous No.11822023]

>>11822009
>By your logic, we should also harvest organs from the terminally ill and brain dead folks
yes, we should and we do

[Anonymous No.11822024]

>>11822014
Under their free will.
We do not harvest from prisoners.

[Anonymous No.11822031]

>>11821443
It would open up discussions for creating subhuman people, mate.

How do we even define a subhuman?
If we define it as anything human-like without human capabilities, then that would put mentally and physically challenged among those.
Why aren't we harvesting their organs either.

Moral degeneration is a slow domino effect.

[Anonymous No.11822034]

>>11822023
Go find a doctor that could appreciate the trauma it would induce upon them.

[Anonymous No.11822038]

>>11822024
>Under their free will.
we harvest from braindead retards too, just need next of kin consent

[Anonymous No.11822059]

>>11821433
By your logic, we should just hire mothers to give birth to fetuses modified to have dead brain just so we can have organs to harvest.

You should not block anything from development because that means that you are afraid of the truth

[Anonymous No.11822071]

>>11822024
>>11822038
this
Also the chinese absolutely do harvest from prisoners and their thriving

[Anonymous No.11822080]

>>11822059
It'd be very inefficient when a pig would also work as they're simply easier to care for without too much interference from other humans

[Anonymous No.11822094]

>>11822059
>By your logic, we should just hire mothers to give birth to fetuses modified to have dead brain just so we can have organs to harvest.
sounds like a good idea to me honestly

[Anonymous No.11822107]

>>11822080
Yes but the technology already exists
We don't do that because we have ethical standards

>>11822094
It's a great idea on paper
Once applied, it results into traumatized doctors and patients who feel disgusted upon themselves.

Sapience is a weird thing

[Anonymous No.11822114]

>>11822107
It's less that we don't do that because of ethical standards and more of we don't do that due to the reactions of people ethical standards are a temporal thing and easily subject to change as ethics isn't an advancing field and more of one that simply changes.

[Anonymous No.11822123]

Such techniques are only to be employed for the benefit of those within the utmost echelon of society, if such marvels were to fall into the hands of the unwashed masses their disgust at the stagnation of medical science would dissolve the authority of the medical priest caste.

[Anonymous No.11822135]

>>11822114
Those ethical standards are there because we discovered that it is what allows us to function as a soceity

Breaking those ethical standards can be seen as a threatening act because if you can break such a simple rule, then that means that you're lacking the same sense of empathy and community that we have. As suc, one can assume that you are capable of doing so much worse

And the people would be afraid of you experimenting on them.
No matter what profit you have made or lives you have saved, your violation of moral codes would have great effects to how people perceives you.

[Anonymous No.11822148]

>>11822135
Those standards are there not because we discovered them to be what allows us to function as a society but because they are what is perceived as good as every age has different ethical standards and so too will the next
>Breaking those ethical standards can be seen as a threatening act because if you can break such a simple rule, then that means that you're lacking the same sense of empathy and community that we have. As suc, one can assume that you are capable of doing so much worse
All ethical boundaries can be justified to remove the only thing that is required would be the government and news media to allow a slow cultural change that will help facilitate it's appeal as the morality of your average schmuck changes as often as the breeze

[Anonymous No.11822152]

>>11822148
Look at the pattern
We all start as barbarians
Then we learn philosophy as we build civilization.

We don't go from civilization back into barbarism. That's called dystopia

[Anonymous No.11822161]

>>11822135
>grow animal to be caged for its entire life to be slaughtered, eaten and shit out
okay
>grow animal to be caged for its entire life to be slaughtered and potentially save multiple lives with the transplanting of its organs
also okay

What is immoral is demanding that people die slowly from organ failure in what could be a post organ scarcity world.

[Anonymous No.11822172]

>>11822059
If everyone involved consents, there's nothing wrong with what you propose. No one gets hurt, everyone benefits.
>But they might feel gross and traumatized
Then don't choose that line of work

>Nooooo we can't allow doctors to do prostate exams, they might think it's gross and the patients might feel embarassed :(

[Anonymous No.11822176]

>>11822152
Barbarism and civilisation represent meaningless terms and ethics persists in the imagination of the people living in a certain culture and time and are not something that "improves" or "advances" towards anything it is simply what people believe to be right in the context of their worldview which can change completely regardless of the time period.

