FabSwingers.com forum: An ethical dilemma

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Surgeons in Sweden have carried out the world's first transplant of a fully synthetic organ, a windpipe created using the patient's own stem cells and a fully artificial scaffold.

Are scientists trying to play god?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

well surely doctors are playing god everyday when they save peoples lives

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eclan_and_AimeeCouple
over a year ago

dunblane, stirling

"Surgeons in Sweden have carried out the world's first transplant of a fully synthetic organ, a windpipe created using the patient's own stem cells and a fully artificial scaffold.

Are scientists trying to play god?"

Am I missing something?

They done exactly that on Gray's Anatomy a couple of years ago... is this where scientists are being taught new techniques??

xAx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

surely its all part of evolution..

if it wasnt for science we'd not be sat here watching digital tv whilst on our electronic devices using the internet.

Medical science is only a good thing surely?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
Forum Mod
over a year ago

I have an image of someone with a giraffe like neck now held up with scaffold

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

well my notions of god dont rely on some book telling me whats right and whats wrong, we are getting to the age where we have responsibility to endevour to create anything to enhance our futures, childrens futures.Nobody thiks its bad for cancer research do they????????????

should a blind person remain blind as thats how god intended them to be.

(pesonal note) shall my niece be allowed muscular motor implants in the future so she can walk????

man IS god, to a degree its just how we use those godly powers that counts.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

i'm sure,if your the guy who needs a windpipe stu.

you wouldnt care what part they're playing.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"surely its all part of evolution..

if it wasnt for science we'd not be sat here watching digital tv whilst on our electronic devices using the internet.

Medical science is only a good thing surely?"

Is it always a good thing? There seems to be a belief, which I don't always share, that anything which allows life to continue should be applauded.

As for it all being evolution. Isn't evolution quite the opposite? Evolution, as I understand it, can also be about the survival of the fittest.

Using medical science to keep people alive to pass on less than perfect genes doesn't sound like good evolutionary practice - though I wouldn't take it to the extremes of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

There for the grace of god go I ... So anything that can improve my quality of life... Go for it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"............Nobody thiks its bad for cancer research do they????????????

.................."

Supposing it was discovered, incontrovertibly, that people only got cancer through genetic inheritance and that the only way to stop cancer FOREVER would be to stop carriers of the gene fom breeding.

Would that be an acceptable outcome of cancer research?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"surely its all part of evolution..

if it wasnt for science we'd not be sat here watching digital tv whilst on our electronic devices using the internet.

Medical science is only a good thing surely?

Is it always a good thing? There seems to be a belief, which I don't always share, that anything which allows life to continue should be applauded.

As for it all being evolution. Isn't evolution quite the opposite? Evolution, as I understand it, can also be about the survival of the fittest.

Using medical science to keep people alive to pass on less than perfect genes doesn't sound like good evolutionary practice - though I wouldn't take it to the extremes of Germany in the 30s and 40s."

evolution is based on natural selection, we have this thing called a human brain, mixed with the possibilty of computer brains...this actually makes us rather successful as the fittest does it not??? evolution may be determined in a different manner nowadays rather thanthe basic model... we have the possibilty of evolutionary changes that will only be made in the brains as we no longer need many of our anscetors primitive needs..

at this very moment we are talking to eachother in real-time despite our distances..imagine it intregated into our minds...we would be one huge global-network....essentially psychic...maybe become a whole new lifeform indeed!(in a million years time, we could really be pretty alien to ourselves), "thats evolution but not how we planned it" lol

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Surgeons in Sweden have carried out the world's first transplant of a fully synthetic organ, a windpipe created using the patient's own stem cells and a fully artificial scaffold.

Are scientists trying to play god?"

Can be sure the person who received it is pretty pleased. A lot of people don't believe in "God" as such, so it would depend on how you _iew creation I suppose but I don't see helping people as playing God (creator whatever) creating is much bigger than that.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

"surely its all part of evolution..

if it wasnt for science we'd not be sat here watching digital tv whilst on our electronic devices using the internet.

Medical science is only a good thing surely?

Is it always a good thing? There seems to be a belief, which I don't always share, that anything which allows life to continue should be applauded.

As for it all being evolution. Isn't evolution quite the opposite? Evolution, as I understand it, can also be about the survival of the fittest.

Using medical science to keep people alive to pass on less than perfect genes doesn't sound like good evolutionary practice - though I wouldn't take it to the extremes of Germany in the 30s and 40s."

isn't evolution,about progress,in every way.

taking your _iew point av,we would still be waiting,for someone to invent the wheel.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"There for the grace of god go I ... So anything that can improve my quality of life... Go for it."

Healthcare is a zero sum game. The cost of one person's advanced medical treatment to improve their quality of life is someone's inability to have some particular operation or course of medications.

Then there's socio-economic cost. Care in to older life and so on.

How do we balance the two?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"............Nobody thiks its bad for cancer research do they????????????

..................

Supposing it was discovered, incontrovertibly, that people only got cancer through genetic inheritance and that the only way to stop cancer FOREVER would be to stop carriers of the gene fom breeding.

Would that be an acceptable outcome of cancer research?"

If it was an outcome it would be an outcome, acceptable or not does not enter into it. By the time they get anwhere near that they will probably be able to select the gene and eradicate it and people could carry on breeding happily.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"There for the grace of god go I ... So anything that can improve my quality of life... Go for it.

Healthcare is a zero sum game. The cost of one person's advanced medical treatment to improve their quality of life is someone's inability to have some particular operation or course of medications.

Then there's socio-economic cost. Care in to older life and so on.

How do we balance the two?"

Watch Holby City.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"............Nobody thiks its bad for cancer research do they????????????

..................

Supposing it was discovered, incontrovertibly, that people only got cancer through genetic inheritance and that the only way to stop cancer FOREVER would be to stop carriers of the gene fom breeding.

Would that be an acceptable outcome of cancer research?"

yeah twist it accomo lol...what u want me to say?? yes i believe thats the best course of action, cancer is like any other disease that kills am afraid...however its not like its a zombie plague virus is it????- think we would be sterlizing not killing people if that was found out.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Im all for medical technology.

The thing I do think about though is keeping very premature babies alive. A lot of these babies survive but are disabled or have life long conditions. I dont know what to think really, its a decision as a parent thankfully Ive never had to make nor would I ever wish to. Do you keep your baby alive at all costs or is the kinder way to take baby off ventilator and give a chance at breathing alone, and if not then its natures way.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *etillanteWoman
over a year ago

I made the decision not to have children due to a heridatary genetic disease. I'm glad I did.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

I am happy to pay more into a pension pot.. Downsize my home if need be.. Work longer..

Actually as a single guy with zero dependants... Why wouldn't I.

Not really everybody elses kids responsibility to look after me..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *etillanteWoman
over a year ago

wish I could spell hereditary

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"............Nobody thiks its bad for cancer research do they????????????

..................

Supposing it was discovered, incontrovertibly, that people only got cancer through genetic inheritance and that the only way to stop cancer FOREVER would be to stop carriers of the gene fom breeding.

Would that be an acceptable outcome of cancer research?

Yeah, of course I'm going to twist it.

Sitting around agreeing we all want world peace and freedom from want but it hardly makes for interesting conversation.

Cancer does kill but not in anything like the percentages it used to. 40-50 years ago almost all cancers ended in death, often preceeded by a regime of radiotherapy or chemotherapy which left many sufferers wishing they were dead.

I posed the 'suppose we could eradicate cancer but at a high price - what would be do?' to gauge reaction, partly because I believe some pretty serious and unpalatable decisions about NHS funding are on their way.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread