Yahble, HIT, Bubblecon, BIZDEV!, Solid State

I use jargon. Here is some of it:

Yahble

Yet Another Huge Binder of LegalesE

These are binders of documentation, policy, plans, and law that you can’t throw out Or Else, but neither you nor anyone else ever reads, and generally are entirely worthless in practice despite being Very Important in theory.

Yahbles collect in the system like lead or mercury. Lovingly, they are passed along the foodchain until everybody dies of heavy metal toxicity induced bureaucratic insanity.

Government agencies and consultants love to make Yahbles. When you force a pile of hot, sweaty consultants into a small, closed space overnight, expect a fresh steaming new Yahble in the morning, there! revealed to thee yonder in the glaring flouresent din of 7:48AM upon ye humble coffee-stained hard white plasix conference table.

It’s also understood that Yahbles are gradually churned into existance from the bowels of The Back Office, but like invention of a new race or ethnicity, nobody has ever witnessed the complete Yahble evolutionary process of a generally accepted Yahble outside of an artifically imposed environment.

HIT

Health Information Technology

This is a common industry term in health-related information technology. In practice, it refers to all the information transmission and processing generally associated with “The Health Care Industry” that doesn’t really work well or that isn’t well understood. Stuff that actually works is just called by its real name, or generally: “software.” Note: HIT does make for cool-sounding portmanteau like “HITman” and “HITbox.”

For example:

Mozilla Firefox web browser: firefox, or just “the browser”

Command-Response terminal simulation system to display text and pictures from a server on another machine over a network that only runs on Windows XP and requires the installation of several vendor-specific plug-ins: HIT

===

Linux: linux, or just “the server”

???: HIT

===

email: email

web 2.o patient physician medical communication cloud computing enterprise suite: HIT

Bubblecon

Internet bubble convention

Bubblecon is some marketing convention for some new hyped technology or industry. Attending bubblecons is a popular means by which one may accumulate a significant collection of business cards titled “CEO,” “Founder,” and “President” —and sometimes, all three at once!

Fact: nobody has ever gotten funded because they attended a bubblecon. I did get laid, though. So YES: in my rigorous scientific sampling of exactly myself, you are more likely to get LAID by a GIRL at a NEW TECHNOLOGY BUSINESS CONVENTION than you are to get your tech startup funded with odds of 1/0 == infinity %. That’s science.

BIZDEV!

Business Development, often predicated by “Vice President” (VPBIZDEV!)

BIZDEV! is always appended with an exclaimation point.

BIZDEV!s love bubblecons because they are concrete and documented evidence of attendance at a work-related events. That’s because documented attendance means work, which is why they are the CEO and visionary entrepreneur, and definitely not bullshit, which is why they are not delusionary aging jock losers that couldn’t cut it at a regular sales job. This Very Important Job is colloquially known as “networking,”and it is the Most Important Job at all startup companies. Also, see “ideas” and “twitter.”

Solid State

in a HIT context, it means a unit of health care organization that is maximally automated with the utmost elegance and efficiency. It is the platonic ideal of how “things should work”. Generally, see Solid State.

You Can’t Solve Problems By Making It Illegal To Have The Problem

The fashion in health care’s “policy sphere” is to fix logistical problems by making having the problem itself illegal. That’s… not going to work. Consider, from Forbes: “How Safe Are Your Medical Records?”

Notification laws are slowly changing as part of the stimulus bill, which has mandated new accounting rules. Physicians will now be required to track disclosures of a patient’s medical information and disclose security breaches in some cases. The new rules won’t go into effect until 2014.

