8 ms·

>Cells from a human embryo were grown into a patch that was delicately inserted into the back of the eye. I assume the baby didn't survive the process since th

>Cells from a human embryo were grown into a patch that was delicately inserted into the back of the eye. I assume the baby didn't survive the process since there's no mention of that.

jackhack 9y ago
This is important because, for some, the moral dilemma would preclude this treatment.
- chapill 9y ago
  It's also important because a baby was killed to give a rich old guy a few more years of sight. A whole new underclass of children worthy of murdering for medical treatment arises.
  - eganist 9y ago
    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/baby http://www.dictionary.com/browse/baby Embryo is not included in any standard definition of the word, so you may wish to reconsider your word choice. Or not. Your call.
    - nsxwolf 9y ago
      "Human" is harder to dodge though.
      - tialaramex 9y ago
        Sure, we know that humans expect small pieces of human to be treated as irrelevant (e.g. you leave tiny skin particles and hairs basically everywhere and all you usually ask is that people vacuum them up to avoid the place being covered in dust) and that larger pieces (e.g. a toe, or in this case an embryo) should be treated with extra care and consideration of people's emotional reaction. But it's not kidnapping if you keep someone's toenail clippings. It's creepy, but it's not kidnapping. It's not murder when the barber sweeps all the hair into a furnace, it's called tidying up.
  - uep 9y ago
    Do you genuinely believed that a baby was killed to harvest stem cells? If the baby was already dead, are you morally opposed to using an unsaveable baby's stem cells?
  - ars 9y ago
    It's not a child. Even if you want to use a broad definition of child (and I do), this cell was not implanted in a women, and could not grow. It's one thing to take positive action to stop a child from living (abortion). It's quite another to simply do nothing. This type of stem cell research is done from cells that would otherwise be thrown out - you have not prevented a child from living.
    - glibgil 9y ago
      > It's one thing to take positive action to stop a child from living (abortion) Until someone creates a fetal transplant procedure it’s really not. You can’t make someone host a baby they don’t want
      - ars 9y ago
        > it’s really not. It's really not what? Not a positive action that kills a child? You have to see a difference between not saving someones life, even though you can, and actually going and killing them. > You can’t make someone host a baby they don’t want We are getting offtopic here, but sure you can. We make people take care of their children all the time. If they don't they go to jail for neglect or abuse.
        glibgil 9y ago
        > It's really not what? It's really not "one thing to take positive action", right. It's no big deal to terminate a fetus. It happens all the time in nature. > sure you can No, you cannot make anyone do anything. You can put them in jail, but you can't make them not try to abort. You cannot make them raise a child. You can punish people, but you can't make them do anything.
  - glibgil 9y ago
    An embryo is not a baby. Babies form in uteruses. Embryos ride on tampons to the trash more often than they latch unto uteruses
warent 9y ago
In one sense, the cells did survive as part of the 86 year old lifeform. It's a ship of Theseus
philbarr 9y ago
It's not a baby, it's an embryo. Lots of embryos don't survive for lots of reasons.
- gottebp 9y ago
  It's a philosophical dilemma that demands rigour. When does a human person begin? If a few cells cannot be a person, well, adults are only bigger clumps of cells. What is the threshold? If personhood begins when the cells are independently viable, well, most infants are not independently viable and some elderly aren't either. What is the threshold? By contrast: The moment when it all begins and the DNA is first unique, and the potentiality for an adult is present is very simple and philosophically elegant. If personhood comes later, such as implantation, birth, 7th birthday, etc. it is difficult to give a basis in the philosophical sense. Many philosophers have struggled with this and it's no simple thing.
GlennS 9y ago
It may be worth knowing that you don't have to kill an embryo each time. Once you've harvested a stem cell line, you can use it repeatedly.
random_ind_dude 9y ago
>baby If, at some point in the future, scientists figure out a way to coax normal cells to become totipotent, will you consider amputation as murder?
- nsxwolf 9y ago
  No, because you'd have to first take the step of inducing totipotency in the amputated cells?
  - ars 9y ago
    And likewise, here you first to have to first take the step of implanting the embryo in a woman. Left alone, these cells will not become a child.

