Slashdot Mirror


China Ahead in Stem-Cell Research

Andrew writes: "New Scientist is reporting (for free) on the WSJ's China clones human embryos story: "Chinese scientists are claiming a great leap forward in human cloning - the creation of dozens of cloned embryos advanced enough to harvest embryonic stem cells."" The lengthy Wall Street Journal story is also on MSNBC.

98 of 395 comments (clear)

  1. Ok, so the chinese can clone embryos... by Tebriel · · Score: 5, Funny

    But where are they going to put all these extra people?

    --
    The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
  2. What does it say when... by cliffy2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When a Communist nation allows scientists greater freedom than a Democracy? Just saying...

    1. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Nazi doctors were allowed a great deal of freedom with their expirements. Just saying . . .

    2. Re:What does it say when... by mqduck · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A nation allows more "freedom" to its corporations than its dissenting individuals? It's called Capitalism.

      --
      Property is theft.
    3. Re:What does it say when... by JonKatzIsAnIdiot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It says that one respects human life and the other doesn't.

    4. Re:What does it say when... by enjo13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ok troll, i'll play.

      Democracy != absolute freedom.

      A democratic nation can certainly limit freedoms, and any fruitful democracy does. In this case the democracy has thus far decided (although not clearly in one direction or the other) that the moral cost of stem cell research is not worth the scientific gain. Arriving at this decision is complex and cumbersome process.. that is the wonder of democracy. The people have effectively put controls on this research themselves.

      A communist nation (or dictatorship) has another method of arriving at decisions. In this case a single ruler (or single party) gets to make the decisions about what freedoms to limit. Traditionally China has placed great limits on the freedom of its people, but in this case the ruler has chosen to let stem cell research continue. This shouldn't really be surprising, it is certainly easier to convince a communist leader with limited responsibility to the wants of the people to pursue a potentially controversial policy.

      This mirrors what we saw in the Soviet Union. They accelerated their space program because the leadership had limited responsibility for the lives of the people involved. They didn't have to care what the people thought.

      --
      Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
    5. Re:What does it say when... by Ooblek · · Score: 2

      Actually, I would wonder about the freedom part. Studies on sociology and economics say that communism has to participate in capitalism on a global scale. My guess is that it is profit that is their motive, not the greater good of humans or any sort of step towards freedom. Besides, wasn't it one of the Asian countries that William Gibson portrayed as a place where you could get *ANYTHING* you could ever want if the price was right? Maybe someone over there liked Gibson.

    6. Re:What does it say when... by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > Like the freedom scientists had to experiment on humans under Hitler?

      Unethical, yeah, but where do you think some of the drawings in your Anatomy texts came from?

      The difference here is that I have no ethical objection to human cloning, nor to embryo research.

    7. Re:What does it say when... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And apparently, so are the people of China, who if current trends continue will soon have cures for all kinds of diseases which will continue to kill and cripple Americans.

      Well. Actually, we're not arguing about socialism vs. capitalism; we're arguing about socialism (the government controls the economy) vs. fascism (the government chooses a few large corporations to control the economy, and everyone else can go to hell.) China is getting steadily less socialist because socialism generally doesn't work very well; the US is sliding into fascism because that's what capitalism tends to become if We The People don't pay attention. Real capitalism is an infinitely better choice than either, but right now nobody seems to have the will or interest to maintain it. News flash: capitalism is hard work.

      What does all this have to do with science? Simple. Science flourishes in a zeitgeist of free inquiry and skepticism. Neither socialist bureaucrats nor fascist oligarchs are friendly to such a zeitgeist, because it threatens their power. Both socialism and fascism tend to be profoundly conservative, in a sense that has little to do with the traditional left-right dichotomy. It's a sad irony that Communist China is doing a better job of breaking the stranglehold of that kind of conservatism than the US is.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    8. Re:What does it say when... by GreyPoopon · · Score: 2
      In this case the democracy has thus far decided (although not clearly in one direction or the other) that the moral cost of stem cell research is not worth the scientific gain.

      And in doing so, they have provided incentive for obtaining stem cells from elsewhere. Using adult stem cells harvested from the same person who will receive them has obvious advantage, not the least of which is the immune system factor. Score one for democracy.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    9. Re:What does it say when... by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2
      Something that constantly gets missed is this: both China and Russia *never had democratic traditions to begin with* (modulo Kerensky's very very short-lived provisional government.) The current regime in China is *as free a government as they have ever had,* and has more democratic mechanisms than any they have ever had.

      Further, the most purely capitalistic eras of American history did *not* coincide with the freest in terms of civil rights or liberties.

    10. Re:What does it say when... by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well, I'm definitally not a Stalinist, but I would argue that socialism under Stalin was largely effective, if not steadily antilibertarian. However, the class shall note that Stalin did to a number of things to further democratize the Soviet Union, such as ammend the constitution to have elections by anonymous ballot.

      You are deluded. Stalin wrote a really great constitution, he also had practically all the members of the Supreme Soviet that enacted it murdered. Stalin's 'secret ballots' consisted of an option to go behind a curtain to mark your ballot rather than just place it in the box and have it count automatically for the party candidate. In Stalin's time most of the people who went behind the curtain were murdered.

      Stalin's state had little to do with any political creed other than opportunism and the persuit of power. There is even evidence that Stalin originally joined the communist party as a Tsarist mole.

      As for Stalin's effect on the economy, it can only be considered positive compared to the stagnation under the Tsars. Most of the progress took place under Lenin in any case, Stalin was too busy massacring Kulacks by the million and issuing edicts that twenty plants be built when there was material for three with the result that none were completed.

      The only positive effect the communists had was they diverted the massive flows of capital that the Tsars had squandered on themselves and poured it into industrial developments, but that did not require a police state.

      However, that said, it is quite hilarious that the response of US side folk to the thought that China might surpass them scientifically is to dredge up cold war rhetoric. China has not been a Stalinist state since Mao died and the gang of four were liquidated. Today it is merely an under-developed kleptocracy. If China was not a rival to US power and did not call itself communist the GOP hawks would have no trouble at all supporting them no matter how many people the regime kills.

      If you have a billion people and a part way modernised economy you canout perform a country of a quarter your size in a few selected areas of science. There is little reason to believe that the Chinese version of communism will be any more long lasting than the Soviet one. The only difference is that in China the impetus for change is comming from economic success rather than stagnation. Nobody believes in Chinese communism, the issue for Chinas leaders is not whether they adopt a democracy but how they get from where they are to where they want to be.