Really. So, if problem is a policy lapse due to an bloated, unresponsive, overloaded health care bureaucracy, then the solution is to force all medical providers to keep Yet Another Huge Binder of Legalese (Yes, the dreaded Yahble) for which you are Legally Liable to Keep A Copy In Your Office At All Times

Genius! I’ll just organize another meeting and invent another acronym. That will be ten million dollars to my Health Care Information Technology consulting firm, please. (Unless, of course, you don’t mind being declared a Federally Deficient Medical Provider. Can you really afford that legal liability? Oh, by the way, we noted in our report that your hospital has a ten million dollar budget discrepancy this year. We advise a hiring freeze in IT, investment in a clock-punch payroll system for physicians, and cuts in “loss-leading” non-surgical, non-specialist departments like primary, preventative, and hospice care.)

Listen: it’s silly to make things that are already illegaldouble illegal.” For example, it’s already clearly against “company policy” to steal cash from the cash register at a medical office —not to mention illegal. There’s no need to Really Really say so in a Yahble. That’s true for cash; that’s true for medical records.

It was illegal in Soviet Union to be inefficient, too. That didn’t make their institutions more productive. That just gave anybody an excuse to prosecute political and economic deviants because, hey, there’s policy for everything. Everybody’s already criminal. We just haven’t gotten around to prosecuting you yet —and do you really want to fight this battle? (ref: U.S. intellectual property law.  ever been accused of “trademark” or “patent” infringement? you’d understand)

June 11th At Westport, CT: Federal Red Flags, HIPAA Security Rules and Fraud Prevention

Josh and I will be attending Fairfield County Medical Association’s “Federal Red Flags, HIPAA Security Rules and Fraud Prevention”  presented by the by Kenneth C. Citarella at Tiburon Restaurant at 333 Wilton Road, Westport, CT 06880.

We’ll be traveling up from New York City, so if you’re in the area and want to hack health care, this guy would probably know something about doing that, so email us and tag along. I’m a member of Fairfield County Medical Association, so the cost is $50.

Event Registration Fax Form (pdf)

Do not learn Dvorak!

Please excuse this interruption for this important news bulletin:

Do not learn Dvorak!

Deep in the tomes of Ancient Geek from beyond Last Thursday, it is rumored to be written that the True Geek shall achieve divine productivity through careful dedication to the art of Dvorak Typing. Type faster with less stress! Dvorak: the rational keyboard —not that abominable scrabble-bag QWERTY layout that The Man grinds into garrulous school children to Keep The Good Word Down.

These are LIES.

I learned Dvorak touchtyping three years ago. It is true: it is a bit less stressful to type in Dvorak than QWERTY.

The problem: all computers and applications are designed for QWERTY. (enjoy trying to use emacs or vim on a QWERTY lettered keyboard reconfigured to type Dvorak. I did learn Dvorak emacs —what a waste of my life)

So, finally, before it was Too Late, I switched back from Dvorak to QWERTY when I converted to OS X with the purchase of a new MacBook last month.

Listen: I have been hamstrung for weeks because I can’t type fluently. You do NOT want to scramble your touchtyping mental wiring during an important project. You will need to dedicate hours each day carefully retraining your fingers. You will not have this time because you are already behind because you’re unable to type your work efficiently. This is bad.

There is one time to learn a keyboard layout: school. Unless you have nothing better to do than practice typing an hour each day —precisely the description of an elementary school typing class— DO NOT DISTURB YOUR TYPING MUSCLE MEMORY!

However, I do strongly recommend occasional typing drills to keep your typing skills sharp. I use this flash drill. The keyboard is the human connection to cyberspace. Don’t get left behind because you’re too lazy to type well.

Genetic Engineering Ethics

Genetic Engineering Ethics

Technology is a double-edged sword and hence needs to be handled with responsibility. Genetic engineering is nothing but the technology by means of which genetic material is scientifically engineered to replicate the original genetic material in living organism be it plants, animals or even human beings. Genetic engineering involves creation of recombinant DNA by cutting up DNA molecules and splicing together fragments from similar or dissimilar organisms.

