First human-monkey chimera raises concern among scientists

[AndiGaga 7,248]

I'm so here for it

Science is the best for us and i give a sh*t about ethical concerns, we live on this planet to grow and get better

Some decades ago, organ transplants were shocking, donating blood was shocking, people died because of a cold or something

 

[SHALLOW 16,469]

31 minutes ago, Didymus said:

They're physically suffering in captivity though, so...

It's not about acting like Virgin Mary, it's more about deciding when animal testing is really necessary and when it's not, when it's humane and when it goes too far.

We're the humans who need saving after all. I'm not sure if many people would agree with an organ transplant where the organ was inside of a monkey, not just due to the "yuck" factor but also because it's simply tragic for the animal involved. Those questions are valid.

Yeah but animals are kept in captivity for various reasons. We were not talking about that but rather whether these studies are gonna hurt them. And the answer is no. So this is not as bad as you’re describing it.

Sis, a person that is dying will take N E THING AH 

[River 127,981]

7 minutes ago, PartySick said:

They can...kinda

The genes to create a dinosaur are present, but mostly dormant, in modern birds. We've hatched chickens in labs with teeth, tails, scales, etc. It's just a matter of getting the right sequencing and triggers and we could, in theory, hatch a baby raptor

That only works for animals with direct living descendants though. If I remember my paleontology correctly, T-rex doesn't have any  but raptors do and they're cool enough.

Ethics gets in the way of that too. It's actually something I've disliked about society for a LOOONG time. Scientific discoveries should never take a back seat to people feeling icky.

Of course, we shouldn't be striving for Dr. Frankenstein levels of nasty here but studying genetics, finding a possible 100% fail proof source of organs, this stuff could change lives for the better. Is it sad? Yeah, and the criticism is valid. But you know what's also sad? People dying while sitting on a transplant waiting list for years.

So I'm not sure why anyone would want to halt possibly life saving research  if you have an animal welfare complaint there are much larger offenders to go after that aren't so grey area. They're full on shadowy evil.

Totally agree with that.

And I was kinda joking because I follow the research, I'm not paleo but I'm an archeologist, pretty close but yet too far and my expertise is prehistoric zoo-archeology.

There is the chickenosaurus already, they didn't really publish a picture though, but it is exist, I don't remember how long it survived though.

I know for 100%, not fake or something, that the Mammoth tempts are going pretty well, but they still didn't succeed in keeping it alive pass few weeks..

What really pissed me off is that the Dodo research doesn't exist and we can really bring this animal to life, 2 years ago they found a huge graveyard of Dodos with a big amount of bones with a beautiful preserved DNA.

 

[River 127,981]

35 minutes ago, kyanewest said:

Thank God they can't. I'd kill myself if there were dinos out there 

[PunkTheFunk 125,719]

If this is something that will ultimately improve the well being of humans, then I am all for it. 

[Katharine Hepburn 4,607]

4 hours ago, Didymus said:

False. It's to combat organ rejection. The article addresses this:

You mean Graft vs Host DISEASE

[uo111 5,283]

5 hours ago, SHALLOW said:

Yeah but animals are kept in captivity for various reasons. We were not talking about that but rather whether these studies are gonna hurt them. And the answer is no. So this is not as bad as you’re describing it.

Sis, a person that is dying will take N E THING AH 

I get it if people don't care if animals die, fine sure. Whatever. Nevermind the ethics of testing on humans (which will have to happen eventually).

But believing they won't suffer is just plain denial. Animal testing guarantees suffering. Some worse than others, of course, but THIS? This would lead to unbearable amounts of suffering. It's laughable to think these particular animals would not suffer. They will likely have autoimmune diseases, have surgeries, biopsies, and euthanasia just to name a few.

5 hours ago, PartySick said:

Ethics gets in the way of that too. It's actually something I've disliked about society for a LOOONG time. Scientific discoveries should never take a back seat to people feeling icky.
 

No scientific discoveries have not happened because we don't do animal research (because we do do animal research).

Human research is a lot more scary. You should look up the nuremburg code if you think ethics isn't important.

[ice bear 1]

7 hours ago, Didymus said:

False. It's to combat organ rejection. The article addresses this:

"Chimeras are seen as a potential way to address the lack of organs for transplantation, as well as problems of organ rejection. Scientists believe organs genetically matched to a particular human recipient could one day be grown inside animals. The approach is based on taking cells from an adult human and reprogramming them to become stem cells, which can give rise to any type of cell in the body. They are then introduced into the embryo of another species."

The reason they're testing human cells in animal embryos is to check if this is actually possible. In normal language: say you need a new liver, doctors just take some cells from you, introduce them into an embryo specially made for your medical salvation (disgusting) and these animals will develop a liver perfectly designed to be compatible with your genetic system.

It's pure medical animal slavery and as a vegan and an animal lover I detest that Maybe focus on getting rid of all the toxic substances that cause organ failure. Ban sugar, alcohol, processed meat,... Why do (unborn) animals have to pay the price first?

That is a ridiculous logic to follow.

You're giving me

teas.

**** that's so ****ed up!!!!!!!