[Anonymous No.11822186]

>>11822152
>>11822176
To add to this we will not descend into barbarism or be enlightened by any notion of "civilised" philosophy but will as we always have and always will change our ethics on the whims of change

[Anonymous No.11822193]

>>11822161
>>11822172
>I am personally responsible for 75,000 abortions. This legitimizes my credentials to speak to you with some authority on the issue.
>Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy. Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic at $500 a time, 1.2 million abortions means an industry generating $600 million annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion.

>It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma, but to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.

>As a scientist I know, not believe, know that human life begins at conception.

Just replace fetology with whatever they would call those pig people and you got the same statement from doctors whom you want to do the dirty work for you

>>11822176
It took us 10000 years of progress to finally ban slavery, sexism, and racism on civilized countries and you're saying that it is meaningless?

[Anonymous No.11822199]

>>11822193
>It took us 10000 years of progress to finally ban slavery, sexism, and racism on civilized countries and you're saying that it is meaningless?
>it took us 10000 years of progress
Ethics is not a system of progress as i've already stated

[Anonymous No.11822202]

>>11815819

What is this image trying to convey?

[Anonymous No.11822203]

>>11822031
Human brain = it's a human, it gets human rights
Animal brain = it's an animal, it gets animal rights to minimize it's suffering
No brain/human modified to be brainless from birth = It's just a piece of meat, no rights to be had here, use it for whatever you will. Yes this supposed rule is arbitrary but it minimizes suffering for sentient beings and allows for experiments on detailed, brainless human models.

[Anonymous No.11822205]

>>11822199
Yeah because why is philosophy and schools of thought

[Anonymous No.11822214]

>>11822205
Because they're good texts on logical thinking and deduction everything else is ethics from their time that people dwell on to think of their own or what they believe to be an ideal "ethic"

[Anonymous No.11822229]

>>11822214
>modified to be brainless from birth
Yeah, that's your slippery slope.
You cannot and must not stop the development part because that is fear of the truth

[Anonymous No.11822234]

>>11822203
>modified to be brainless from birth
Yeah, that's your slippery slope.
You cannot and must not stop the development part because that is fear of the truth

>>11822214
Never tried studying them, did you?

[Anonymous No.11822235]

>>11822193
>Just replace fetology with whatever they would call those pig people and you got the same statement from doctors whom you want to do the dirty work for you
So? Some work is dirty, you don't outlaw stuff on such a basis.

[Anonymous No.11822239]

>>11822235
You would all just say "it's saving lives!"
When in reality, it is a steep and slippery slope that would descend into madness and greed.

[Anonymous No.11822241]

>>11822234
Never studied philosophy rigorously although the ideas of Stirner were interesting it's simply that ethics isn't something that is evolving or improving towards anything it's just changing under the context of whatever culture and people it's idealised through

[Anonymous No.11822247]

>>11822241
Yeah, if you think that going from medieval witch burning to reniassance and democracy is not progress

[Anonymous No.11822248]

>>11822239
You are aware we're currently in an age with a thriving illegal organ harvest business and that through growing these organs in other animals you'd eliminate a massive issue

[Anonymous No.11822253]

>>11822247
Medieval witch burnings were rare and democracy is hardly a new idea and the reniassance had little to do with ethics and more to do with rediscovering roman and greek texts and their subsequent popularisation

[Anonymous No.11822255]

>>11822248
In China and probably some other shitholes
Don't remove that part

[Anonymous No.11822257]

>>11822239
>slippery slope that would descend into madness and greed
No, there's nothing indicative of that happening. On the contrary, it seems that it would instead lead to an age of advanced medical science and generally increased well being. Supressing such advances is the morally incorrect option here.