Genetic engineering has been put to use in several fields. Transgenic plants, pest-resistant plants were created which helped to increase the quantity as well as quality of food crops, which only meant increased food supply for the needy. Scientists also found out a way to alter somatic cells and hence modify the genetic make up of people to cure certain diseases or ailments. Thus, the advancements in the field of genetic engineering are considered to be positive developments. However, there are certain issues associated with this field that make us think whether the practice of genetic engineering can be considered as valid and harmless on an ethical scale.

Genetic engineering helps to create transgenic plants, which are nothing but a cross of different species of plants. Often these sort of medications or engineering techniques are carried out in order to improve the quantity and the quality if the yield. However the creation of genetically engineered plants means creation of a different species of plants altogether. In addition to this several questions have also been raised about the ill effects of creating genetically engineered plants.

First and foremost it has been observed that genetically engineered plants, which were made pest-resistant, also created damage to several other insects. Hence while creating insect-resistant plant varieties, care should be taken that it doesn’t drive the entire species of that insect or other insects towards extinction. Also, there exists a possibility that insects can develop resistance to that pesticide element in the plant and hence pose increased danger.

The biggest ethical issue in genetic engineering is about the concern over creating living creatures out of genetic material. Human cloning or even crossing animal and human genes to create living creatures will lead to the emergence of a different type of creatures. There can be several unethical things that can happen like creation of living organisms and using them as labor or slaves. Thus care has to be taken about who could use these technological advances, and what are the unethical threats, which need to be prevented.

Besides this, one major ethical issue that a majority of people have cited in this reference is that the use of genetic engineering for creation of life forms is similar to ‘playing God’ and taking control of creation and destruction of life on earth. While on one hand, the ability of genetic engineering to cure diseases and health conditions is a great benefit, the possibilities of its misuse are plenty.

Any new technology has its set of advantages and disadvantages. However you cannot proscribe a beneficial technology because of the possible misuse. Saying no to genetic engineering would be like refusing to log on to the Internet because you are afraid your email account might get hacked. The simple solution is to use the technology with great caution. Technology is never inherently good or bad; it is the intentions of the people who use it.

Genetic Engineering Ethics

Human Genetic Engineering – Background

Human Genetic EngineeringResearchers are currently trying to map out and assign genes to different body functions and diseases. Once the genes responsible for a disease are found, theoretically gene therapy should be able to permanently cure the disease. Interactions between genes and gene regulators are complex and many of these interactions are currently unknown.Human Genetic Engineering

Human Genetic Engineering – History

Human Genetic EngineeringThe first gene therapy trials on humans began in 1990 on patients with Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID). In 2000, the first gene therapy "success" resulted in SCID patients with a functional immune system. These trials were stopped when it was discovered that two of ten patients in one trial had developed leukemia resulting from the insertion of the gene-carrying

Human Genetic Engineering – Methods

Human Genetic EngineeringSomaticSomatic genetic engineering involves adding genes to cells other than egg or sperm cells. For example, if a person had a disease caused by a defective gene, a healthy gene could be added to the affected cells to treat the disorder. As of now, this is likely to take the form of gene therapy. The distinguishing characteristic of somatic engineering is that it is

Human Genetic Engineering – Uses

Human Genetic Engineering

There are two types of human genetic engineering, positive and negative. The former enhances humans and the latter removes genetic disorders.

Negative genetic engineering

When treating problems that arise from genetic disorder, one solution is gene therapy, also known as negative genetic engineering. A genetic disorder is a condition caused by the genetic code of

Human Genetic Engineering – Controversy

Human Genetic EngineeringEthicsThe genetic engineering of humans has raised many controversial ethical issues. With the release of the 1997 cult film Gattaca, human genetic engineering has been widely debated. While negative genetic engineering (gene therapy) does indeed raise a debate, the use of genetic engineering for human enhancement arouses the strongest feelings on both sides.Genetic