      If China succeeds in a peaceful democratic transition they will inevitably outstrip US power in the same way and for the same reason that the US suceeded the UK, population size.

      China is planning to become a biotech super-power. That is not the immediate threat to the US however since it is unlikely many US scientists would move to China. Many will move and are moving to the UK and Canada however.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    11. Re:What does it say when... by evilned · · Score: 2

      Its been awhile since I read the Communist Manifesto, but for true marxist communism, a dictatorship of the proletariat is a nessecary step. The eventual hope is to remove all the government apparatus and the people will take care of themselves, and communism would spread around the planet, and the concept of a nation state would dissappear. Eventually this would end with no need for government. Considering that the nation state has not dissappeared, and there is no one world government, communism with out dictatorship wouldnt be possible. Perhaps you meant socialism, which economically is very similar to communism. Socialism's only major difference is the method of enacting the policy, generally socialist tried to work within the existing government structure.

      --

      "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

    12. Re:What does it say when... by yintercept · · Score: 2

      When a Communist nation allows scientists greater freedom than a Democracy?

      Well, it says is democracies value the freedom of the individual over the state. Communist nations allowed their scientist to experiment and toy with people's lives. Look at all of horrifying and disgusting experiments done on living people by the USSR and Hitler's Germany.

      Western nations say that science is supposed to serve people...not that people are lab equipment for scientists, and stem cell research borders on experimentation on people.

    13. Re:What does it say when... by lrichardson · · Score: 2

      >Poor example, I think cadavers provided the data for most anatomy books. Much of that artwork predates Nazis.

      Actually, there have been large ethical fights over that issue ... some of the best work came from the Nazis. Many schools have pulled the pictures, arguing that to use them validates the Nazis.

      >Anyway, I believe we have the right to insist that scientists operate within the ethical guidlines of our society, other societies may choose there own ethical environment.

      'Rights' are more illusory than you might think. Rights are only what society gives, no more, no less, and, contrary to what many believe, there are no universal rights. To bring this back to the topic at hand, I live in America, and I totally support stem cell research and cloning. Unfortuantely, with a (scientifically) ignorant President (low shot, mea culpa, he's quite bright as far as politics and power go), with massive right-wing reactionary Christian fundamentalists supporting him, it doesn't really matter whether or not I am in the majority (according to the polls, I am): the laws have been passed which have virtually stopped research in these areas within the US. (I use the word 'virtually' to dramatize the difference between the rate we're going forward and the rest of the world.)

      Now, if you, as a member of the immoral minority get laws passed that run contrary to what large numbers of people agree with, the following occurs: Scientists who disagree may either a/ do what you tell them b/ disregard what the law says and go ahead with the research under threat of severe penalties, or c/ head for some place where the laws allow them to do what they want. Oddly enough, b/ and c/ happen an awful lot more than the politicos would have you believe.

      Now for the really scary scenario. The Chinese government is, for the most part, morally bankrupt. Genetic engineering, where the fetus is brought to term. Remember, there's only a two base pair difference between human and simian muscle tissue, and their's is ~15 times stronger. Think they won't be trying this?

  3. This is not the only ... by ZnoOne · · Score: 3, Funny

    China also ahead in cloning copy right CDs

    1. Re:This is not the only ... by Ooblek · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and their big-screen to DVD process is much faster than it is here in the US. I thought it was amazing back when Batman came out on VHS as fast as it did. Now you can get the DVD a day after the movie premieres in the theater. China must have this efficiency thing down to a recipe!

    2. Re:This is not the only ... by darkonc · · Score: 2
      The chinese government is already complaining about too many people in that country. What's the value of making even more??

      I guess they haven't quite gotten the capitalist concept that when there's a glut in your market, the last thing you need is more production.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
  4. Yup by sharkey · · Score: 2


    "Yew must be dem clones I been a-hearing 'bout. Y'all look the same ta me."
    </Southern Senator>

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  5. Evil by ThousandStars · · Score: 2, Funny

    The nice part about evil, soulless facist governments is that they play by no rules, with no rules, with no consideration of the negative potential for science I agree that stem cells hold tremendous potential for good, but without pondering the Brave New World/Gattaca/(insert cliche book here) consequences, the future might turn out an ugly place. It is dangerous to wave flags and say we should follow in their footsteps. One cannot use the dark side of the force/The One Ring/etc. without becoming Darth Vader/Sauron/CowboyNeal.

    1. Re:Evil by jonbrewer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      the future might turn out an ugly place.

      I believe the present is an ugly place. Read a newspaper. Look at some pictures of dead Palestinians, and think how complacent the US is in their deaths.

      And as for "evil, soulless facist governments," are you implying that the US is any better? We only ban this research because of the religious right. Get religion out of government and we'd be doing this, no question.

    2. Re:Evil by detect · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So let me get this right: Stem cells hold the potential for good but without pondering the cliche consequences, the future might become an ugly place? Ok.

      Which Governments actually do shows signs of fascism? What countries impose bans on scientific research and raise tariffs on imported goods all while preaching on Democracy and Free Trade?

      --
      // The fastest Alt-Tab in the West
    3. Re:Evil by evilned · · Score: 2

      And how many of those dead people had anything to do with the 1967 invasion? There is plenty of blame to go around in the middle east, especially when the palestinians and the isralies are both acting like first rate fuckos. Both sides show exactly why religion and politics shouldnt mix.

      --

      "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

  6. I'd hate to be GWB. by IPFreely · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ... But then I hate GWB.

    The poor boy is now solidly stuck between his Oh So Rightous right wing religious supporters and the need to keep the United States up with the rest of the world in genetic research. It looks like science suffers at the hands of the Morality police.

    Hasn't this happened before?... (Galileo, Darwin, ...)

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
    1. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by IPFreely · · Score: 3, Interesting
      So I guess we should be thanking open-minded, understanding Chinese government for their enlightened views on humanity and science.

      I'd bet that Chinese scientest have about the same attitude as US or other scientest do about science: Learn more, Understand better.
      I'd also bet that the chinese people, scientest, and government each have different attitudes about the role of science (the same is true in the US and other places). I don't give the chinese government any credit other than being smart enough to not tromp all over the advancement of learning and understanding (something GWB and the "Morality Police" haven't been able to do).

      If you want to argue what is best for society via science, that's one thing. If you simply want to look for any reason to demean religion (let's cut to the chase...Christanity) don't expect people to give you much credence.

