Submitted by Thabang
If people are interested in reading more about what this man Michael Tellinger has to say they can go on his website etc...for me the question are rather simple, well in my mind..whether gene therapy or stem cells it does not matter to me but i ask WHO GETS TO DECIDE FOR THE HUMAN RACE?? this question i suppose also links in with some of the discussion posed earlier...issues of morality etc...me i guess what i am calling for in a re - definition of everything as we currently know it...for example do people know about the large hadron collider experiments being conducted in europe??? scientists are trying there to recreate conditions as they were AT THE BIG BANG, depending on what your belief systems are we are talking about 16 odd billion years ago.....now WHO DECIDED THAT THESE EXPERIMENTS CAN BE CONDUCTED??? experiments whose results may end life on earth as we know it, thats the reality, because nobody actually knows what may or may not happen.....so in the same breath how are world, global matters decided on and who gets to participate and if an alien extra terrestrial race should make themselves known to us, who will be earth's ambassador?
so to talk about - WHO GETS TO DECIDE THINGS FOR ALL OR US??? because so far it seems this privilege belongs to rich nations..
see article below
.....................................................................................
Stem Cells – Stepping stones to immortality? Or a waste of time?
(by Michael Tellinger, July 2006, Also see: www.slavespecies.com www.akomati.com and www.zuluplanet.com)
Before we crack the DNA code – lot's of fun to be had with the miracle of Stem Cells.
This week I'd like to shine the spotlight on the tussle between stem cell research and gene therapy. Recently a reader mailed and asked me to investigate the DNA and genetic sequence of Dolphins. Sad to say, that so far there seems to be very little information available and I am not even sure if there is a group mapping the Dolphin genome at present. My guess is that as soon as they have some tangible results it will be posted on the various genome project websites, as it is with the other species being mapped. The results will certainly be fascinating to study and compare to the apes and human genome with specific attention being focused on the number of active genes and introns.
But while we are wrestling with the intricacies of our DNA in an attempt to understand the blueprint for human life, another group of medical scientists are making great strides in the art of manipulating our bodies, with the miraculous abilities of stem cells. And you can rest assured that it will not be in the too distant future that hospitals will become much more than a place for the treatment of sick people. It is quite easy to speculate that hospitals and laboratories will rapidly evolve into organ and body-part factories.
The futuristic view of cloning movies of some years ago is now truly upon us. The scientific media has been reporting that not only can scientists now grow brand new organs from stem cells as ordered by patients or CLIENTS, but surgeons can also re-grow damaged organs like hearts, crippled spines, livers, kidneys and any other problem organs in your body. Stem cell therapy can also reverse the damage caused by Parkinson's disease, diabetes and others. The most encouraging aspect of this procedure, is that it overcomes the problem of transplanted organs being rejected by the auto-immune system of our bodies, which has in the past caused many transplants to fail miserably causing their recipients great anguish.
But when these synthetically grown organs and body parts will actually be unleashed on the human populace is not known. My guess is, not until the pharmaceutical giants have ensured that they have wrapped up the commercial benefits of these procedures tightly enough, and ensured that new legislation has been passed that protects their commercial exploitation of this new area of science.
For those who are still a little fuzzy on the subject of stem cells: The most sought-after stem cells are known as Embryonic stem cells. They are the first cells that are created when an embryo is formed after fertilization. There stem cells have the remarkable potential to develop into all of the different cells that make up the body. It is a true miracle of life. In a sense they can also serve as a sort of repair system for the body, while they can theoretically divide without limit to replenish other damaged cells as long as the person or animal is still alive. When a stem cell divides, each new cell has the potential to either remain a stem cell or become another type of cell with a more specialized function, such as a muscle cell, a red blood cell, or a brain cell.
So how do we get stem cells to use for our medical treatments? This is where the moral and ethical argument begins.
For years, doctors have been transplanting adult stem cells or blood stem cells obtained from bone marrow, when performing bone marrow transplants. But in 1998 the first embryonic stem cells were isolated and started the moral dilemma. Is it ethical and humane to keep human embryos alive in a laboratory to harvest the purest form of stem cells from such embryos? Those with life threatening diseases usually answer yes. While those who believe that they are the custodians of human dignity and morality will voice a definite no.
And so, while strong opposition in the USA to stem cell research and cloning is forcing the US giants to set up operations in emerging economies like South Africa, once again we need to come to terms with the fact that no matter how many organs we successfully grow or transplant from stem cells, we are once again practicing reactionary medicine. We are simply treating the cause but not the symptom. Because the source of all our disease and organ failure and physical deformity is not found in stem cells, but rather in the defects of our DNA.