Human Genetic Engineering – In popular culture

Human Genetic EngineeringMobile Suit Gundam SEED (anime): Set in a world in which genetically modified humans, termed 'Coordinators', have been ostracized and isolated from unmodified humans, termed 'Naturals'. Due to extreme differences in mental and physical abilities between the two groups, racial, economic, and political issues have arisen, culminating in war. Gundam Seed addresses such

Human genetic engineering – An Introduction

Human genetic engineering is the modification of an individual's genotype with the aim of choosing the phenotype of a newborn or changing the existing phenotype of a child or adult. It holds the promise of curing genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis and increasing the immunity of people to viruses. It is speculated that genetic engineering could be used to change physical appearance, metabolism,

Human Genetic Engineering – A Very Hot Issue!

Human Genetic Engineering - A Hot Issue!Human genetic engineering is a hot topic in the legislative and executive branches of the U.S. government. Time will tell how committed the United States will be regarding the absolute ban on human cloning.Human Genetic Engineering - Position of the U.S. GovernmentHuman genetic engineering has made its way to Capitol Hill. On July 31, 2001, the House of

What are the risks of genetic engineering in humans? (human genetic engineering)

Human Genetic EngineeringIntentional germline genetic engineering in humans where the DNA changes will be inherited by successive generations is by far the biggest and most profound risk in genetic engineering. The "Center for Genetics and Society" states it this way. "We are fast approaching arguably the most consequential technological threshold in all of human history: the ability to alter the

What are the benefits of human genetic engineering? (human genetic engineering)

Human Genetic EngineeringThe benefits of human genetic engineering can be found in the headlines nearly every day. With the successful cloning of mammals and the completion of the Human Genome Project, scientists all over the world are aggressively researching the many different facets of human genetic engineering. These continuing breakthroughs have allowed science to more deeply understand DNA

Genetic Engineering – Ethics and Controversy

Genetic Engineering Ethics

Genetic Engineering - Stem Cell Research Ethics and Controversy

ISSUE'S AND CONTROVERSY

Stem Cell research is a highly controversial and emotive subject that is, more often that not, misunderstood, misrepresented and fraught with 'ifs and buts'. There are fears that science is moving too fast without giving proper consideration to potential impacts and to ethical concerns. The subject is a confusing and complex one that is difficult to grasp and constantly changing. Governments around the world struggle to develop policies and guidelines at the same time as individuals struggle with their conscience and beliefs.

There are two key areas of debate:

The scientific debate; what is proven, what is debatably proven, research results that are received with skepticism.

The ethical/moral debate; some people base their objections on religious beliefs, some on ethical grounds, others believe simply, that changing or 'messing with' the human genome is simply not right, against nature and a highly dangerous path to follow. Others harbour concerns about the directions in which stem cell research can be taken.

Significantly much of the debate is held at an emotional level with scientific facts often overlooked or conveniently ignored. So with that in mind lets first look at the issues that are currently facing scientist in the field.

Exciting claims are regularly reported by scientists with their findings published in reputable science journals with all the relevant data and background information, the media, picking up on these stories, repackages the findings for public consumption and dutifully supplies the splash headline:

'Brain stem cells to cure diabetes'
'Giant leap for the 'secret of long life'

Unfortunately the fine detail is the thing that is often lost leading to much misconception, once you get to the small print you discover that all is not as it seems. Sentences like 'hold much promise', 'seems to suggest', 'has the exciting potential to be', 'it is reasonable to assume' abound in reports of advances in genetic engineering and stem cell research.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE SCIENTIFIC HURDLES STILL TO BE OVERCOME?

As rapidly as the field of stem cell research is developing new questions and problems arise, with each new discovery another set of problems seems to arrive. Scientist really don't fully understand why embryonic stem cells can proliferate successfully in the laboratory without differentiating but adult stem cells are not so easily controlled or proliferated. As yet there is no reliable and reproducible way to create stem cell lines. For experimentation to continue successfully it is essential that results can be reproduced repeatedly, at present this simply doesn't happen. Scientists have yet to agree a set of test to confirm that the fundamental properties of a stem cell exists in a set of laboratory stem cells. Even the test that are used are not wholly reliable and accurate.

