Mechanical organs - a horrible choice!

Um, dying is worse methinks...

I don't see your issue here - not like you have to look at the thing all day...

If I had a choice between dying or placing a mechanical eyesore in my chest, I'd choose the mechanical eyesore every single time...

+1 make me Mr roboto :p

does it come with USB support so you can monitor it and do a firmware upgrade? :D:p

ROFL :D

Anti-biotics in the wrong hands can be pretty dangerous. Existing viruses in the wrong hands are dangerous (and btw, we don't need stem cell research to do any of this :rolleyes: ). Guns in the wrong hands are dangerous. I can go on but hopefully you've got the point by now.

So you would have thought we would have learnt something from this :rolleyes::p:D
 
I know that it was meant to save lives, but seriously, who would want to live with that thing?


What's worse, dying or this thing?


Artificial mechanical organs completely gross me out.

I wouldn't even like to have to choose between something like that.

All because cloning and stem cell research are made illegal.

What a stupid post.
 
Stem cell research has been held down for over a decade, above that Bush has just also vetoed research for it two years ago.
Stem cell research has been going on in other countries.

The mechanical heart may be a temporal achievement, but stem-cell research could have been far more developed right now than it already is.
You can't do science without ethics and virtues.

Cloning could be even far more rewarding, and completly moral too. Headless mice and other species have been grown to have the exact same organs as the ordinary mice, if this could be done with humans, which i've read is not at all a far leap, we already would instantly have completely natural and identical replacements for nearly every organ in the human body. ref. Time
Embryos still don't have any consciousness, they don't have a soul, when a woman naturally looses her embryos, this does not mean that a baby has died and gone to heaven.
As fascinating as headless mice and tadpoles sound, I am sure you can see the ethical dilemma it poses when you want to apply it to the human condition.
Consciousness is a sensitive subject and it can be argued that all living things have consciousness (albeit in a limited sense and not that of a fully developed human). When you apply that notion to a human embryo, it can be argued that a human embryo HAS the capability to develop consciousness and be PART of the human experience. The ethical dilemma is in denying that possibility to a developing fetus.
With regards to the soul, you are introducing an (as of yet) unscientific proposition of what a soul actually is. You can't equate a soul to be same as consciousness, but even if you do, you still run into the possibility that all living things have a consciousness (quantum mechanically and limited) and thus a soul if you were to equate the two.

Besides that, thanks to just recent developments just this year, embryos ('souls') could also be made from, skin cells&Adult Cells
These are not embryos in the strict sense (sperm + ova). The researchers used a technique called somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) where they took the DNA from skin and transferred it into an egg cell (after its contents has been emptied). This technique can be useful for creating pluripotent stem cells, and I see no problem with that.

The same way, Bush can't acknowledge that stem cells don't have souls, or the new '7 deadly sins, even more pathetic than the prev ones, the new ones are: Genetic modification; Birth control...
Since you bought up the seven deadly sins (old and "new"). Which ones do you object to (old and "new"), why, and why can't they be seen as guidelines to live a virtuous life?
 
Last edited:
don't know that, even so, if we had to allow this tech to grow and ban stem cell research and cloning as we are doing today, these companies would eventually come up with replacements for everything, and we would end up looking like the first pic.

If could take the other route, the cloning/stemcell route, we would look completely natural and infact we would avert if not turning back aging too.

ROFL :D

I will get the android-Dx900 eyeball(laserbeam optional) for Xmass 2016... Maybe I will get one for my SU as well :D
 
don't know that, even so, if we had to allow this tech to grow and ban stem cell research and cloning as we are doing today, these companies would eventually come up with replacements for everything, and we would end up looking like the first pic.

One stupid comment upon another. You amaze me.
 
Shut up SnotVreeter!;)

Nothing stupid about that or any of my comments, that is what will happen, it happens with absolutely all new products/inventions and the like. One basic product gets sold first (ie a pc) from that industry countless other industries (ie 3g phone, xbox...).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_organ , now stuff it... :sick:

Oh geez. This is unbelievable. But don't worry. Should your heart fail, you can die. I'm sure they're not going to force the artificial organ on you. And should you look like the cyborg in the picture you posted, imagine how easy it would be for them to fix you again. :rolleyes:
 
complete idiot.

It's not about what i'll choose, it's about not making another choice available.

/returns this thread to a civil and serious debate.

Complete idiot, me? Who's the one here scared he'll end up looking like a cyborg? :confused:
 
+1 for this in a few years time we might not even know the difference between these hearts, as for the cloning argument I for one am in support of that in stem cell research,
give you 2 sittuation 1) a child is dieing in hospital due to a heart failure, his parents can replace it with a donar heart,
2) next to him a child is dieing to brain cancer and cannot be cured but the doctors can help those parents by giving a healthy clone of the child, honestly I don't see much of a difference between these, it comes down to values though.
 
You are

your blik-kop is already evidence that it has began.

So you would rather die than get an Mechanical heart?

Mmmm, maybe if we can get you to accept the mechanical brain first we can get you the heart later :p:D
 
:rolleyes:

right back at you
you people really can't read.

i've said that i'm afraid of the choice, I haven't said what i would choose.

And no, we don't really need mechanical brains that much, if at all, even if they would be possible.


Serious discussion please!!!
Brains dont really age that much and when they do, they are usually as a result of the body being able to take care of them


Oldest Woman In World At Death Had Brain That Did Not Show Tell-Tale Signs Of Aging -
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/13/tech/main4179073.shtml?source=RSSattr=Health_4179073

You cannot be taken seriously in this thread. I mean, your cyborg comment was idiotic to start with.

Why so?
k,simple question, would you wan't to look like this: http://homepages.uel.ac.uk/u0526098/images/AnimatronicCyborg.jpg

or would you want to look like this: http://sexyeditor.com/wp-content/photos/scarlett_johansson_44.jpg
 
Lol, look mechanical kidneys (ok not 100% the replacement of a real kidney) have been in use for a couple of years already, why do you have a problem with mechanical organs again?
 
Lol, look mechanical kidneys (ok not 100% the replacement of a real kidney) have been in use for a couple of years already, why do you have a problem with mechanical organs again?

Well would you believe that! Something we agree on! :D I would also like to know what Phenom's problem is. :confused:
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X