[Anonymous No.11822258]

>>11822239
Madness and greed will always be made manifest. not choosing the far lesser of two evils is to demand multi track drifting

[Anonymous No.11822259]

>>11822255
It's thriving in the west as well as it's not very difficult to kill someone and cut out a few organs for a couple grand

[Anonymous No.11822260]

>>11822253
How about going from burying people alive with the pharaoh
To giving rights to slaves
To banning it

Come on, man.
Stop playing dumb.

[Anonymous No.11822270]

>>11822260
They're not some infinitely progressing ethic that is going to a "better place" they're simply changes and they're very likely to change once again as they always will and that can even be seen in the modern form of slavery where people can work for a company and work 10 hour shifts go home to the land that the company owns and eat food from the supermarket that the company also owns

[Anonymous No.11822274]

>>11822259
You kidding?
Yes it is hard, fuck face.
You cannot just steal organ and freeze it for other time. It has to be kept alive.

Only professional doctors with license to buy the needed chemicals can handle that stuff

[Anonymous No.11822275]

>>11815881
>If not for morals, we could have made orks destroying mankind right now
Look at USA and Europe right now.

[Anonymous No.11822277]

>>11822257
>>11822258
Considering the effect would reach up to the Constitution...I would say not

[Anonymous No.11822286]

>>11822274
You do realise you can purchase pretty much anything you want and these things are easily obtainable as all the information required is literally free right now on the internet we even live in an age where I can buy literally everything required for genetic engineering there isn't a thing on this planet you can't obtain if you have money.

[Anonymous No.11822290]

>>11822286
If you don't want to be arrested, you would not buy it

Guy bought a liver in China, got found in Spain.
Boom
Imprisoned for a year and heavily fined

[Anonymous No.11822294]

>>11822277
The constitution protects American citizens, if you are born from a pig, I would say that precludes any relevance of its application.

[Anonymous No.11822297]

>>11822290
If fear of an arrest ever actually stopped people there wouldn't be crime

[Anonymous No.11822301]

>>11822297
That qoute only applies to poverty, nigga.
If you can buy a liver that costs $150k, you can buy common sense and getting imprisoned literally costed you your professional life

[Anonymous No.11822302]

>>11822294
Even if you have a pig with human sapience?

[Anonymous No.11822305]

>>11822301
Unless of course you require that organ to survive then any cost is well worth it and jail is something that would matter very little to you

[Anonymous No.11822307]

>>11822294
If it doesn't apply to unborn children, it doesn't apply to headless humans

[Anonymous No.11822310]

>>11822305
Buy it legally.

[Anonymous No.11822321]

>>11822310
You can't and we're in an organ shortage as there is literally not enough to go around or else producing viable organs for transplantation in animals wouldn't be such an attractive line of research

[Anonymous No.11822325]

>>11822302
A pig with with human sapience is still a pig and not covered under the letter of the law.
>>11822307
Potentially true but that hinges on the means by which it enters the world. It must not meet the standard to be a "natural born citizen" at least in the united states, which is why medical advancements of this nature are unlikely to take shape within the borders of public America.

[Anonymous No.11822326]

>>11822321
Then pass a law saying that every citizen would have their organs harvested upon death by default unless they refuse to.

There are ways to cut this problem but creating subhuman races and playing god is not the solution

[Anonymous No.11822328]

>>11822325
Considering all the films we have about animals with human sapience, I doubt that the people would agree to that

[Anonymous No.11822329]

>>11822326
You'd lose out on growing organs that are genetic clones of your own which would avoid organ rejections which is still very likely to happen

[Anonymous No.11822335]

>>11822329
The pig organ is untested.
We don't know if would actually be accepted 100% either.
Either way, refining the transplant tech is easier than revising the constitution

[Anonymous No.11822337]

>>11822335
Exactly which is why it must be repeatedly tested and the method refined

[Anonymous No.11822338]

I'm going to leave for a moment

[Anonymous No.11822342]

>>11822328
Creating human sapience out of a lower animal would be an enormous waste for something that is going to be slaughtered instead of studied until its natural death.

Sapient animals will be undoubtedly be the last thing we are capable of creating as a result of the complexity of the brain in comparison to the complexity of any other organ.