In actuality scientist don't really know exactly how the process of stem cell differentiation takes place, whether the stem cell be embryonic or adult. Differentiation occurs when a stem cell becomes a specific cell type, this happens when the stem cell receives signals telling it to start to become a cell. Scientists barely know what those signals are and how they affect the process. Directing the differentiation of stem cells has developed over the years but is still not an wholly exact science. It seems likely the process relies on a series of complex interactions. Controlling the differentiation is proving to be a major difficulty, how to make a stem cell become the exact cell type you want is not so easy and certainly not reliably reproducible in all areas.

Scientist simply don't know how many different types of adult stem cells exist and where they exist. They also don't know how adult stem cells come to exist or how they know where to go to do their repair and replacement functions. The question of just how flexible different adult stem cell types are is still unknown. Some scientist claim that adult stem cells can differentiate into many kinds of cells outside of their specialism, others argue that this is a fluke of the laboratory.

One of the major goals for scientists is to develop a way to use stem cells to repair damaged tissue. To do this they require a large amount of cells. Embryonic stem cells are the easiest to proliferate but are not a genetic match for the patient, adult stem cells are a match but are not easy to grow or control in large numbers. The recent announcement from Seoul University is being seen as a major step forward in this area.

There are many other problems that face the scientists; the laboratory process requires the use of some animal products that leave residue, how long a laboratory created cell survives in a human is an unknown. There has been significant progress in the field but there are still many unanswered questions.

THE ETHICAL DEBATE

The biggest problem with the ethical debate is that the potential for stem cell research to produce cures for some of the worlds most deadly and debilitating diseases is pitted against fervently and deeply held moral and faith based beliefs.

The issue that gets the most attention and is often the focus for opponents of stem cell research is the use of embryonic stem cells. This is because during the process of stem cell line creation the embryo is destroyed, opponents argue that this is the taking of human life - murder. Opponents argue that, as every embryo has the potential to become a human being that each and every one is sacrosanct. Proponents argue that even under natural conditions not all embryos go on to form a baby, that unused harvested embryos would anyway be destroyed and that, ultimately the ends justify the means. Many opponents of Embryonic stem cell research put forward compelling arguments for more vigorous experimentation and research into the use of Adult stem cells. They see this as an answer to the dilemma of the potential for disease relief. In reality this debate is quite clear cut, either you believe that embryonic stem cell research is fundamentally wrong because it destroys a potential human or you believe embryonic stem cell research is acceptable because the embryo will never become a human even if it has the potential to do so.

But this argument is merely a very vocal, media fed argument that only scratches at the surface of far deeper and potentially more impactful debates. There are big questions regarding the potential directions in which stem cell research can be taken; designer babies and eugenics, cloning, chimera. What of the rights of the women who donate their eggs for research and just how much attention is being paid to the health risks? What are the potential impacts of research on the future?

CHIMERA

A chimera is an organism constructed out of living parts from more than one biological species. Many scientist see the creation of chimera as a useful tool for the observation of stem cell behaviour.

The Science

The use of chimera is seen as a way to overcome some of the hurdles outlined above. Basically it allows the scientist to test what happens when stem cells are introduced into a patient, without experimenting on humans. For experimentation purposes what happens is that human stem cells are implanted into an animal host, either an animal embryo or an adult animal. Most commonly used are mice and monkeys. Some of the experiments that have been done already involve implanting brain cells and creating mice with entire human immune systems. It is also worth noting that this is not an entirely new idea and that human-animal chimera also exist in the form of animal tissue implanted into humans; pig heart valves are commonly used as replacement organs for people with heart disease. The extent to which the implanted human stem cells affect the host animal is dependent on the stage at which the material is introduced. If the human stem cells are introduced into an early stage animal embryo then they have a much more profound effect because the stem cells of the host are less differentiated. If the stem cells are introduced into an adult animal the effect, in theory is much less profound because much less differentiation is taking place so the stem cells are more of an addition. But just how far should we go with the use of chimera? Where should the boundaries be drawn? When does the 'yuck' factor kick in?