      Point. I do not demonize religion in general (though I did not clearify that), I demonize those individual people who use religion as an excuse to enforce their opinions on others, to supress people, to supress the truth, to glorify theirselves, and to gather personal power in the name of their religion (Plenty of history on that count in any religion).

      The "religious right" that currently influences much of the politics in the US embodies much of those qualities, and as far as I can tell embodies very little of the teachings of their namesake savior, Jesus Christ.

      Galileo suffered not because his opinions went against the teachings of the church, but because he challanged the authority of the church by claiming that his discoveries disproved a few items in the bible and therefore the bible as a whole must be considered suspect. It was a power struggle, not a religious one.
      Darwin suffered because Rightious people would not accept a less superior place in the order of life as described by evolution.

      --
      There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
  7. Health care... by cperciva · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok... so if you want to use someone else's organs, you hop on a plane to India... if you want to have pig organs grown for you, you hop on a plane to the UK... if you want to have stem cells cloned and grown into organs for you, you hop on a plane to China...

    Is it just me, or does it seem that medical treatment is moving in the direction of taking a very large number of plane flights?

  8. Embryo cloning, abortion? by xSterbenx · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I always thought that it was interesting how the United States can allow abortion (the killing of an unborn embryo) but not embryo cloning/harvesting (the killing of an unborn embryo), especially since embryo cloning can bring some good. While I remain pro-life myself, I could never quite understand this hypocrisy.

    I find it also interesting how the one main country with whom the United States has mixed in civil rights with trade agreements is the country that may end up further along in this line of research. Of course, one could say that Hitler had learned a lot through research as well. How far can we allow our morality to stretch to further the advancement of the human race?

    1. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Kushana · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The difference, of course, is the mother. The Roe v. Wade decision said nothing about the "rights" of the foetus, it was about the woman's right to control over her own body.

      Perhaps unfortunately, there exists no equivalent decision supporting the rights of scientific research, cloning, or medical advances.

      --

      Careers should combine three things: what you can do, what you want to do, and what you can get paid for.
    2. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Telastyn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      First off, I am decidedly pro-choice.

      Now: I believe the difference lies in intent. Cloning/harvesting is making a baby with no intent on making a person. Abortions (should) occur only when a couple has no intention of making a baby, but *oops*. US law states that embyroes in very early stages can be killed, as it cannot live outside of the mother (without assistance) and is thus 'part of the mother' and she has the right to do whatever things to herself she wants as long as she does not endanger herself, or anyone else. (the debate is wether she can further endanger someone who cannot live outside her)

      Personally I believe that abortion should be allowed, and is the worst, last option in birth control, but still far better than having a child that cannot be loved and supported as one should.

    3. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by gwernol · · Score: 2

      Please remind me, I don't believe I tried to blame anyone. I simply noted, without comment, the hipocrisy in allowed abortion but not stem-cell research. You should allow both or neither, regardless of where my own opinions lie.

      Sorry, perhaps blame was not the right choice of words. I was reacting to the term "hypocracy" that you used. When people throw that term around they are usually looking to find someone to blame; if you were not I apologise.

      And when i said 'morality', I was referring to the morality of society in general. Surely such ideas exist. To give some examples, genocide? murder? human sacrifice? I guess in each own persons mind what they are doing is moral, but as a society we uphold a number of things as moral. Try and sacrifice a live virgin in your front yard and claim its moral. We'll see how society reacts

      Just because most people would agree on some questions does not mean we have a common morality. The most obvious example is exactly what we are talking about: abortion. There are clearly many Americans who believe this is morally wrong, equally there are many Americans who do not believe this is morally wrong.

      And even the "easy" examples you cite are usually not nearly as clear cut as you might like to think. Is it always wrong to kill people? Clearly not (war, self-defense, provocation...). When you say "murder" you mean killing that contravenes current laws. But these laws (and therefore the distinction between murder and lawful killing) are changing all the time. Indeed they even differ from state to state. So there is much less of a common morality than you seem to imply.

      --
      Sailing over the event horizon
    4. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by HanzoSan · · Score: 2

      As if theres a diffrence? Women have an abortion to save themselves time and money, they dont want to give birth and they dont want to raise a baby, they could have birth and do adoption but they choose not to.

      Abortion is worse, because who gets helped from Abortion? No one but the woman who had the Abortion, this means Abortion is selfish.

      Stem Cell research could help any one of us. When you fall and break your spine, you'll change your mind about stem cell research, hell if a woman fell and broke her spine would it be ok for her to use the stem cells to fix her back?

      You have a right to your opinion, but i see it as hypocritical.

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    5. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by ArticulateArne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I assume you mean to say your morality. Please don't presume to speak for anyone but yourself. There are plenty of people with different viewpoints than your own. These people are just as "moral" as you.

      Indeed? How does one define morality? Are all viewpoints moral, or are some more moral than others? And if some are more moral, who gets to decide why they're more moral?

      The idea that everybody gets to pick their own morality is a common and attractive one in today's intellecutal milieu. Yet, it ultimately reduces the meaning of morality to absolutely nothing. There absolutely must be some common definition that people can work from in determining what is and is not moral. It's like trying to do math where everybody gets to pick their own values for different numbers - some people might come close to each other's results when solving a few problems, but the system will break down extremely quickly. Is morality defined by consensus? How much of a consensus is necessary? Are we able to declare immoral the behavior of any group that ever had a consensus?

      I'm curious where you're coming from here, and how you make your definition of morality stand.

    6. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Telastyn · · Score: 2

      Abortions should not be done by women save themselves time and money. It should save the would be child the problems and emotional problems of being raised in a broken home, without proper parentage.

      Adoption does not solve these problems. Or at least current adoption does not. In an ideal world where people adopted all the children put up for adoption, it might.

    7. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



      Shouldnt the scientist who created the cells in a lab "OWN" the cell and thus have the same rights as a mother?

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    8. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by praedor · · Score: 2

      Who's morality? Mine says abortion is OK and that embryonic stem cell research is totally OK. I don't know what you mean by "How far can we allow our morality..."


      This is a reason that religion does absolutely NOT belong in government in any way shape or form. Science is science and marches to its own drum.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    9. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by issachar · · Score: 2, Insightful
      These people are just as "moral" as you.

