Slashdot Mirror
Sperm Sorting Chip
Makarand writes "Microscopically narrow fluid streams running side by side barely mix - a phenomenon
put to use in a
new stamp size silicon chip for purifying sperm. This
technique could
find use in infertility clinics where centrifugal technqiues, which
can damage fragile sperm, are currently used to purify sperm. Semen and salt water
are dripped into etched lanes less than half a millimeter wide from opposite ends of the chip. When the lanes merge, the healthy and wriggly sperm swim into the salt water stream
and leave the dead and the disabled sperm behind."
I would like to request at this point, for the good of the community, that no one post any jokes on this thread.
Or if you are dying from cancer because you inherited a genetic defect predisposing you to it - don't try to save yourself. If you're "naturally" unable to destroy the tumor, maybe you're not supposed to live at all!
I don't mean to troll either. We should consider the issues, and your point about adoption is well-taken.
But your comment is a disturbing muddle. You say that "nature is nature" - what do you mean by this? You seem to imply, particularly with your use of "supposed to," that there is some entity "nature" prescribing rules for human beings to follow. And you further imply that it is our obligation to follow these "rules" (whatever those may be and whoever determines them).
But this is a strange type of nihilism/fatalism. If we didn't do what we were "naturally unable" to do, we would still be living in caves. There isn't anything "natural" about cars or corrective lenses, or supermarkets or even a reliable supply of food. Do you advocate abandoning these?
Further, the "natural way" of having children involves risk of death to the mother, almost guaranteed malnourishment for both mother and child, and the probability that the child will not live past the age of 5 (as figures from many third-world countries, and pre-Industrial Europe will attest). Should we all return to this state because it is how we're "naturally supposed to" live?
Justin
This technique could find use in infertility clinics where centrifugal technqiues, which can damage fragile sperm...
If centrifugal techniques can damage sperm cells, just imagine what a centrifuge will do to the rest of the guy undergoing the treatment! You'll never get me into one of those deathtraps!
How does it perform against Mergesort or Quicksort?
You are naturally unable to fly, does that mean one should never take an airplane anywhere?
Adoption is a good thing, I was adopted myself, but thats a personal decision, adoption isn't for everyone. My dad had an accident, and his brain swelled, crushing a part of his brain responsible for regulating hormones, therefore rendering him unable to father children- does that mean he shouldn't have kids? You say that if nature doesn't want you to have kids, you should adopt a kid? Makes no sense...
Would it be fair to say that this is "seminal research"?
Ron Paul 2012
Would it not be better to use a maze that they would have to traverse. Might be able to breed a better human if the sperm had to find it's way to the egg. Maybe with little ghosts that flash colors when you find a powerup.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
I'm sorry, but it's too bad about the moderation on this one. Something about a reference to being "0WN3D" by an 18th century philosopher is just classic. My kingdom for some mod points.
"PH33R MY L337 PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY!"
--John Stuart Mill
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
It really doesn't matter what value you place on human life, nor if you are a believer in "God's Grand Design" or a steadfast evolutionist or anything in between... Nature is nature.
If you can't have children because you are naturally unable to, then maybe you're not supposed to have kids at all.
There you go, the fatal flaw in this reasonning is when you used the word "supposed". As if there was an intention behind someone's low sperm count, as if a concious choice was made at some point by an intellectual entity with power over your sperm count.
This is not how natural selection works. Natural selection works thusly: If you have descendents, you suceeded. And the word "natural" doesn't mean "if you have children that you would also have had had you been stranded without any technology on a remote desert island".
Using a device to filter out your lil' swimmers is no different, in the grand scheme of things, from using a spear to kill an antilope. Its using your naturally selected brain to come up with a plan to make sure you live another day and have kids that'll do the same, day after day.
Remeber, its not how you reproduce, its if you reproduce.
If you want a kid and are unable to have one "the natural way", why not consider adoption?
Selfishness. They don't want "a" kid, they want "their" kid. They want a version 2.0 of themselves.
You can't take the sky from me...