The Ethics

The 'yuck factor' is the point at which our reaction to a piece of information or something we see makes us squirm. If we see a monkey running around a cage, we're unlikely to squirm even if we know that a percentage of that monkeys brain is made up of human cells. But what if we saw a sheep with human feet? Although there is no proof that this has happened, it is theoretically possible. In fact there are a lot of theoretically possible outcomes of chimeric experimentation and many of them may not be so evident to the naked eye. It is the mixing of animal and human cells that concerns the ethicists that have bothered to notice this element of stem cell research. For example how human would a monkey with 20% human cells be, is it human or monkey? Some might say that 20% human cells does not make a monkey human but where is the line to be drawn? These are some of the issues that the bioethicists are fighting with.

For more information on the chimera debate a good starting point is The Other Stem-Cell Debate

For a Christian Perspective: The Stuart Little Syndrome
CLONING

There are two basic types of cloning Reproductive cloning and Research cloning. Reproductive cloning means to recreate a genetic duplicate of a human being and in itself raise a great many ethical issues, therefore it is dealt with separately on this site. Research cloning is the use of cloning techniques to create an embryo for research purposes only.

The Science

The technique can be used to produce stem cells for research. The technique used is called Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer: SCNT, what happens is that nucleus from a body cell is transplant into an egg. Using electricity or chemicals this entity is triggered into producing an embryo. The resulting embryo can then be used to obtain embryonic stem cells. This process is also know as embryo cloning or therapeutic cloning. Some of the uses for this technique include producing patient specific stem cells, the genetic material of the patient is implanted into a donor egg thus producing stem cells that are a genetic match for the patient. This stem cells could then be used for therapeutic cell transplant. Another proposed use is that stem cells could be created with genetic disorders allowing research of that disorder to be carried out. There are however a few scientific problems; the cost of therapeutic patient specific cell production may make it a non-starter or at least only available to the very rich; the very specificness of the cells means that they can only be given to the patient they were grown for, unlike conventional drugs which can be given to almost anyone. Even though recent research has improved the efficiency of cell line production it still takes a lot of time and eggs to produce very few usable lines. Also lets be clear the technique is still only useful for research purposes and there are many hurdles to be overcome before any real human use is possible.

The Ethics

Lets not forget that cloning in itself uses human embryos whether created using the in vitro fertilization method or using donated eggs, so already we have the ethical difficulties previously outlined. But there are yet more ethical problems arising out of cloning cells. There are fears that research cloning will open the door to human cloning. With the proliferation of cloned embryos the chances of a few hundred embryos going astray becomes more possible. One of the major concerns is the treatment of the women who donate their eggs. How informed is the consent they give?

THE DONORS

Whichever method is used to obtain stem cells at some point or other an egg is needed. Adult stem cells are near to impossible to proliferate outside of an egg, embryonic stem cells are taken from an embryo. So a donor is needed; enter the women. Eggs are often donated by women who seek fertility treatment, they give their spare eggs to science. Some women are paid to produce eggs for research. As far as it is know all women give 'informed' consent for the eggs to be taken. But there are big questions being asked as to exactly how informed that consent actually is.

The Science

Cloning and stem cell production requires an enormous amount of eggs. Initial attempts at cloning needed 242 eggs to produce a single usable embryonic line, since then that figure has been reduced to 20 eggs for one embryonic line. During a normal cycle a woman produces just one egg so inevitably women are treated with drugs to stimulate multiple egg production. The process requires a two stage drug programme, firstly to shut down the ovaries and then to stimulate them to produce the eggs. A woman treated with drugs to stimulate multiple egg production can produce about 10 eggs.