      BZZZT Wrong! Morality is not a relative issue. Something is either morally acceptable or it is not. There's no such thing as "Well that may be wrong for you, but it's not wrong for me". It doesn't suddenly become moral to beat your wife or your children just because someone thinks it's okay.

      For any moral question, there is a right answer, and a wrong answer. Establishing the right answer is more tricky, but the fact that people don't agree on it doesn't mean there are two answers.

      The world is either flat or round, it's not both. God either exists, or he does not. Foetus' are either human beings, or they are not.

      --
      . --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
    10. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      I say let the human race decide as a collective what is moral and what is not. I would rather have that then to have a small tribe of jews who lived 2000 years ago decide.

      That's just me though. I know many people disagree.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    11. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      True or false?

      Columbus discovered america.
      Jesus Christ is the son of god.
      A gallon of gasoline costs $1.10

      The truth is much slipperier then you think.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    12. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by HanzoSan · · Score: 3, Insightful



      Please, most children are raised in a broken home, thats the stupidest excuse i've ever heard.

      I was raised without a father around, Am I going to wish i were aborted? hell no! And i dont think anyone else raised in a "broken" home wishes they were aborted either unless they have some serious mental problems.

      If you are in a foster home, or a broken home, it does not mean you'll grow up to be a bad person.

      Please stop talking about emotional problems and proper parantage as if its somehow normal in this day and age to have that knowing that almost half the kids growinng up or who have grown up these days grew up in a broken home. Alot of kids were abused mentally, sexually, etc, and have had it worse than me, and this was by their real parents, honestly this is beyond your control, but even if i grew up like that, i still wouldnt wish i was aborted.

      Its not right for you to judge for some other lifeform if it should live or die, its up to that life form to decide for itself, that is my opinion.

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    13. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Pac · · Score: 2

      Perfectly fine, if you have guns enough big enough to back up your words. See what happened to the Native Americans before and during the 19th century to see what I mean. And that is just a particular instance. You can take a look at the history of the Armenians in Turkey, the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq and Iran, the Aztecz and the Incas under the Spanish rule.

      Morality arguments are always just a step from being a refuge for the coward to justify actions that can not be justified by reason.

    14. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Telastyn · · Score: 2

      And it is my opinion that people should be able to judge if they are going to mentally, sexually, or physically abuse their children and not have them. I also believe sexually active heterosexuals should know if they could support a child, and not have one if they cannot, or will not within 9 months. But I am naive...

      It is for the parents to judge. This is my opinion.

      And I'm not saying that children raised in broken homes will be bad people, because that's certainly not true, but in general I think most people will agree that it is better to have two adults raising a child they love and providing for it than just one.

      Most families in America are strugling to provide for themselves and their child(ren) even with two incomes...

  9. Oddly appropriate Fortune on this page (+5 Spooky) by Pii · · Score: 2, Interesting
    When I went to look at the comments for this page, the fortune quote at the bottom read:
    The entire CHINESE WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL TEAM all share ONE personality -- and have since BIRTH!!
    Spooky!
    --
    For those that would die defending it, Freedom
    has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
  10. Inevitable by legLess · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Briefly (I'm at work) this is exactly why the U.S. shouldn't ban this research. It's bloody inevitable. Our government is caving to a few screaming fundamentalists over one of the most important medical advances in history.

    Who's going to pursue this more ethically? The Chinese, who've been alleged to use prisons as organ factories, or us?

    --
    This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
    1. Re:Inevitable by debrain · · Score: 2

      Quite right. We shall cling to our non-capitalist luddite principles on a subject, and be overtaken by someone who does not.

      This in no way reflects my views on capitalism, ludditism, ethics of human cloning, pro-life, or anything else. All I wish to say is: If your morality prevents innovation, and it lies in a gray area (pay attention to gray areas throughout history - mathematics could be considered one of those in the middle ages), those who do invent it will have an "advantage". (ie. the Ottomans.)

      -B

    2. Re:Inevitable by stubear · · Score: 2

      Don't worry, Superman has stepped in...er, wheeled in, to save the day. He's testifying before congress about the use of genetic research for medical cures - specifically, no duh, spinal injuries.

  11. Now how did that get there... by IPFreely · · Score: 2
    The quote at the bottom of the page:

    The entire CHINESE WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL TEAM all share ONE personality -- and have since BIRTH!!

    Seems a little too relevant...

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
  12. population?? by Hooya · · Score: 2
    don't they have enough people already? do they really need to start cloning humans? (i know, i know, it's just for stem cells.)

    On one hand, they employ 'neighborhood-watch' for couples who might want a second child. those couples are then 'socially' pressured into getting an abortion. but on the other hand the gummint wants to clone humans... I guess they're going to require someone to have a license to produce humans... (much like a manufacturing license). But then the country is so good at piracy -- you know where that's going to end up. 'pirated copies' -- literally -- will be found on every chinease street corner. what's new?

  13. I hope not! by burtonator · · Score: 2, Funny

    If China gets to far ahead they will swarm us with...

    Just think... billions of Chinese!!! ah!

  14. This is news... but not new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I believe that, if you dig into some of the KGB stuff from the early 80's, the russians were (as a military experiment) working on human body modification through genomic experimentation and gene mutation/cloning. Alot of the documents are obviously still hidden away, but there was a site I visited last year that was a clearing house for recently declassified documents from the Moscow bureau.

    While nothing specifically mentioned the cloning, analyists who had been looking for hints on space weapons, stealth bomber/fighters, and missing prisoners came to the conclusion that some of the rumors about human cloning in remote siberian research stations were not without backing evidence. This was due to a small trickle of the worst dissidents, those who had good health records and whom were fit and free from known genetic diseas in their families, were disappearing.

    These stations still remain closed to the world and heavily guarded, and there are only rumors. Rumors like men being bred from birth with extra ribs and denser/thicker muscles and bones. Men who had enhanced senses of smell or night time eyesight.

    A few of the people who went "missing" from soviet prisons for serious crimes were noted as re-appearing years later in soviet Marine Infantry brigades (spetznat) with clouded service records, but it is difficult to imagine Russia in the 80's having the technical knowhow or where with all to be able to "mutate" or modify already grown adults. I toss that one out though as an x-files kind of rumor that sure could scare the kids up around Mermansk.

    Like I said, alot of rumors... but it makes you think. You gotta wonder what the CIA paid for too... there is alot of black budget money that doesn't get tracked beyond the agency front door... they managed to produce the Blackbird that way, and U2/TR1 as well as who knows what. I wonder if the gov't has dabbled in genetic mutation or embryonic modification/cloning...

