> Larry wrote:
> From materials and equipment, there is a very large amount of government
> oversight. So much so that I very much doubt that a company could get away
> with anything significantly unethical
That doesn't pass the sniff test.
I guess I have a hard time believing that NatalCorp i
>Did you do the experimentation or were you a subject of the experiments? ;)
>
Both. Nothing we did with the participants were not test out on ourselves. The
hypnotic pain control methods, sticking your hand in ice water for a minute
(we'd only let participants go for about 20 seconds), and the
>> Larry wrote:
>> What I want can be expressed here:
>> http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/index.html
>>
>
>I'm not at all familiar with this, but what's to stop a privately
>funded company from doing whatever the hell it wants? Genentech, for
>example.
>
>I mean legal or no they will do what th
Did you do the experimentation or were you a subject of the experiments? ;)
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Larry Lyons wrote:
>
> >> You're not at all familiar with how research is done these days are you.
> I
> >> don't have the time nor the inclination to teach you something you
> really
>
>> You're not at all familiar with how research is done these days are you. I
>> don't have the time nor the inclination to teach you something you really
>> should know if you're going to be bloviating about this. I suggest you start
>> at the NIH site and continue from there. I would also do a g
>As always, you read only want you believe beforehand. I have been quite
>clear for years that I am not religious and religion has no place in
>government or regulation of any sort.
>
>What you totally fail to understand, it seems, is that ethics are founded in
>morals. Without basic moral guideli
All laws contain some form of moral or ethical (and by extension moral)
judgment, whether good or bad. But that doesn't mean all laws are socialist.
Take the FDA. They enforce strict rules on food products, rules based on
ethical and moral judgments about food safety. Is the FDA socialist? I don't
> RoMunn wrote:
>
> no, it's democratic. it's not an economic problem, it's a political problem.
>> Uhhh ... isn't that a little socialist?
>
So when the government taxes us, and uses those funds to ensure moral
oversight, you're saying that's not socialist?
Because hopefully you can see wh
no, it's democratic. it's not an economic problem, it's a political problem.
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Gruss wrote:
>
> > RoMunn wrote:
> >
> > I'm not saying I have the right answer. What I know for sure is that
> giving
> > science free reign without any thought to ethical or moral c
> RoMunn wrote:
>
> I'm not saying I have the right answer. What I know for sure is that giving
> science free reign without any thought to ethical or moral considerations is
> an invitation to unthinkable evil in the name of science. If we can all
> agree that there needs to be some limit somewhe
I'm not saying I have the right answer. What I know for sure is that giving
science free reign without any thought to ethical or moral considerations is
an invitation to unthinkable evil in the name of science. If we can all
agree that there needs to be some limit somewhere on what we allow scienc
> RoMunn wrote:
> proceed. Your ranting about religion and morality is no argument at all,
> just a child whining that they want their own way.
>
+1
~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release t
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 8:50 AM, Larry Lyons wrote:
>
> >What do you want? More Dr Mengeles? More Tuskegees?
> >
> >Someone has to watch them, because history has shown some will go WAY too
> >far for research.
>
> What I want can be expressed here:
> http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/index.html
> Like the guy or not, you have to admit that he presents a clear argument
> about why science alone should never govern research.
yeah... Org.Religion has always been so very much about the
advancement of Science... we should put clergy in charge of
everything!
/sarcasm
> How anyone as sophist
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Larry Lyons wrote:
> You're not at all familiar with how research is done these days are you. I
> don't have the time nor the inclination to teach you something you really
> should know if you're going to be bloviating about this. I suggest you start
> at the NI
Dammit Robert and Gruss...look what you guys did with your recent 'I agree'
antics...I agree with Larry on this one.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Larry Lyons wrote:
>
> >> Aside from the fact that Charles Krauthammeris a shill for the neocons,
> >> just examine your statement there.
> >
>
> Larry wrote:
> What I want can be expressed here:
> http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/index.html
>
I'm not at all familiar with this, but what's to stop a privately
funded company from doing whatever the hell it wants? Genentech, for
example.
I mean legal or no they will do what they want, b
>What do you want? More Dr Mengeles? More Tuskegees?
>
>Someone has to watch them, because history has shown some will go WAY too
>far for research.
What I want can be expressed here: http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/index.html
What I do not think should be the case are religious/morals approva
>> Aside from the fact that Charles Krauthammeris a shill for the neocons,
>> just examine your statement there.
>
>
>Then he's a pretty shitty shill, if he endorses stem cell research.
>
>
>> It is so mind boggling gob smacking so far out there that its in orbit.
>> What do you want, correct mora
> ZapMan wrote:
>
> It's interesting to me that people are fine with creating embryo's in
> the quest for creating a life, even if some of those fertilized
> embryo's are going to be destroyed later on. Yet, people are not fine
> with creating embryo's for the sake of research.
Yeah, that's my p
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Larry Lyons wrote:
> Aside from the fact that Charles Krauthammeris a shill for the neocons,
> just examine your statement there.
Then he's a pretty shitty shill, if he endorses stem cell research.
> It is so mind boggling gob smacking so far out there that i
It's interesting to me that people are fine with creating embryo's in
the quest for creating a life, even if some of those fertilized
embryo's are going to be destroyed later on. Yet, people are not fine
with creating embryo's for the sake of research. It's the same end
for the majority
What do you want? More Dr Mengeles? More Tuskegees?
Someone has to watch them, because history has shown some will go WAY too
far for research.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Larry Lyons wrote:
>
> >Like the guy or not, you have to admit that he presents a clear argument
> >about why scien
>> RoMunn wrote:
>> I will note in advance that I am in favor of stem cell research (I worked
>> for a biotech company that does it, after all), but I am totally opposed to
>> the idea of creating embryos solely for the purpose of research.
>>
>
>Yeah but that's extreme in the other direction.
>
>
>Like the guy or not, you have to admit that he presents a clear argument
>about why science alone should never govern research.
Aside from the fact that Charles Krauthammeris a shill for the neocons, just
examine your statement there. It is so mind boggling gob smacking so far out
there that i
Decent arguments, not without merit. I'm a huge stem cell supporter, and
would also support embryo creation solely for the harvesting of stem
cellsbut I would welcome discussion on limits to this practice.very
tight regulation of some kind.
I also hope that research on adult stem cells, w
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Gruss wrote:
>
> For example, are the "embryos" created for couples that can't have
> babies "research"? If not, why not? And if we're going to say
> creation of THOSE is ok, why not for other types of "research"? And
> what about the ones that are already crea
> RoMunn wrote:
> I will note in advance that I am in favor of stem cell research (I worked
> for a biotech company that does it, after all), but I am totally opposed to
> the idea of creating embryos solely for the purpose of research.
>
Yeah but that's extreme in the other direction.
While the
Like the guy or not, you have to admit that he presents a clear argument
about why science alone should never govern research.
I will note in advance that I am in favor of stem cell research (I worked
for a biotech company that does it, after all), but I am totally opposed to
the idea of creating
29 matches
Mail list logo