The Ethics

At its simplest the procedure for egg extraction is painful and invasive. However the drugs used to stimulate multiple egg production can produce serious health risks. Whilst most women suffer only minor symptoms such as headaches or nausea some can develop much serious problems such as severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, which can lead to dangerous fluid buildup, clotting disorders, renal failure, infertility and even death. One drug that is used in the procedure is called Lupron (leuprolide acetate) a drug that is not approved or tested for this purpose, although it is being legally used because it is approved for other purposes. Lupron has caused many problems which have been reported to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) including chest pain, nausea, depression, emotional instability, loss of libido (sex drive), amblyopia (dimness of vision), syncope (fainting), asthenia (weakness), asthenia gravis hypophyseogenea (severe weakness due to loss of pituitary function), amnesia (disturbance in memory), hypertension (high arterial blood pressure).

A woman who donates spare eggs from fertility treatment has a clear motive for wanting to undertake such a procedure, she wants a baby. However those choosing to voluntarily donate eggs will have different motivations; possibly they believe they are helping to find ways to cure disease, but how many realise just how far into the future those cures are? Maybe they are doing it for the money, tho' laws exist preventing excessive payments in some countries, in other poorer countries that money can be more than useful, but how aware are the women of the risks they are taking ?

EUGENICS AND DESIGNER BABIES

There are issues associated with the connections between stem cell research, eugenics and designer babies. It is within the area of stem cell research that information will be found that will enable scientists to pursue eugenics, the betterment of humanity and the ability for parents to choose not only the sex but also physical and character traits of their offspring, designer babies. Because these are such big issues they are covered elsewhere on this site.

Genetic Engineering Ethics

Genetic Engineering Ethics In Science Fiction

Genetic Engineering Ethics

Q: I am a final year university student who is currently writing an ethics essay. I have been trying to put forward the view that some of the ethical problems associated with new technology have already been explored in science fiction. I would like help in substantiating this view. My essay is on the topic of human genetic engineering and cloning. While I am familiar with some of the work on this topic I was hoping for some help in tracking down some short stories or novels which deal with either the ethical problems or the social implications of these topics. At the moment my list includes Hyperion Quartet by Dan Simmons Glory Season by David Brin Some parts of the Uplift books by David Brin As you can see this is rather short and mostly deals with the social consequences rather than the ethics. Does anyone have any suggestions? I would appreciate any recommendations (along with magazine titles and editions for short stories if possible) I am also interested in peoples opinions on the idea that science fiction is the ideal medium for exploring tomorrows ethical dilemmas.

A: -Greg Egan, definitely. Egan mostly seems to be interested in the boundary between ontology and the more speculative aspects of physics. I find that a bit of a shame, because I don't think it's his real strength. Anyone can wave their hands about the Copenhagen Interpretation, but nobody is better than Egan at writing about the ethical and social implications of advanced biotechnology. I'd start with _Distress_. The first chapter is stunning, but you should pay close attention to the whole book. Don't miss the voluntary autists, the asexes, the notion of targeted biowarfare, and the ethical implications of the way that bioengineering interacts with intellectual property law. -Most of the Lois McMaster Bujold books have some facet of genegineering ethics conundrums. I especially recommend Memory and the last one "A Civil Campaign" in which a conniving aristocrat creates 180 daughters of himself and ova that have been deposited in the local gene bank. Memory deals with a set of clones and how they become enmeshed in a web of mistaken identity and amnesia. Another one is "Falling Free" in which a corporation creates a new "race" of mankind that has four arms and no legs for work in freefall.

Genetic Engineering Ethics

Cellulosic ethanol can considerably reduce gasoline use by 2030

As the debate on the future of cellulosic ethanol gains steam, a new study shows the U.S. can replace a third of its annual gasoline use with ethanol by 2030.