I would therefore not be too concerned about the stem cell area of medical science but on the progress of gene replacement therapy. When we come to master this area of medicine, we will truly be knocking on the door of the Holy Grail that harbours all secrets of life. Our biggest concerns will then become the philosophy of world religions and the concept of immortality.
Because once we have mastered gene therapy, we will be very close to understanding immortality in our species. What effect will this have on our human behaviour? How will we treat the poor backward nations of the world? Do we have the mental and spiritual ability to deal with immortality? Not by a long shot.
In 'Slave Species of god' I briefly deal with this subject but as we make new discoveries in genetic science I find myself conflicted by all this. And it raises some horrific possibilities. Because if our genome was manipulated and cloned to produce a primitive species, it is quite possible that we have managed to evolve and reactivate certain parts of our DNA but not other crucial parts that would normally evolve in tandem. All this could lead to tragic behavioral results by humankind, not really ready for such high levels of scientific knowledge, while our spiritual side has been stagnating, enslaved by the dogma of world religion and the royal political elite, over the past 13,000 years.
6 comments:
ello all
Thanks for the info Rox, now we all know what an undercover nerd you really are.
But jokes aside, I think the actual question here that calls for our opinions is why is information on these experiments not made public BEFORE they start. Its all good and well that they report their results if the experiment is going good, but why were the general public not informed beforehand? How much other, more dangerous experiments are not taking place right now, and we just don't know about it? In the article the moral dilemma vs the greater good is pointed out very nicely. And as a collective we have shown that we don't appreciate people experimenting on other beings, especially if they don't a choice in the matter. Keeping embryos alive to "milk" them makes me uncomfortable, but if I was dying I would not say no to a drug that would save my life just because once upon a time it was tested on monkeys. Time for me to get in touch with my inner hypocrite I guess. And maybe there is a place for "ignorance is bliss", and there are times when industry and government alike use that against the masses. If you dont' know about it, you can't get upset about it. Makes you wonder how many experiments and research that turned out bad has happened, and we will never know about them. (Anybody got time to look for info on this?)
I think it comes down to the way things have always been done in the past. The great scientists of history never asked for permission, only funding. So yes, maybe the rich do get to decide what research happens and what doesn't because they pick which research to fund. So who you vote for (or didn't vote for in the case of Idi Amin since he became president via military coup, just saying) doesn't really matter since most of the technocraps and collider thingies are paid for by private industry. Should we be monitoring private industries? The latest financial recession points to yes. But does that mean we move to a more socialist/communist way of doing business?
Aliens...hmmm.
It would seem logical that the leaders that we pick to represent our collective needs (i.e. presidents) would be the best choice to represent our planetary interests if aliens were to come to earth. I don't think we should be so negative when describing our species, because we have the capacity to be the worst and the best. The maths all say that it is likely that we are not alone, but also that we are extremely unique. Who doesn't like meeting new people?! I'm sure the aliens will find us delightful. Let's leave the self-loathing for our psychiatric visits, aka mid-day beer session on a monday. Its not constructive, and degrades/demeans any progress that humanity has made thus far.
To my mind the issue is why are the masses not informed? Since knowledge is power, we would have to acknowledge that we would be accomplice to all these things if we were informed. So, if you had a choice, would you rather not know?
Roxan's previous comment:
So, i've been reading the discussions on the biology on premiscuity, and also the one below. It's great that we're trying to discuss issues of value as an alternative to what we saw in a boutique or how much we drank last weekend.
I don't know how or who decides on the weekly topic, but it's important to really consider the topics and how they relate to our everyday lives before we turn it into a week long talk. Hear me out here: Two seemingly thoughtprovoking questions are posed: who decided for the human race and who decided that crazy, life threatening experiments be conducted. ...Is this an a debate or matter of opinion? Do these questions take us a step forward? Can we do this one on our own?
Perhaps some of you are aware of this, but it's worth mentioning that the halide collider aka CERN in Switzerland was mentioned in Dan Brown's book Angels and Demons (oh god, I know, I'm rolling my eyes too, bless dan's heart for his thrills :-)), back in, was it, 2001? i can't recall exactly, and this same Swiss institution was written about in an online national geographic article about 3 years back. See "God Particle", national geo. And that was when it was already near completion. Now, by conflating Thabangs concern for atom collision experiments (which is decades old), and the extinction of the human race, we have to ask ourselves, what do all these weird and wonderful things have in common?
Rox contd....
