Ethics

If there were to be a procedure that allowed a person to transfer their brain to a new body how would one be able to know if the original person died during the swap? Would there be a way to tell? Would we even care? Assuming all brain function transfered and the body worked the same as before, just no actual person inside.

Many people have their cats declawed and spayed/nuetered (including my family). This sparked a thought: Is declawing comparable to getting angry at a human for scratching you and taking their fingernails out? I mean, it's a cat, but do cats have this right? Or are they lower than us? Does our furniture have greater rights than our cats? () Same with neutering or spaying. I think they should be declawed, but I really couldn't defend that position. I'd like to see what you know.

I recently saw "The Island," and just wanted to know what opinions other people have of it.

Not sure if its here or politics that is the best home, but I was thinking - why don't we have tax breaks for being an organ donor? Some countries have an "opt-out" policy, but I am mixed on that solution to the need for more donors. I am dead set against any "free market" solutions but I am curious what other people think.

Would it be ethical to create a human chimp hybrid, if it could be done even with a bit of genetic tweaking to the gametes of one or the other? If this resulted in offspring, what rights should the offspring have? how would this impact the rights of primates? Could this be an important experiment to clarify the rights of our closest relatives in the animal world? your opinions please.....

I got this college freshman textbook called "Fundementals of Biology" from 1928 that my uncle found somehwere. Needless to say I was a bit surprized at the presentation of Eugenics as a science...something I believe was shunned after Hitler and WWII. Anyway, I just wanted to share a bit of it and see what you guys think I, myself, was most shocked at the use of "normal persons" as if to say that "defectives" are a different species.

http://abortionclinicdays.blogs.com/

What are everybody's views on stimulants (such as Ritalin and Adderall, but not limited to) prescribed for AD/HD? I few topics I'm interested in: Stimulants prescribed for school-age children Teachers pushing stimulants on students Stimulants prescribed for adult ADD

I've started this thread partly so I can check my own understanding of the theories, but also in the hope it will be useful and informative to others. There are four main principles in ethical decision making: The Principle of Autonomy - in certain areas, an individual has the right to be self-governing The Principle of Beneficence - promote well-being or benefit The Principle of Non-maleficence - do no harm The Principle of Justice - equals ought to be considered equally (perhaps more important in looking at allocation of resources) There are two main ethical theories: consequentialism and deontologism. Consequentialism This theory is concerned with o…

Why must we keep alive the minds of those who are nothing more than shells? Vegetative individuals are more of an ethical weight on the back of America than an ethical balance! And while we are at it, why must the mentally retarded stay on this earth? They are a burden to society; we do not know how to treat them, and so we try to avoid them. Those few who live with and around them feel pity and shame. We will only reach a peaceful equilibrium, often called by the name "Utopia", if we correct these imbalances in the world.

I'm not sure if any else has noticed this, but lately more and more companies are rising and raking in huge profits for medical services. Thus resulting in the term "medical-industrial complex". However, some ethical question arises from this: #1. Should drug companies be allowed to raise the cost of the drugs to whatever they want? Even say millions of people depend on the drug? #2. These drug companies are essentially the only thing keeping millions of people alive, should they really be allowed to decide who lives and who doesn't based on socioeconomic factors? #3. Can a company refuse the release of say a cure for cancer simply because it wants to hold o…

I was just wondering if members thought it was sensible to offer this therapy. Is it not legally the woman's choice? It's not as if she is a victim. Did she not bring it upon herself? I was just fishing for opinions, and I may just learn something new! Thanks for the input.

Please take a look at the following link... http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C10117%2C15891104-13762%2C00.html Why do they want to know if human brain cells will make a monkey self aware ? I can't really see the advantages in the experiment other than to make PG Tips rethink their ad campaign. What do you think, is this immoral, or can anyone see the benefits of this type of experiment outweighing the ethical implications ?

closed

I know I said I was going to leave, but I figured this topic would be good for discussing. I got the article from CNN.com I want to know how you guys feel about this. I don't want to know if you're pro-choice or not, I want to know how you feel about someones right to make a choice being taken away? Granted, partial birth abortions are inhumane, I still believe it's a her body her right her choice type of thing. “the right to life cannot be granted or denied by government.” Is what Bush declared as signing the bill. Now correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the banning of partial birth abortions granting the right to life by the government? I understa…

what do you think of cloning, we know the purposes, uses, and how it could be done, but is it really ethically right? do people have the right to do it? what if something goes wrong? im not talking about the actual law in each country, what im talking about is the basics ethics, the moral law, not the country's law... what do you think?

The End of Pregnancy by Jeremy Rifkin Within a generation there will probably be mass use of artificial wombs to grow babies. "The womb is a dark and dangerous place,a hazardous environment," wrote the late Joseph Fletcher, professor of medical ethics at the University of Virginia School of Medicine. These words have haunted me over the years and have come back to me again in recent weeks, with talk of the imminent prospect of cloning a human being and using embryonic stem cells to create specific body parts to cure diseases. As shocking as these developments have been, there is still another biological bombshell waiting in the wings - and this one provid…

Oxytocin is known to be a strong and powerful compound, which is related to positive interpersonal relationships, mating, and child rearing. It is reduced when people have a negative emotional experience, think about someone or something they don't like, and when people are afraid. Essentially, it is the hormone(also coupled with vasopressin) of love and relationships. It also forms very strong positive emotional experiences. There is more to this but that's the jist. Therefore, would it be wrong to spray oneself with a rather large quantity, so that the fumes would disseminate into the air and intoxicate people, making the people like you, a whole lot more. …

I wonder will we ever catch up to our European brothers on certain issues. Doesn't look like it to me. http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/25/stem.cells.ap/index.html

What are your views on biomedicine vs. cybernetics.

According to evolutionary theory, individuals in a society are weeded out if they possess an atribute that makes them less likely to survive and reproduce. When we (humans) use medicine, I believe we are weakening the human race by stopping evolution from taking place. If we didnt use medicine then people with inhibiting conditions would gradually die out. if we didnt make glasses then we wouldnt have very many people with really bad eyes because if you cant see you cant get by in our daily world. is the human race permenantly halting its own progress? are we forcing ourselves to remain imperfect forever? will other races eventually overcome us since we are the only ones …

From here Now that can't be a good thing.

I was looking at a jar of hazelnut flavored Coffeemate in the grocery that said "Sugar Free". However, it had 30 calories per tablespoon, (5 gms) - 2.5 of fat, and 2.0 carbohydrate, and 0 grams of sugars. However, when you read the list of ingredients, the 2nd item on the list, after palm kernal oil, is "corn syrup solids". How come "corn syrup solids" don't have to be classified as sugar? My assistant's father is diabetic, and he was sent to special nutritional counciling to teach him how to read the labels to detect hidden sugar. What about the diabetics that didn't get that counciling? I know that some things have natural sugar, so I can buy labeling it …

I am curious as to others feel about this issue; please explain your reasoning.

Think about all that diseases do for us they make us sick cost us huge medical insureance premiums and sometimes kill us. So I can see why people normaly asociate disease with bad, that is why we try to cure and and wipe any little spec we see becasue it might have germs on it. But really are germs all that bad? No they are not and if you want to find out why come on in