Thoth Aw C'mon
Mongoose
Aw C'mon!... :shock: See the article below...
No one tell Chuck Heston! "Get your hands off me, you damn dirty ape-like humanoid creature of indeterminate moral standing!"
While certainly one hopes for success in such research of this dreadful disease, that Chuck Heston is currently suffering from ironically, you never know what unintended consequences can arise given enough time..
Certainly gotta hope they don't have that 3d8+9 damage Crush attack like they do in the Conan RPG! :wink:
Most of all, I hope this doesnt lead to more Marky Mark Planet of the Apes flicks...
Experts Ponder Ethics of Ape Brain Research
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter
http://www.evitamins.com/news.asp?fu4i=33jde8&f4rws=3hgg56ge7&id=526841&j5gik=39ddt9d
THURSDAY, July 14 (HealthDay News) -- Imagine this
scenario: Sometime in the not-too-distant future,
scientists decide to test a potentially lifesaving
treatment for Alzheimer's disease in a chimpanzee. The
treatment involves the transplant of human neural stem
cells into the ape's brain.
As their experiment progresses, the researchers notice
the chimpanzee is changing in ways they never expected
-- displaying signs of a much richer emotional and
intellectual life as the transplanted human cells take
root.
The scientists begin to feel uneasy about continuing
their research. Has the animal gained an inner life that
now makes her use in medical experiments morally wrong?
Is this even possible?
Perhaps, concludes a special panel of ethicists, legal
experts and scientists whose report on the ethics of
neural stem cell research in non-human primates appears
in the July 15 issue of Science.
"There was consensus on the view that there was indeed
something to worry about. Ethically speaking, we cannot
rule this possibility out," said panel member Mark
Greene, an assistant professor of philosophy (and former
veterinary surgeon) at the University of Delaware.
Greene and the other experts stressed that no
experiments have as yet triggered this kind of shift in
the moral ground between animal and human. However,
based on evidence from the cell biologists,
neuroscientists and primatologists taking part in the
discussion, the panel agreed that the potential effects
of human neural stem cell transplants in primate brains
remains largely unknown.
Neural stem cells are progenitor cells that can grow
into any number of brain cell types. Laboratories around
the world are already hard at work investigating whether
these cells might be used to re-grow brain cells lost to
Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other neurodegenerative
illnesses.
Because they are the nearest relatives to humans, other
primates are a logical choice for neural stem cell
research.
"But the problem is that we can't rule out the
possibility that engrafting human neural stem cells into
a non-human primate would alter the emotional or
cognitive life of the creature," said panel member Ruth
Faden, director of the Berman Bioethics Institute at
Johns Hopkins University.
This type of neurological change might also alter the
animal's "moral status," which Faden defined as "the
extent to which something is entitled to moral
protection and respect."
It's easy to draw moral lines in the sand between humans
and stones, insects and (for many people) rats. But
things get tricky when higher-level animals are
involved. The panelists decided to set aside the larger
moral problem of whether animal experimentation itself
is moral, and concentrated instead on this new question,
borne of a new technology.
"A lot of people believe that humans are morally
special, just by virtue of being human," Greene said.
But he pointed out that we often give moral equivalency
to other species -- at least fictional ones. "Look at
science fiction, Star Trek -- you'll see all the time
encounters with other species with rich mental lives,
and we have no problem according them humanlike moral
status."
So, real-life dilemmas could arise if scientific
tinkering brought primates closer to "humanlike" moral
status, he said. Such a change might be difficult to
spot. "It's certainly not going to be talking," Greene
said. "It might be that we suspect the animal's social
needs have somehow changed, something like that."
The panelists agreed that scientists still understand
very little about the inner lives of even well-studied
primates like chimps or gorillas, so gauging any
cognitive or emotional change would be tough. "But just
because that change is subtle doesn't mean it's morally
ignorable," Greene said.
While the group did not expect to reach a consensus on
whether or not human neural stem cell transplants in
non-human primates was morally correct, they were able
to agree on rough guidelines that might help researchers
avoid ethical quandaries.
Ideally, very small amounts of human neural stem cells,
transplanted into the brains of fully grown, lower-order
primates (i.e., not great apes) probably pose the least
risk of cognitive enhancement approaching the morally
ambiguous, they said.
"At the other end of the spectrum, if we are talking
about an embryonic or fetal chimpanzee or bonobo, or
some other great ape that's still developing, we can't
rule out the possibility," Faden said. "Those human
neural cells might integrate into the construction and
function of the animal's brain, altering its
experience."
She stressed that the panel's work was not about coming
to any certainties on this issue, but simply to start
discussion and to alert researchers that changes in an
animal's "moral status" could potentially occur.
In the end, Faden said, researchers simply need to learn
much more about man's closest evolutionary cousins
before any definite recommendations can be made.
"This is an extraordinary puzzle," Faden said. "How can
we possibly know what the inner life of another species
is when we aren't privileged to the inner life of even
our fellow humans? With other species, we can't even ask
the simple question 'How do you feel?' "
More information
For an insight into how primates aid scientific
research, head to the Yerkes National Primate Research
Center.
SOURCES: Mark Greene, Ph.D., assistant professor,
philosophy, University of Delaware, Newark; Ruth Faden,
Ph.D., director, Berman Bioethics Institute, Johns
Hopkins University, Baltimore; July 15, 2005, Science
Copyright © 2005 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved.