    Oh well, in direct comment to the article and posters here, let me go on the record that I think this is not a bad thing. China is not looking to increase their population (which they have difficulty controlling or feeding as is now)... they are doing research to A) Best the US and Europe at their own game, and B) come up with medical breakthrough that meet condition A and benefit their own society as well... maybe even boost their economy with something original that only they can produce, that being working genetic medicines they for once control under patent.

  15. People, people, lots of people by Pac · · Score: 2

    That looks like exactly what the People's Republic needs, more republican people!

    It also helps that one can clone the important Party officials and make even truer the tradicional Chinese fascination for long term planning (not the 3-month Wall Street long term standard, mind you, the Chinese long term is measured in centuries). In the future, one will plan and have a clone to implement the plan.

    I hope they remember to learn how to clone the rice, the pork and the fish, to feed all the surplus people they will be making.

  16. Not according to the CIA World Factbook: by Byteme · · Score: 2
  17. Next man on the moon? by rufusdufus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The next man on the moon will be chinese too. They have a plan for manned mission in the near future.
    Our science fiction always assumes that space colonization and the "future" will be dominated by western ideals, but as things are trending now, the future looks brighter for asia.

  18. Re:Uh, yeah by grytpype · · Score: 2

    Source?

    --

    - Have a picture

  19. asia is the way to go... by supernova87a · · Score: 3, Insightful

    many people have predicted (and it's becoming apparent) that Asia will lead the way in such biotechnology areas. People in Asia are not quite as brainwashed or blinded by Christian religious dogma, and probably don't mind conducting research that can improve the quality of human life.

    While the politicians here debate, and try to cater to every consituency, by holding research back, the rest of the world will be able to run with the ball...

  20. an educated question... by Hadlock · · Score: 2

    from the article...

    Unlike most adult cells, whose functions are preprogrammed, embryonic stem cells can adapt themselves to a variety of specialist roles, filling in as heart or nerve cells.

    so, let's assume i'm born, from an embryonic cell (cloned), and my heart goes bad. the doctor forgets to stick the embryo in the magic soultion that turns the "turn me into a heart organ" switch, and puts the cell directly into me.

    does the embryo turn into a blasocyst and a developing baby/tumor? or would this "know" what to do? i know there's a specific solution that must be prepared to turn on all the genes to clone an animal, but would the body naturally tell this embryo what to do?

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  21. Human Organs by james_shoemaker · · Score: 5, Funny

    So in the future when you look at the packaging your replacement organs come in it will say...

    "Made in China"

  22. China. Cloning. 'Nuff said. by cryptochrome · · Score: 2

    I suppose it was inevitable that while the majority of the world wrangles over the ethics of this technology, it would be developed anyway by a government with a total lack of them. While I am not opposed to cloning technologies on philosophical grounds, as a practical matter I trust the chinese government about as far as I can throw them.

    --

    ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

  23. Re:Uh, yeah by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

    How about this: "Once I found a woman who was 9 months pregnant, but did not have a birth-allowed certificate. According to the policy, she was forced to undergo an induced abortion. In the operating room, I saw the child's lips were moving and how its arms and legs were also moving. The doctor injected poison into its skull and the child died and it was thrown into the trash can. Afterwards the husband was holding his wife and crying loudly and saying, what kind of man am I? What kind of husband am I? I can't even protect my wife and child. Do you have any sort of humanity?"

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
  24. Picture this in court.... by kwishot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This would be a step backwards in court cases that rely on DNA evidence.

    With people being truly identical in every which way (not including haircuts and stuff like that) including DNA, it would be nearly impossible to prove innocence or guilt of one of the clones in a court case that currently relies on such technologies.

    Think about it...
    "Your client was on the security camera and it was his blood on the floor"

    "No, your honor, it was his identical clone with the same DNA - my client was nowhere near the place of the incident"

    -kwishot

  25. Mixed reactions by tiltowait · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Column A
    This is yet another reason why China scares me. Anyone upset over the American jingoism since 9/11 and during the Olympics should be blown away by the scope of Chinese nationalism, to say nothing of their singularly ass backwards system of medicine, politics, human rights, spam filtering, etc..

    Column B
    Kudos for this country for pushing the scientific frontiers of medical benefits to mankind. This forward-thinking is yet another sign of the benefits of not being caught up in corrupt fundamenalist political wackos. But since China's rich cultural heritage spanks the USA in longevity by about, oh, a factor of ten, it shouldn't be surprising where they're headed - it's only a matter of time before this technically advanced economic powerhouse dominates the globe.

  26. Re:China. Cloning. 'Nuff said. by C.+Mattix · · Score: 2

    Is it me or did Fraxis hit the nail right on the head when they put "Chairman Chang" as the leader of the "Human Hive" in Alpha Centauri.

    Is it sick that I can still pretty much boil down much of the socio-political landscape in terms of a computer game? ..... Don't answer that.

  27. Re:Uh, yeah by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

    So, do you have a better way of population control?

    Yes, Capitalism and Democracy. As a population becomes more economically stable, the birth rate naturally decreases. In fact, I've seen some studies that show population will stop increasing around 2050 or 2100.

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
  28. Many More Maos day celebration to follow. by RealityCrutch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course they are ahead of us. We are a democracy and any substantial protest brings us to a screeching halt. (Think: nuclear power)

    And as a totalitarian state, not particularly worried about ethics, foreign opinion, or foetuses, they have a very large source of research material.

    But I expected better from many of you. They aren't doing this to increase their population. They aren't even doing this for stem cell research per se. They have plenty of stem cells from their very aggressive population control program. No, what they want is money. They want to clone embryos to sell to us squeamish westerners. They have to develop the technique of cloning them, so they can clone the stem cell lines we hypocritically approve of, then sell them back to us. What a wacky world we live in!

  29. Talk about mixed messages by Nygard · · Score: 2

    So in a nation where parents can only have 1 child, they are cloning humans...

    Yeah, that makes sense.

    --
    "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." --Elbert Hubbard (1856-1915)
    1. Re:Talk about mixed messages by ziriyab · · Score: 5, Insightful
      They're not cloning embryos to make more humans. Read the article.

      The biggest problem with /. is that some very smart people who know a lot about one specific field, think they're qualified to comment (and +mod) on things they know nothing about.