[Anonymous No.11822421]

>>11822337
It was halted so yeah, that's that.
Just refine the already available tech.

>>11822342
Nigga, you have created a pig with human organs. You can create a pig with human brain.
It is bound to happen in an error.

[Anonymous No.11822437]

Animals are equally capable of suffering as humans. We already torture test animals. Doing shit with brainless animals is nothing in comparison.

[Anonymous No.11822455]

>>11822421
>You can create a pig with human brain.
Just terminate it early if that happens, no worse than an abortion.

>>11822437
True, having a brainless human to experiment on could remove the need for test animals.

[Anonymous No.11822456]

>>11822421
>It was halted so yeah, that's that.
China will almost definitely keep at it
>Nigga, you have created a pig with human organs. You can create a pig with human brain.
>It is bound to happen in an error.
>It is bound to happen in an error.
How exactly do you fuck up and introduce genes related to human cognitive function

[Anonymous No.11822468]

>>11822456
They discussed it saying that it is possible for the fetus to develop more human organs than what they designed it for and a human brain is not impossible. So yeah

[Anonymous No.11822472]

>>11822455
Until you ask how do you even figure out whether a pig fetus has a human brain activity or a pig one.

You can't.
It has to be born and develop first

[Anonymous No.11822477]

>>11822472
*which makes it legally murder

[Anonymous No.11822480]

>>11820115
>those political prisoners consented to human experimentation
I can't wait to slaughter chinks in WWIII

[Anonymous No.11822490]

>>11822472
Humans have 46 chromosomes, pigs have 38. If it has 46, you abort it. If it's 38 then it's an animal and you can slaughter in a humane manner without issue.

[Anonymous No.11822496]

>>11822468
A human brain is an insanely complex organ and if we somehow manage to recreate that even by accident it'd be monumental

[Anonymous No.11822507]

>>11822490
It's a chimera with both human and pig chromosomes

>>11822496
I mean, the tech didn't recreate it. It cloned an existing one

[Anonymous No.11822510]

>>11822496
This. It'd be a reason to push forward, not slow down.

[Anonymous No.11822515]

>>11822507
>It's a chimera with both human and pig chromosomes
Not a human and doesn't deserve human rights, still deserving of a humane death, though

[Anonymous No.11822521]

>>11822515
My point is that it would be born first before you discovered your mistakes

[Anonymous No.11822527]

>>11822521
No, you can test for chromosomes. That's how you can discover downs before the child is born. What you describe really is a non-issue

[Anonymous No.11822532]

>>11822527
And again, it's a chimera with both.

[Anonymous No.11822559]

>>11822532
It's not human then

[Anonymous No.11822564]

>>11822559
If it has sapience, it is. Both legally and morally
You have created an ork. Congratulations

[Anonymous No.11822578]

>>11822564
Suppress the development of it's brain and it's just a piece of meat. Then you can do whatever with it.

[Anonymous No.11822591]

>>11822578
And you lose your license.
You cannot suppress anything from development because you want some moral convenience

[Anonymous No.11822597]

>>11822578
Any other context I'd probably agree, but we're literally discussing organ transplants, up to and including the brain. If we can make it human with a single transplant, that says a lot about what it really is (beneath all the red tape and taxonomic bickering).

[Anonymous No.11822602]

>>11822591
Sure, in this morally warped society. Tell me how suppressing the development of the brain is any worse than outright abortion?

[Anonymous No.11822608]

>>11822602
Legally, it would be taken as murder.

You fucking sociopath

[Anonymous No.11822614]

>>11822608
Abortion isn't classified as murder, so this shouldn't either if you were to be consistent in your logic

[Anonymous No.11822624]

>>11822614
It's a perfectly healthy fetus
You killed its brain because it was inconvenient

The court of justice does not just judge you for your actions but also for your intentions.

You're a murderer by legal code and deserves capital punishment

[Anonymous No.11822626]

>>11822624
I take it you believe abortion is murder?

[Anonymous No.11822631]

>>11822626
Abortion doctos say so.