>Cells from a human embryo were grown into a patch that was delicately inserted into the back of the eye. I assume the baby didn't survive the process since there's no mention of that.

jackhack 9y ago

This is important because, for some, the moral dilemma would preclude this treatment.

chapill 9y ago
It's also important because a baby was killed to give a rich old guy a few more years of sight. A whole new underclass of children worthy of murdering for medical treatment arises.
- eganist 9y ago
  http://www.dictionary.com/browse/baby http://www.dictionary.com/browse/baby Embryo is not included in any standard definition of the word, so you may wish to reconsider your word choice. Or not. Your call.
  - nsxwolf 9y ago
    "Human" is harder to dodge though.
    - tialaramex 9y ago
      Sure, we know that humans expect small pieces of human to be treated as irrelevant (e.g. you leave tiny skin particles and hairs basically everywhere and all you usually ask is that people vacuum them up to avoid the place being covered in dust) and that larger pieces (e.g. a toe, or in this case an embryo) should be treated with extra care and consideration of people's emotional reaction. But it's not kidnapping if you keep someone's toenail clippings. It's creepy, but it's not kidnapping. It's not murder when the barber sweeps all the hair into a furnace, it's called tidying up.
- uep 9y ago
  Do you genuinely believed that a baby was killed to harvest stem cells? If the baby was already dead, are you morally opposed to using an unsaveable baby's stem cells?
- ars 9y ago
  It's not a child. Even if you want to use a broad definition of child (and I do), this cell was not implanted in a women, and could not grow. It's one thing to take positive action to stop a child from living (abortion). It's quite another to simply do nothing. This type of stem cell research is done from cells that would otherwise be thrown out - you have not prevented a child from living.
  - glibgil 9y ago
    > It's one thing to take positive action to stop a child from living (abortion) Until someone creates a fetal transplant procedure it’s really not. You can’t make someone host a baby they don’t want
    - ars 9y ago
      > it’s really not. It's really not what? Not a positive action that kills a child? You have to see a difference between not saving someones life, even though you can, and actually going and killing them. > You can’t make someone host a baby they don’t want We are getting offtopic here, but sure you can. We make people take care of their children all the time. If they don't they go to jail for neglect or abuse.
      - glibgil 9y ago
        > It's really not what? It's really not "one thing to take positive action", right. It's no big deal to terminate a fetus. It happens all the time in nature. > sure you can No, you cannot make anyone do anything. You can put them in jail, but you can't make them not try to abort. You cannot make them raise a child. You can punish people, but you can't make them do anything.
- glibgil 9y ago
  An embryo is not a baby. Babies form in uteruses. Embryos ride on tampons to the trash more often than they latch unto uteruses

warent 9y ago

In one sense, the cells did survive as part of the 86 year old lifeform. It's a ship of Theseus

philbarr 9y ago

It's not a baby, it's an embryo. Lots of embryos don't survive for lots of reasons.

gottebp 9y ago
It's a philosophical dilemma that demands rigour. When does a human person begin? If a few cells cannot be a person, well, adults are only bigger clumps of cells. What is the threshold? If personhood begins when the cells are independently viable, well, most infants are not independently viable and some elderly aren't either. What is the threshold? By contrast: The moment when it all begins and the DNA is first unique, and the potentiality for an adult is present is very simple and philosophically elegant. If personhood comes later, such as implantation, birth, 7th birthday, etc. it is difficult to give a basis in the philosophical sense. Many philosophers have struggled with this and it's no simple thing.

GlennS 9y ago

It may be worth knowing that you don't have to kill an embryo each time. Once you've harvested a stem cell line, you can use it repeatedly.

random_ind_dude 9y ago

>baby If, at some point in the future, scientists figure out a way to coax normal cells to become totipotent, will you consider amputation as murder?

nsxwolf 9y ago
No, because you'd have to first take the step of inducing totipotency in the amputated cells?
- ars 9y ago
  And likewise, here you first to have to first take the step of implanting the embryo in a woman. Left alone, these cells will not become a child.