    2. Re:Talk about mixed messages by Nygard · · Score: 2

      I did read the article. I chose to make a politically pointed, satirical remark. (For your education, satire often uses exaggeration and rhetorical devices to make a point.) This obviously exceeded your capacity.

      As far as I can see, the biggest problem with /. is the utter lack of a sense of humor among people like yourself. The second biggest would be a complete lack of courtesy.

      For that matter, what qualifications do you have to judge any of the following?
      a) My intelligence
      b) My fields of expertise
      c) Fields in which I lack expertise
      d) Your own moral and editorial superiority

      --
      "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." --Elbert Hubbard (1856-1915)
  30. Why are capitalists so anti communist by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



    As if the USA is a democracy? First we arent a democracy we are a republic.

    Second communism allows far greater freedom than capitalism IF the government is not corrupt.

    Since 99 percent of all governments are corrupt including ours, a corrupt communist government is one the people cannot control. Our government is controlled by the top 10% of rich Capitalists not us, so how are we in any diffrent of a situation than the Chinese?

    SSSCA, The Patriot Act, DMCA, These laws arent democractic at all, we didnt vote to have these laws in place, if we were allowed to vote the majority would vote against these laws, hey but some rich guys in suits and some representatives who are actually representing the rich guys in suits, they make the law.

    A corrupt government is a corrupt government, Communism isnt bad on paper, its bad only because humans make it bad, and our government is bad only because we allow it to be.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  31. Facism has nothing to do with Communism by HanzoSan · · Score: 2, Interesting



    Because the USA is filled with Facism as well, perhaps we arent as bad as Germany, Russia, China, but we arent as good as some other places in Europe, or NZ either.

    As far as freedom goes, Communism does have its benifits, one of them is science benifits greatly from it because scientists have complete freedom.

    The only problem China faces is the fact that they have too many people and not enough jobs for them all, their government is out of order, right now we are entering the information age, resources and man power will matter less, information will matter more, and in this situation, the bigger population shall have more producers of information.

    China and Communism benifits from this greatly, however because of their stupidity they are restricting information through censorship, if they ever allow their people to actually access the information then we'd be left in the dust.

    Then again we have problems like that here (Copyright is a form of Censorship)

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  32. Re:China's Next Move by Master+Bait · · Score: 2
    The godless Red Menace will produce a genetically superior million-man army of cloned soldiers, selected for their size and prowess, intent upon landing upon our shores, intent on crushing our American Way.

    Believe It or Not!

    --
    "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
    --Tom Schulman
  33. Re:Of course they are ahead.... by praedor · · Score: 2

    Easy to cast stones from over here isn't it? WE don't have to live shoulder to shoulder, packed like sardines into limited space as they must in China. WE don't (yet) suffer the same overpopulation problems China does NOW.


    I fully support the intention of their population control measures, if not necessarily the way they are carried out. Perhaps economic inducements to smaller families would be better (here AND there). Instead of payrolling big families with tax deductions and crap like that, make people actually pay the real cost of their overproduction of kids.

    --
    In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
  34. Stem Cell research is not being hindered. by Picass0 · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is nothing that bans the cultivation of stem cells for medical research in the United States.

    The only policy that President Bush has established concerning stem cells said that an existing set of stem cell strains (aprox. 60) would recieve federal funding. That's not the same as outlawing or limiting future stem cell research.

    Other stem cell strains may be created, but not at federal expense. Medical Companies would need to use private financing to start future strains.

    1. Re:Stem Cell research is not being hindered. by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2

      I think your view on this is rather narrow. The problem isn't that the US government is not going to fund your stem cell research. The fact is, they are NOT going to fund anything done at your lab if there is stem cell research going on in it. This would be a MAJOR loss to a lab to lose federal funding on all of its research.

      Universities would lose a great portion of their grants if they were to even consider stem cell research. Major companies still rely on federal funding. It is only the smaller ones or the ones located in other countries that's going to succeed.

      The problem with this is this. Let's just say China does research and finds a cure for cancer (per se). Now 1) would the FDA approve this treatment? 2) Would you be willing to try a treatment that was not FDA approved? 3) Would the US respect the patent on this treatment (if there was one) or if Bush and his people are in power, will they just ignore the patent laws? (Look what they were considering to do with Cipro - allowing another company to produce a generic version at a cheaper price. And Cipro was produced in the US and is protected by US laws)

      --


      _______________________________
      "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
  35. Abortion is legal in the USA, whats the diffrence. by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



    We have legalized abortion yet we respect human life all of the sudden? Come on. Be serious.

    If Abortion is legal, Stem Cell research should also be legal. Its the same thing, the only diffrence is you are actually making use of the embryols for a purpose which can actually save lives.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  36. Like the chinese really need this... by slashbrent · · Score: 2, Funny

    Doesn't China kind of have a little over-population problem as it is?

    Like to the tune of 1.2 BILLION people!

    ;-)

    --

    Moderators need an additional choice: "Karma Whore" for people who cut-and-paste articles as their comments!
  37. Last Super Power on Earth ? by RembrandtX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Its sad to think that I will probally be the last generation in my family to have known the USA as a technological superpower.

    With increasing restrictions on scientific study, assanine patent law, and scientific monopolies - it seems everyone is out for either the buck or the moral highground. [or a political office.]

    Hobbes would be proud, since he was the first to preach that to inturrupt the 'process' of god was a sin. Apparantly cloning (as well as violent video games and open source software) falls into this catagory.

    Am i using a sweeping generality , you betchya`. Is it far from the truth ? not really as far as I would like it to be.

    While i must say .. im registered as a Republician, and fairly conservative about stuff in general. I'm ironically a futurist. I think we should be more green, use cleaner technology, and improve our life/life style. But keeping the cost to future generations in account.

    Apparantly the way the govt slid the last 8 years, was to pander to the highest voting majority, go back to our 16th centruy religious roots, and avoid change.

    change apparantly is evil. and will destroy our 'family' values. Whatever values they have 'saved' in 15 years when people are mutating horribly due to all the petrolium toxins in the air/water/soil won't matter .. its TODAY that counts.

    As the US becomes more and more self centered and less a 'world' player .. we are going to isolate ourselves from new technology .. new ideas. [fun experiment, ask your average religious right how much the yen is at .. or the euro .. and see if they know.]

    Anyone see what japan did ? Japanese as a culture are rather xenophobic. [Just watch a 6 foot tall black man walk down a street in Yokohama .. and you will understand what i mean.] When a society isolates itself socially, it stagnates. They may have been a super-power economy once, but the bubble burst - and with that loss of economy, the last 40 years of growing pains are showing.