No one tell Chuck Heston! "Get your hands off me, you damn dirty ape-like humanoid creature of indeterminate moral standing!"
While certainly one hopes for success in such research of this dreadful disease, that Chuck Heston is currently suffering from ironically, you never know what unintended consequences can arise given enough time..
Certainly gotta hope they don't have that 3d8+9 damage Crush attack like they do in the Conan RPG! :wink:
Most of all, I hope this doesnt lead to more Marky Mark Planet of the Apes flicks...
Experts Ponder Ethics of Ape Brain Research
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter
http://www.evitamins.com/news.asp?fu4i=33jde8&f4rws=3hgg56ge7&id=526841&j5gik=39ddt9d
THURSDAY, July 14 (HealthDay News) -- Imagine this
scenario: Sometime in the not-too-distant future,
scientists decide to test a potentially lifesaving
treatment for Alzheimer's disease in a chimpanzee. The
treatment involves the transplant of human neural stem
cells into the ape's brain.
As their experiment progresses, the researchers notice
the chimpanzee is changing in ways they never expected
-- displaying signs of a much richer emotional and
intellectual life as the transplanted human cells take
root.
The scientists begin to feel uneasy about continuing
their research. Has the animal gained an inner life that
now makes her use in medical experiments morally wrong?
Is this even possible?
Perhaps, concludes a special panel of ethicists, legal
experts and scientists whose report on the ethics of
neural stem cell research in non-human primates appears
in the July 15 issue of Science.
"There was consensus on the view that there was indeed
something to worry about. Ethically speaking, we cannot
rule this possibility out," said panel member Mark
Greene, an assistant professor of philosophy (and former
veterinary surgeon) at the University of Delaware.
Greene and the other experts stressed that no
experiments have as yet triggered this kind of shift in
the moral ground between animal and human. However,
based on evidence from the cell biologists,
neuroscientists and primatologists taking part in the
discussion, the panel agreed that the potential effects
of human neural stem cell transplants in primate brains
remains largely unknown.
Neural stem cells are progenitor cells that can grow
into any number of brain cell types. Laboratories around
the world are already hard at work investigating whether
these cells might be used to re-grow brain cells lost to
Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other neurodegenerative
illnesses.
Because they are the nearest relatives to humans, other
primates are a logical choice for neural stem cell
research.
"But the problem is that we can't rule out the
possibility that engrafting human neural stem cells into
a non-human primate would alter the emotional or
cognitive life of the creature," said panel member Ruth
Faden, director of the Berman Bioethics Institute at
Johns Hopkins University.
This type of neurological change might also alter the
animal's "moral status," which Faden defined as "the
extent to which something is entitled to moral
protection and respect."
It's easy to draw moral lines in the sand between humans
and stones, insects and (for many people) rats. But
things get tricky when higher-level animals are
involved. The panelists decided to set aside the larger
moral problem of whether animal experimentation itself
is moral, and concentrated instead on this new question,
borne of a new technology.
"A lot of people believe that humans are morally
special, just by virtue of being human," Greene said.
But he pointed out that we often give moral equivalency
to other species -- at least fictional ones. "Look at
science fiction, Star Trek -- you'll see all the time
encounters with other species with rich mental lives,
and we have no problem according them humanlike moral
status."
So, real-life dilemmas could arise if scientific
tinkering brought primates closer to "humanlike" moral
status, he said. Such a change might be difficult to
spot. "It's certainly not going to be talking," Greene
said. "It might be that we suspect the animal's social
needs have somehow changed, something like that."
The panelists agreed that scientists still understand
very little about the inner lives of even well-studied
primates like chimps or gorillas, so gauging any
cognitive or emotional change would be tough. "But just
because that change is subtle doesn't mean it's morally
ignorable," Greene said.
While the group did not expect to reach a consensus on
whether or not human neural stem cell transplants in
non-human primates was morally correct, they were able
to agree on rough guidelines that might help researchers
avoid ethical quandaries.
Ideally, very small amounts of human neural stem cells,
transplanted into the brains of fully grown, lower-order
primates (i.e., not great apes) probably pose the least
risk of cognitive enhancement approaching the morally
ambiguous, they said.
"At the other end of the spectrum, if we are talking
about an embryonic or fetal chimpanzee or bonobo, or
some other great ape that's still developing, we can't
rule out the possibility," Faden said. "Those human
neural cells might integrate into the construction and
function of the animal's brain, altering its
experience."
She stressed that the panel's work was not about coming
to any certainties on this issue, but simply to start
discussion and to alert researchers that changes in an
animal's "moral status" could potentially occur.
In the end, Faden said, researchers simply need to learn
much more about man's closest evolutionary cousins
before any definite recommendations can be made.
"This is an extraordinary puzzle," Faden said. "How can
we possibly know what the inner life of another species
is when we aren't privileged to the inner life of even
our fellow humans? With other species, we can't even ask
the simple question 'How do you feel?' "
More information
For an insight into how primates aid scientific
research, head to the Yerkes National Primate Research
Center.
SOURCES: Mark Greene, Ph.D., assistant professor,
philosophy, University of Delaware, Newark; Ruth Faden,
Ph.D., director, Berman Bioethics Institute, Johns
Hopkins University, Baltimore; July 15, 2005, Science
Copyright © 2005 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved.