The study, jointly conducted by General Motors and Sandia National Laboratories, predicts that out of 90 billion gallons of ethanol that experts say need to be produced in 2030, 75 billion gallons could be cellulosic ethanol, which usually makes use of feedstock like corn-combs and switch grass.

A press release by Sandia National Laboratories says the study examined four sources of biofuels: agricultural residue, such as corn stover and wheat straw; forest residue; dedicated energy crop, including switch grass; and short rotation woody crops, such as willow and poplar trees. It found that the cost of producing, harvesting, storing and transporting these sources of cellulosic ethanol to newly built biorefineries was minimal and would not lead to a price hike of the final product.

“… an increase to 90 billion gallons of ethanol could be sustainably achieved by 2030 within real-world economic and environmental parameters,” says the study.

Reinforcing the argument that cellulosic ethanol could be produced in a sustainable way, the study notes that
“…large-scale cellulosic biofuel production could be achieved at or below current water consumption levels of petroleum fuels from on-shore oil production and refining.”

The study comes hot on the heels of another study, earlier released by the University of Minnesota, which shows cellulosic ethanol production contribute less to climate change compared to gasoline or even food crops-based ethanol.

 

 

 

 


EU challenges France on GM Maize

The European Union (EU) is again challenging France’s decision to ban a genetically modified (GM) maize developed by the U.S.-based biotech giant Monsanto. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is angry that France has refused to allow the cultivation of MON 810, the only GM crop being grown in the European Union.

“No specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health and the environment, was provided that would justify the invocation of a safeguard clause,” EFSA said in an opinion article on its web site.

These are weighty words, coming especially from such a nonpartisan organization as EFSA. They’re words directed not only at France but other European countries weighing on the issue of genetically modified crops.

The issue of the safety of GM foods has been discussed since the introduction of the first genetically modified crop in 1996. Reputable organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. National Academies of Science have issued numerous reports on the safety of GM foods. In June 2005, for instance, WHO released a report entitled Modern Food Biotechnology, Human Health and Development, which reaffirmed the safety of GM foods. The U.S. National Academies of Science, itself, has on numerous occasions cautioned against condemning GM crops on the basis of non-scientific evidence.

France and other countries opposed to crop genetic engineering will do their citizens proud if they allow science to guide every decision of GM crops. Blanket condemnation of GM crops doesn’t serve the interests of farmers. It only denies them an opportunity to boost food production.

Link of ethanol use to high food prices questioned

As the debate on whether more ethanol use is sending food prices skyrocketing rages, the ethanol industry is positioning itself to set the record straight.

Four major players in the ethanol industry – Hawkeye, ICM, POET, and Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. (GPRE) – yesterday launched an organization called Growth Energy to promote the use of ethanol in a sustainable way. GrowthEnergy also plans to take head on “Big Food” for blaming the ethanol industry for high food prices.

In a press statement issued at the launch of GrowthEnergy, the heads of the four companies argued there was no link between ethanol use and food prices. “Big Food and their Washington lobbyists have been trying to blame the rising cost of food on American ethanol producers and the cost of corn. Well, now that the price of corn has dropped more than fifty percent since the summer, we ask the Big Food industry to explain to the American people why food prices are still so high,” said Jeff Broin, CEO of POET.

Dave Vander Griend, CEO of ICM pointed out that the price of corn had gone down by almost 50 per cent over the last few months yet food prices had not followed suit. “Our current low-priced corn, high-priced food economic situation shows that the experts were right - biofuels production does not lead to increased food costs,” said Griend.

With the launch of GrowthEnergy, it seems the war of words between ethanol producers and the food industry is likely ratchet up. GrowthEnergy is vowing to wage an intensive grassroots campaign to fight disinformation that more ethanol use leads to high food prices. It has already prepared a policy brief (PDF) on the issue, to bolster its argument.