    Incest between mother and son is common due to bonds formed from 'exam' stress. Rape and molestation is practicaly a way of life for young girls. And 12 year old prostitutes in the Tokyo/yokahama area are not only common, but ALMOST accepted. Theft and crime, once unthinkable (outside organized gangs) are becoming common place.

    Again, im being general here .. some to make a point, some to save time.

    I just wonder, how much of 'protecting our values' Japan did 10-15 years ago. Are we repeating the same social mistakes? By refusing to let our scientists to explore? When our future is being decided by people who are holding onto beliefs that were founded 2000 years ago, when the world (to them) comprised of about 1/3 of europe - is that system equiped to handle the way the world is now ?

    would you choose to program your new graphics application in C++ ? or COBOL ?

    --

    --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
    1. Re:Last Super Power on Earth ? by RembrandtX · · Score: 2

      actually .. both have been publicized heavily in the papers over here in the U.S. recently. The euro when europe switched .. the Yen just recently with the Steel embargos on Japan.

      I wouldn't have chosen those two examples if not for the publicity. [maybe I would have questioned the sales tax rate for the states that surround the one they live in .. or maybe even any other non U.S. country that won an olympic medal in the event of the questionee's choice.]

      I was,however, insinuating that religious right people ignore news that does not pertain to their (often) narrow view of the world. [generally the state they live in .. possibly how the government is letting those damn hippies ruin the country's 'family values'.] particularly over here in America, where medical doctors have been murdered becuase they performed an abortion sometime in their life. Or where large groups of religious people have manged to win frivilious law suits, or sway opinion vs the 'public' norm.

      example: here in maryland, one of the towns near D.C. refused to allow 'santa clause' to appear in their traditional thanksgiving parade. This was publicized as a 'town tradition' (grain of salt) The town banned 'santa' not becuase of the NYC bombing, not because of safty issues. But because a small (less than 20) group of religious people said it was insulting because they didn't believe in celebrating christmas.

      If that doesnt give me evidance that people who spout religious dogma can't influence society more than the 'average' american joe - well .. i would be surprized.

      A somewhat techno-geek example would be allowing a MSCE to replace all the Apples in public school learning labs with windows machines (at tax-payer expense) because 'they dont know how to maintain a MAC' rather than learning how to work the existing system.

      --

      --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
  38. The law has spoken by HanzoSan · · Score: 2


    Abortion is legal, which means sperms with eggs are legally not alive even if they are actually alive.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  39. food for thought by FrenZon · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know this is extremely bad taste, but ..

    Now you're really going to have to worry about what you've got in your dim sims.

  40. Real capitalism by HanzoSan · · Score: 2


    Would mean we'd all be consultants, and start our own businesses, small ones of course.. Big business is actually bad for the economy because it decreases competition, innovation and people get paid less

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  41. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by HanzoSan · · Score: 2

    NZ is not capitalist either, you can go to college for free, hell you even get allowances from the government.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  42. Re:I hate to break this... by nomadic · · Score: 2

    The numbers can be a bit confused.

    I was incorrect, the birth rate is a negative number, but the lowering death rate means the population is growing.

    As for the Indian thing, I don't think wars are decided by how many men you can put in the field anymore. China has the largest population in the world (they still edge out India), but they're surrounded by less-populated countries who are more than a match for them in a fight (Japan, Taiwan, Russia, etc)

  43. Re:Cloning Morals? BAH! by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2

    Not trying to be flamebait, but the fact is that a majority of the country did not vote for our president. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

    --


    _______________________________
    "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
  44. Re:Mixed, shaken not stirred by nickynicky9doors · · Score: 2

    I rarely bother to react to reactionary statements, but what with the distemper attendant upon a bout of the flu, bitchslapping an idiot has a perverse appeal.

    Column A is vacuous and needn't be commented upon further.

    Column B is idiotic. China's 'rich cultural heritage' is rife with xenophobic internecine warfare. The present regime is but the latest set of warlords. I've worked with and for Chinese families of substantial wealth, they were urbane, informed and loath to live in China. The Chinese mythos has long held the 'middle kingdom' will 'soon' rule the earth. It's quite funny to hear a chinese person self-deprecatingly state the inevitable rise to world dominance of the Chinese people. It's like they really don't want to rule the earth but destiny *is* destiny. China can barely feed it's people. The Three Gorges Dam is a grandiose scheme to implement a hydroelectric panacea. China historically came 'online', if you will, by development of a series of canal works, but the Three Gorges Dam is thought to be fundamentally flawed and might well silt up in plus/minus thirty years. Long stretches of China's rivers are dead. Environmentally China is a sludge pressure cooker overheating. China had damn well better scramble to advance every and any frontier of learning because in all likelihood when the shit (night soil) hits the fan over the next decade or two were all going to be splattered and forced to help clean up the mess.

    cheers
    --

    heuristic algorithm seeks stochastic relationship
  45. Re:Any History Students Here? by nickynicky9doors · · Score: 2

    insightful and funny but, sorry, they won't let me moderate. ;)

    --

    heuristic algorithm seeks stochastic relationship
  46. Re:Interesting for the ethics not science. by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2
    Your statement:
    What is more worrying is that the slight advantage China may have is due to their lack of ethical regulation and disregard of human rights. While different cultures have different ethical standards the fact that these women were not fully consulted on the fate of their eggs and that human animal hybrids have been created is a real concern.
    From the Article:
    But regulations are far less restrictive in China. Lu, who directs a large fertility clinic, simply asked some of the dozens of women who walked through her door each day to donate their leftover eggs. She claims that now five per cent of her cloned embryos develop to blastocysts.


    So, I'm not sure where you are getting that the women were not fully consulted and also the part about human animal hybrids. Sounds like FUD to me... The article specifically said that the women were asked if they would like to donate the leftover eggs.

    Secondly, the "animal hybrid" that you mention is rather inaccurate. US Scientists have been using all types of mammals eggs to test human DNA. In addition, there are a number of Human-Animal testing that are currently taking place. Read here So it's not unusual for this to occur in the scientific field.

    Lastly, I agree with your last statement in that "we cannot hold back other countries technical progress." The main thing is that the East Asian culture has bred a totally different belief system that is not centralized on Christianity and/or a single god. There is very little stigmata towards donating unused eggs to research (It would otherwise be thrown out anyways) The belief is that it would probably benefit the society and science more through donating than from trashing the unused eggs.

