Click

This really creeped me out.

Wow! Interesting article.

I assume such progress in these fields will face strong conflict with "ethics standards" and religious groups.

Blasted furres (or whatever) are plauging science now too! WHAT WILL HAS THE WORLD COME TO?!


*leaps off tall building*

For example, an experiment that would raise concerns, he said, is genetically engineering mice to produce human sperm and eggs, then doing in vitro fertilization to produce a child whose parents are a pair of mice.



AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA LIKE STEWART LITTLE!!!!!

AHHAAAAHHHAAAAA!:D ROFLCOPTER

But seriously, a mouse with a 100% human brain? What would it think/feel/do? what rights would it have, and what kind of hell would it go through? There are ethical standards and limits, and like they said, there are many other ways to accomplish what they're trying to attain, i.e. use of complex computer models.

This is just creepy to me. O_o

they should just say to hell with ethics and label it

'the narnia project'

This is excellent news, it has huge implications in drug testing for medication and cosmetics.

Hey, if they could give me the speed of a cheetah and the strength of a gorilla, I'd be happy!

Ha! Nothing can stop the technocrats!

What can be done will be done.

Meow.

Don't do it! They'll just harvest your DNA from the splattered remains!

Well, you knew it was going to happen eventually.

Yay, I... um... guess.

Hmmm Is it really safe to mix human intelligance with an animal body?

ALL HAIL THE MAN MONGOOSE!!! [/SIZE] [/b]

omg <3 mongeese

It's interesting but kind of makes me sick. People do the strangest things...

Anyone ever play that game, Impossible Creatures?

I can't wait till I get turned into a super human.

wouldn't that be Mangoose?

let me guess they are gonna sit a bunch in a box with some mouse traps and see how long it takes for them to outsmart the trap...

since it's a human brain they might just give up and watch TV

I bought that game for my brother for 5 bucks from wal-mart for christmas.


Guys, don't you think there are some ethical standards here to consider?

SCREW ETHICS. I WANT MY KID TO HAVE EMU LEGS.

o...k... nevermind the ethics question.

EMU LEGS FOR EVERYONE!

Who cares what religious groups think? Screw them. When was the last time someone walked on water, or God appeared, or for that matter, anything happened that can literally be proven that God himself did it? Face it, science is making progress. Screw the religious crap.

When I get a headache, I don't pray to God for help. I take Advil. When I need to have an x-ray done on my back to see if it can be fixed, I don't say "Dear God, please fix my back." I go get an x-ray done, get my back cut open and my spine adjusted.

yup

<3 grizzling mantis.

If you knew anything about religion, you'd understand why.


As for the topic at hand...


WHO WANTS A COW/HUMAN HYBRID?! *DROPS PANTS*

YOU CANNOT RESIST MY MANUDDERS

Hahahahaha! Oh man, this thread has made me laugh more than I have in a while. Emu legs, man udders.....then again, it could be the beer. Ah well, good stuff anyway:)

If this stuff gets banned in America they will simply move to another country and do it there.
Religion may have stifled science in the past, but it's never stopped it, and it will never stop it.

It is kinda creepy though...

'Ethical concerns' really shouldn't contrain science very much. The 'morals' of society are shaped by science, never the other way round. A few hundred years ago, using dead bodies for anything was totally out of the question, because of superstitious fears about the dead, but now organs from cadavers are being used to save lives all the time. What might seem 'creepy' today will only become normal in the future, if it is useful. Like blokey above said, you cannot 'stop' science, you cannot censor science. If America bans this, the science will still go on, just somewhere else, and America will lose out on all the medical benefits this research offers.

QFT - Couldn't have put it better myself.

They are called beliefs for a reason, not proofs.

If it can potentially benefit the human race as a whole, and isn't exceptionally risky (Benefits > Risks) then go for it. Of course, there will be military applications for it but hell, crossbread humans with roaches and we might survive the inevitable.

WTF are you talking about? The article never once mentioned religion or religious groups. The ethics mostly in question are the rights of the hybrid animals will or won't have. We've got this same old mention of "spare parts" in the article, if that gives any insight.

ethics != morals

I'm pretty much with this guy:

This calls for FLAMING PURPLE MONGEESE!

They must create a Bat-man

We've been doing this with selective breeding for centuries. Animals have always been 'tampered with', in order to produce the greatest yield.

This is just a far more efficient way, with a whole host of medical benefits.

And now we're bringing humans into it.

Also, that sounded like an appeal to tradition. Also, selective breeding is not the same as genetic manipulation.

Bull's Eye DogS. This genetic manipulation is not the same as selective breeding. In selective breeding an animal stays within it's species with an untampered genetic code. Genetic alteration like this is worlds apart from that. You cannot selectively breed a human brain into an animal. Also, this is not the only way to further our medical knowledge. The same means can be accomplished through complex computer models and the such without such contreversy and disregard for ethics.

You can only do so much with computer modelling.

All cosmetics and drugs are tested on animals. They have to be, because that's the only way to make sure the product is safe for use in humans. If a product says "Not tested on animals!" then it's not lying, that product itself hasn't been tested, but everything in it has. There isn't an alternative to animal testing, it's the only way to make sure people won't be harmed by the products. Computer modelling is used to know where to start, it answers a lot of the preliminary questions, but it simply isn't good enough to really make sure the product is safe.
Even with animal testing, there may still be gaps, things that are different in humans than to the animal - with genetic manipulation, we'll be filling in those gaps as best as we can.
'Disregarding ethics' isn't really a very significant point. Ethics change. And in this case they'll have to, because 'ethics' conflict with minimising the side-effects of drugs, which could cause serious injury or death to humans. That isn't really much of a choice.

When cosmetics are tested on animals they aren't genetically altered. And with all the new technology that we create, we will be able to use more technology towards such research.

This is just like the debate over human stemcell research. People wanted to create in test tubes human embryos, destroy them, and harvest their stem cells. Anyone who opposed such actions was labled a fanatical zealot and was thought to be hidering life saving research. Human placentas have over twice the stem cells and don't involve such contreversy. Why use such contreversial practices when methods less questionable and just as/ more effective exist?