[Anonymous No.11822642]

>>11822631
Ok, so you agree with them. But in a society where abortion is legal, suppressing the development of a brain to get a human body to experiment on or to harvest organs from is no worse than the aforementioned abortion. There's no coherent reason as for why it would be otherwise.

[Anonymous No.11822656]

>>11822642
>it isn't a human
Yeah, it's always the ones with clean hands who dehumanizes people out of convenience.

Sorry, I don't want to repeat the regrets in history

[Anonymous No.11822664]

>>11822656
Don't worry china will do it for you

[Anonymous No.11822669]

>>11822664
I don't want to be associated with them.
Thankyou very much

[Anonymous No.11822673]

>>11822669
It's fine your moral objections to these things hardly matters as they will happen regardless

[Anonymous No.11822676]

>>11822656
It's human in genome only. Would you argue that a lone liver, or some lone skin cells deserve human rights? The human "essence" so to speak isn't our genes but our sentience.

[Anonymous No.11822686]

>>11822676
Does it have sapience?
Human right. No matter the DNA

[Anonymous No.11822693]

>>11822686
>Does it have sapience?
No, it doesn't have a fucking brain

[Anonymous No.11822695]

>>11822693
Did you get rid of it?
Murder.

[Anonymous No.11822703]

>>11822695
>Murder
We disagree, but the state and general public that finds abortion legal allows it since it doesn't cause any suffering, so it's bound to happen.

[Anonymous No.11822707]

>>11822695
If you alter it so that it never actually develops a human mind then it's the same as killing any animal or ye old coat hanger

[Anonymous No.11822720]

>>11822673
>>11822707
>"Youre honor. I wanted to do some human experiments but I find the idea of using subjects that are protected by the law very inconvenient. Thus, I designed a subject that is completely brain dead so I can pursue my knowledge without questions. Surely you understand"

You won't even make it to your cell.

[Anonymous No.11822727]

>>11822673
Wrong qoute. Anyway, surely you don't actually support China, do you?

People view the Nazi Japanese atrocities with great disdain. China is seen in the same way. No matter what progress they contributed to the scientific field

[Anonymous No.11822739]

>>11822720
Abortion isn't frowned upon, this won't be either. There's no logic for why the majority that allows abortion won't allow this to happen.

[Anonymous No.11822758]

>>11822739
Look at all those aborted "80% healthy fetuses that poses no threat to the mother" without any sense of disgust.

Yeah...

[Anonymous No.11822767]

>>11822758
If the abortion was done early enough, I don't care since there was no suffering involved.

[Anonymous No.11822785]

>>11822767
Out of sight Out of Mind, eh?

>"I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a prenatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the fetus in the womb. A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one"
-Dr. Bernard Nathanson 75,000 abortions

>""At the end of six weeks, I was angry at what I had seen. I thought that women should have a safe abortion and I would provide it. At that time, there was not one abortion center in the entire state of Mississippi. A group of "concerned citizens and clergy" had already lined up a place to rent and had hired nurses and counselors. Everything was ready to open the first abortion mill in Mississippi, except that they needed a physician willing to become the "town abortionist." I initially declined, but later determined that I would run the best abortion facility in the country.

>The new abortion mill was running smoothly. We only offered first trimester (first 12 weeks of pregnancy) abortions because I felt later abortions were riskier. Nevertheless, I did experience complications, the worst of which was perforating a uterus and suctioning a piece of small bowel into the tube. I was so depressed I couldn't stand it. I started considering Christianity, and at one point prayed the scripture, "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me." One day an employee at the mill asked to see the contents of the sock in the suction machine. I saw a beautiful arm, and I thought, "What are you doing?" That was one of the last abortions I did."
-Dr. Beverly McMillan. Founder of an abortion clinic

If you cannot join in the muck, you have no right to speak

Later

[Anonymous No.11822801]

>>11822785
>If you cannot join in the muck, you have no right to speak
I've no issue with joining in the "muck". Also appeal to authority is a pretty lame way to argue for your morals being right lol

[Anonymous No.11822815]