    Other Human-Animal Articles
    http://cronkite.pp.asu.edu/med/Pages/clonself.html
    http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/monkey 010111.html
    http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/r abbit000918.html
    --


    _______________________________
    "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
  47. Re:Mutant rabbit-people by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2

    Sorry to tell you, but this has been and is currently a widely used Western Science technique. Read Here or Here

    --


    _______________________________
    "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
  48. Relinquishment is dumb! by WillWare · · Score: 2
    Who's going to pursue this more ethically?

    Amen to that!

    Whenever we relinquish a technology because we feel we're ethically "above that sort of thing", we run the risk that the technology will be picked up by people with WAY less moral scruples. Relinquishment pushes technology into the hands of the unethical, the very thing we'd hope to avoid by relinquishing in the first place.

    There's then this tricky problem: how do we keep a strong technical lead in an ethically problematical area of technology? Historically we've done it with black ops. Maybe that's what would work here. Then again, there have recently been advances that may make Bush's unfortunate decision moot: it is now possible to extract a stem cell from an adult human that is fully capable of differentiating into any cell type.

    So now, maybe we can have our cake and eat it too. If the Chinese make huge gains using fetal stem cells, but we can do all the same stuff with stem cells from adults, then their putative technological lead becomes a tempest in a teapot.

    --
    WWJD for a Klondike Bar?
  49. Proof please... by 2Bits · · Score: 2

    The Chinese, who've been alleged to use prisons as organ factories, or us?

    And where is your proof to support that statement? Or is this just he-says-she-says-thingy?

  50. Dinner for two by volpe · · Score: 2

    I'll take "jingoism" and "nationalism" from Column A, and "heritage" from Column B.

    Oh, and bring me my fortune cookies first so I can see how much the check is going to be.

  51. Cloning wrong? by dh003i · · Score: 2

    Cloning? Wrong? Immoral? Unethical? Nonsense.

    Show me one logical reason why "cloning" is wrong?

    The sanctity of life? That's just bullshit we made up.

    Playing god? More bullshit we made up. There is no god.

    Growing a person to harvest him for organs? Well, we do have abortions, and if there's nothing wrong with abortion, there can't be anything wrong with that. As long as it isn't conscious, there's no big deal.

    Cloning Hitler, Jesus, Socrates, Imhotep, or other dead persons? Well, their dead and have no say in the matter anymore. As for the concern of cloning someone who "was" evil, its ludacrous to think that doing so will result in the same person. Hitler wasn't a product of his genes. If Hitler had been born today, he probably would have wound up in a mental institute; or perhaps been a great artists; or who knows. But he wouldn't have been the holocaust-creating Nazi that we associate with the name. As for those people who believe that cloning such a person would result in the same end result, that's nonsense: every person makes their own decisions and choices. Hitler chose to become who he was; it wasn't forced on him by some quasi-religious concept of predestinaton.

    Lets get over the irrational fear of human cloning. Its only the product of religious bullshit. Proof of point, in China, where the people aren't brainwashed by religion, they find nothing wrong with it; same in Britain.

  52. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by SEE · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Who are you to impose a global ethical standard on anyone? Ethics is a totally subjective ideal and there is no act that can alone be considered wrong or right,

    Who are you to object to his imposing a global ethical standard on anyone? If ethics are a totally subjective ideal, then how can his act of imposition be considered wrong or right?

  53. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by SEE · · Score: 2
    New Zealand? On the pro-capitalist 2002 Index of Economic Freedom, by the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal countries are ranked like so:

    1. Hong Kong
    2. Singapore
    3. New Zealand
    4. Tie: Estonia, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the United States.
    9. Tie: Australia, Chile, and the United Kingdom
    12. Tie: Denmark and Sweeden
    14. Finland
    15. Tie: Bahrain and Canada

    NZ is, according to capitalists, more capitalist than the U.S.

  54. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by jnana · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who are you to impose a global ethical standard on anyone? Ethics is a totally subjective ideal and there is no act that can alone be considered wrong or right, even in the post S11 environment of today.

    Your position is untenable. Do you really want to cling to ethics as subjective? It means that it is okay if a country decides to raise 98% of its people so that they can be slaves to the remaining two percent (literally slaves), perhaps they even get killed and eaten at age 35, when they have outlived their usefulness but still taste pretty good and serve as a good food resource for the 2%?

    Your bullshit argument basically amounts to saying that we weren't justified in doing anything about Hitler, because ethics is a subjective thing, and we can't impose our subjective values on somebody else or interfere with their own culturally valid ways of life. And should governments not impose laws that regulate conduct, since everybody has their own subjective interpretation of ethics?

  55. they need cloning over there by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

    after all, they are short on population and need all the people they can get..

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  56. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by maxpublic · · Score: 3

    By contrast, look at our American society in the West. We have debated the issue of cloning. We have expressed grave concern over its moral implications.

    Actually, "the West" hasn't "expressed grave concerns" over the moral implications of cloning. You say this as if we, a unified body of First World nations, think cloning is eeeeeeevil.

    Fact is, there's a great deal of disagreement on the subject - no unity whatsoever. And as the strongest objections seem to be made by religious fanatics with no scientific background in the biological sciences, I can see why the Chinese might find much of the debate specious and rooted in Western-style religious fundamentalism.

    Hell, I'm an American and that's the way I see it. Yet another bunch of clueless idiots who've seen one to many 'evil clones kill people' horror flicks and think that this is somehow going to happen in real life....

    Max

    --
    My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
  57. sing it with me now by discogravy · · Score: 2

    I like Chinese.
    I like Chinese.
    There's nine hundred million of them in the world today.
    You'd better learn to like them; that's what I say.

  58. OT: Re:warning Goatse.cx link by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2

    Don't you think it would be pretty straightforward to grep any link for "goatse.cx", then flag the whole thing as a possible goatsex link?

    I'm sure I could hack up a bit of code to demonstrate this, if anyone was interested. I wonder how much trouble goatsex trolls go to, trying to find out ways to obfuscate their goatse.cx links? Still, it keeps them out of trouble. Imagine if they turned their talents to something sinister...

  59. Re:Socialist = Conservitive? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

    Western European "socialism" is a long, long way from government control of the economy. It's more a set of policies on the part of the government to control the less humane tendencies of capitalism -- "capitalism with a human face," one might call it, if one were in an ironic mood.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.