It's us. Let's take our very own Rainbow Nation as a shining example. Every four years, we advertise, market and drill into the minds of pensioners and party-goers alike that We. Must. Vote. ...Have your say. It's your right. Oh, how blind we are. We chose our leaders. Regardless of who belongs to which party, voters being saboutaged, promises, wage increases, wank, wank. That's besides the point. The point is that society as we know it; civilization as we know it, dismisses itself from taking responsibility for this world. The 'it' here is us. We put humans like Amin, Mao, Obama, amongst others, in a position to make decisions for us. It doesn't matter what our cultural backgrounds are, and who we glorify as leaders. We put in place the people that make decisions so that we simply don't have to. Hu Jintao and other asain leaders have inspired their respective peoples to constructively contribute to the economic, social and public safety in a way never before attempted. They've done so with enthusiasm and success. (My damn internet connection is spazzing out now, but look it up. I do apologise for lack of sources and references). Anyway, my point is, we appoint leaders so that we don't have to take responsibility for ourselves. But we complain when they don't do what we want; when they put us in uncomfortable positions. It's our own fault. Either we stop taking shelter behind our ballots, or shut the hell up. Shouldn't we be our own leaders?
Consider this, in a universe about 20 billion years old, with infinities stretching from inside a black hole to the space between the photons, to the speed of light, to how plants communicate, to the mysteries of our DNA. And here we are, choosing to preoccupy our time with where we'll draw two crossing lines on a square of a page. And who do we think we are assuming that some extra-terrestrial beings would want to make contact with us? This life is not a sci-fi movie. How primitive and arrogant of us to think we could even perceive entities outside the known universe? What if the whole earth was just a scraping on the inside of a cheek? Our perceptions betray us.
Rox contd3....
Thabang, can you be more specific with your second question? As our genes propogate for ensure the best of the best survive, our brains and bodies (someone help me with a word here...?) evolve biologically, psychologically and emotionally. We are more than just curious two-legged creatures (not as intelligent as we'd like to think, though), but with the our inquiring minds, we are at an age where information is omnipresent and accessable... What's the deal with the article on stem cell research? Stem cell research has been around for what, 10 years? 3 years ago, Discovery channel aired a documentary on how nano tech enables us to regrow lost limbs. Now, we are able to print new skin. Almost like a graft. Yes... and place it like a freshly licked bubblegum tattoo over damaged skin tissue. See wired.com. This months issue. And this decades new word? Technocrats. It puts a new spin on leadership vs merit vs qualification. Check it out.
And as far as end of life on this earth goes, what are we actively doing to prolong our most magestic existence? God forbid anything should happen to us. Most of us live our lives like our parents did, and their parents did, or we only pay attention to the things that jump out at us, that seem juxtaposed to our repetative lives. Truth is, atom colliding machines, our quest for longevity, quantum mechanics are the least of our concerns. :) We're still too concerned with our own existence than the health of the planet. No wonder we fear death. My opinion? The earth doesn't need us. The problem? Egos.
I didn't read the article in addition to the text below. Too tired. But the statement: 'WHO GETS TO DECIDE THINGS FOR ALL OR US??? because so far it seems this privilege belongs to rich nations... ' should be readdressed. African nations have suffered at the hands of the leaders THEY CHOOSE to decide for them. Idi Amin, Paul Biya, amongst others, see 'The trouble with Africa, Why Foreign Aid Isn't Working" (i don't know if you'll get online excerpts...?)
Ok, i can't think anymore. Next time, I'll include better references. Good night everyone.
ps Jerusha, I like what you said about promiscuity being so much broader than we think. We have to learn to move away from the paradigms society has on gender relations. Nothing is ever that cut-and-dried.
The human race is ‘animal farm’. Who gets to decide? Those in power.
“all animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others”
Just some points
rox u r so rite the CERN collider has been around foreva. and just by the by. it may be 1 of the biggest but there r quite a few colliders around. iThemba labs in CT has 1. yes its almost in ur backyard. its used to generate the isotopes used in chemotherapy for cancer. and this is not a secret. And its not a bad thing either.
re. experiemnts that have gone rong. just a few yrs back a antiinflammitory drug clinical trial 'went wrong' where trial participants started swelling all over and trial was scrapped. this is actually not very common occurance.
re. the point the 'we' choose the leaders that make the descions. i dnt agree completely. look at countries like myanmar and N korea. And we not talking about yrs ago. This is today.
Access to experiment info: there is a hell of a lot of experiments going on, im not sure how every1 will be kept informed. though usually if u have a look at univeristy or institution websites the current activity is openly available. It is there. But who has the time to read up on everything…
Who gets to decide on experiments/studies? an ethics board and advocates where applicable: all studies which may be a risk to an animal/human/etc's wellbeing is reviewd by a group of ppl selected and trained on ethics. and they say yay or nay. but at the say time ppl who have an avid interest in certain experimnt or part of a grp that advocates against it have the power to change the ethics group opinion. eg. ths SA microbicide trials.
But still yes, it is not the man on the street who decide.
Post a Comment