>>11822801
Whom would you rather listen to?
A shitposter who says there's nothing wrong with it
Or people who've been there and found it heinous

It's not appeal to authority. It's appeal to credibility. You soft handed preacher

[Anonymous No.11823534]

Unfortunately and ironically it has become transparent that all who would survive the coming future need do to attain their technological heaven is kill/detain all pseudo philosophers who push morals and ethics that impede the scientific progress of those far more capable. What we are experiencing is a divergence in the human psyche: one side believes the ends justify the means, and the other clings to a dogmatic sense of morality that increasingly suffocates its every step forward in a swamp of bureaucracy. Advancement requires sacrifice. There is no way around this. While morality and ethics have their place, you've overburdened yourselves to the point of blind zealotry. Your loved ones will continue to die from diseases that could have been cured decades ago, while those willing to get their hands dirty will find miraculous ways to cure them, and then you will come begging to partake and share in such, pretending you're still innocent and pure. You're revolting, but there is still time to join the winning team. You'd better hurry.

[Anonymous No.11823542]

>>11815881
you can't transplant a brain though. or at least it would be really fucking stupid.
also yes it's a fucking pig that has human organs it's meant to be harvested.
also proof?

[Anonymous No.11823559]

>>11815819
full body amputations when
i just want 2 be a brain is a jar plz

[Anonymous No.11823562]

>>11823542
Just google stem cell pigs

[Anonymous No.11823681]

>>11823534
Nigger. Stop acting like there are no other alternatives

Make it a law to obligate people to donate their organs after death
Research synthetic organs
Improve prosthetic.

You don't have to play god right at once.

[Anonymous No.11823779]

>>11818460
>It would question our definition of what makes a human

[Anonymous No.11824051]

>>11822720
Just do it in a different country we've already got loads of people heading off to china or the dominican republic for these experiments
>>11822727
How they view them doesn't actually matter as they can't do anything about it
>>11822815
The morality of people is irrelevant as they can and will be replaced by those who will do it
>>11823681
It's the lowest hanging fruit and we will always play god

[Anonymous No.11824068]

>>11821417
You fucking retards, you don't need to grow a full human body to grow organs, if you needed to literally do a brain transplant into a newly grown body, don't you think wed be able to modify the genetic code to grow one without? Come on how brain dead do both of you have to be.

[Anonymous No.11824088]

>>11820704
>Being a CCP bootlicker

Just look at the numbers. In 2006, China performed over 20,000 organ transplants. At the same time, China only had 130 voluntary organ donors.

China says they get the organs from executed prisoners. Public executions in 2006 are estimated to be between 1000 and 8000. Even taking the higher value, there's a massive discrepancy. Even if China executed enough prisoners to match the number, matching all prisoner organs exactly to donor recipients is statistically impossible. On top of that, using prisoners to source organs would require prisoner executions to by chance coincide with a 24-48 hour window for the transplant.

At the same time, China has the lowest wait time for a transplant in the entire world. The only conclusion is that China has a massive hidden source of organs.

[Anonymous No.11824098]

>>11815881

I guess it is more ethical to let organ trafficking to continue business as usual.

[Anonymous No.11824220]

>>11824088
Where do the numbers come from? How about donations between relatives?
What 24-48 hour window? As you said, you can wait for most transplants.

[Anonymous No.11824433]

>>11824098
imagine wanting to put back alley surgeons out of a job baka

[Anonymous No.11825357]

>>11824433
based bathtub surgeon

[Anonymous No.11825909]

>>11818095
Lmao we're the only actual biologists here

[Anonymous No.11825919]

>>11821034
I wouldn't touch em either

[Anonymous No.11826044]

So its ok to create a human fetus and then abort it, but it is not ok to create some weird pig hybrid and then abort it?

[Anonymous No.11826591]

>>11826044
Exactly, now you’re thinking with ”ethics”

[Anonymous No.11828746]

>>11823681
>Make it a law to obligate people to donate their organs after death
no

[Anonymous No.11829148]

>>11823681
>>11828746
Just make it opt out. Few people care one way or another, so that they never register for donation, but they won't opt out either.