The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Monthly Archives: March 2017
What Political Correctness Means to Donald Trump – Study Breaks
Posted: March 23, 2017 at 1:21 pm
His promise to tell things the way they are has backfired so badly that even his supporters urge critics not to interprethim literally.
By Timothy K. DesJarlais, University of Arizona
President Trump is politically correct, despite what his behavior and actions may otherwise suggest.
You may think I made a typo above, but no, this time, I did not. President Trump has railed against political correctness, claiming it was a chief cause of Americas ills. For Trump, examples of political correctness include failing to criticize illegal immigrants and refusing to use the word Islamic when discussing acts of terrorism.
In a way, Trump portrayed himself as the enemy of political correctness, as he promised to return straight-talk to the White House, but what is political correctness? Definitions tend to vary, but all seem to point to a way of speech that does not offend or marginalize specific groups or violate social norms. Other forms of politically incorrect language include using the wrong gender or race to describe an individual, as well as making generalizations about an individual based on their background or looks.
On one hand, it is good that todays society has begun to try to be more tolerable, but sometimes political correctness is taken too far, leading many to feel that its simply a tool in a culture-war between progressives and conservatives.Examples of political correctness that may have gone too far include schools banning the American flag because they are concerned some may see the flag as an offensive symbol.
Trump constantly broke the mold of a politically correct presidential candidate. Instead of utilizing scripted speeches free of offensive words, he delivered off-the-cuff stump speeches. This style meant that most of what Trump said had little filter, as he repeatedly made remarks offensive to some minorities, women, immigrants and veterans.
Image via Reddit
Some of Trumps insults included stereotyping immigrants from Mexico to be criminals and rapists, challenging Senator John McCains war-hero status, mocking a Gold Star family or a disabled reporter and using slob or pig to describe women he hated. Twitter was the medium from which he launched most of the scathing attacks, which wouldve made any public relations representative wince.
These remarks have led Trump to be branded as a politically incorrect candidate, a title he embraces. While he tries to justify his often-unpolished behavior with the excuse that he is being honest and straightforward though, Trump and his diehard fans may unknowingly be ascribing to their own form of political correctness.
One such example could be Trumps views of the American flag. Theres an iconic image of him hugging the flag and his controversial statements that people who burn the American flag should be jailed. Flag-burning has always been controversial, but it has been widely considered a form of free speech, even by the Supreme Court.
Nonetheless, some view the burning of the American flag as both inappropriate and criminal. In this case, for some patriotic conservatives, flag-burning is politically incorrect behavior that must be stopped because it is offensive.
The double-standard of political correctness doesnt stop here, though. Trump can also be accused of considering the media to be politically correct. He constantly criticized the media for failing to cover issues during his campaign and for using politically correct language, but as president, Trump is exasperated every time the media tries to scrutinize his administration. He considers any criticism of him to be inappropriate and fake news.
Trump expects respect for his office and demands that people stop spreading rumors about his supposed ties to Russia, yet isnt this the same man that was spreading the rumor that President Obama was not born in the United States, during his own term of office?
Even Trumps campaign rhetoric is specific, highlighting the theme of America First. Such a phrase may be considered politically incorrect, as some argue it could marginalize non-Americans. While the above may be true, it is alternately politically correct by Trumps standards. For Trump, failing to put America or its interests first is a gregarious error, and he lambastes anyone or anything that he believes opposes this worldview.
I am not saying patriotism itself is bad, and I believe every American should cherish and love their country, even if they have disagreements with those in power. But some forms of extreme patriotism as expressed by President Trump have created an alternative standard of political correctness, where if you dont salute the American flag, kneel during the national anthem or openly express your love of country, you are a traitor.
Furthermore, Trump and his supporters take offense when others conduct these expressions, like when football player Colin Kaepernick refused to stand for the national anthem. It is time that readers realize political correctness is not one-sided, and each political side has their view of what political correctness should be.
Trump may claim he is against political correctness, but by the end of the day, he is still politically correct, just with a different set of values.
Donald Trumpfake newspolitically correctpolitically incorrectPresident Trump
View original post here:
What Political Correctness Means to Donald Trump - Study Breaks
Posted in Politically Incorrect
Comments Off on What Political Correctness Means to Donald Trump – Study Breaks
The Classification and Censorship of Video Games in Australia … – The Escapist
Posted: at 1:20 pm
"Discipline and self-restraint when practiced by an individual, a family, or a company is an effective way to deal with this issue. The same thing when forced on a people by their government or, worse, by a self-appointed watchdog of public morals, is suppression and will not be tolerated in a democratic society."
John Denver said those words in September of 1985 during the infamous PMRC (Parents Music Resource Center) Senate hearings. Back then, Tipper Gore led the "Washington Wives" in a petition to have warning labels placed on music albums that contained potentially offensive content, like drugs, sex, and references to the occult. The end result was not only the addition of "Parental Advisory" stickers (and the fact that Denver is actually the founding father of the theory of the Streisand Effect), but also a statement that has maintained relevance far outside of its intended audience for decades.
In the most recent installment of "Wow, that sounds like something John Denver would say," Australian Senator David Leyonhjelm recently denounced the decision of the Australian Classification Board to refuse to classify Outlast 2 - which, effectively, resulted in the game being banned from sale in Australia.
In a ruling earlier this month, the Board concluded that Outlast 2 is guilty of the following: "depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified."
So Outlast 2 is offensive to the standards of morality, decency, and propriety that "reasonable adults" would accept, with the implication that any adult willing to accept such depictions is, by default, unreasonable. The Board then issued an ultimatum: remove the depiction of "implied sexual violence" in Outlast 2 and the game will be accommodated with an R18+ rating. So, if developer Red Barrels is willing to remove a scene that includes a depiction of "implied sexual violence," the game will likely have a chance of getting classified. To put it plainly: If the developer removes mature themes from a product intended for a mature audience, then they can possibly sell their product. To adults. And this is where the title of this post becomes more than just extremely clever word play (yes, I'm proud of that one) - Senator Leyonhjelm stood against the Board on the decision, urging them to "leave gamers alone."
Leyonhjelm began by pointing out that 68 percent of Australians play video games regularly - with the average age of those gamers being 33. Further, he stated that Australian laws regarding video games are made by people who have no understanding of the medium. Leyonhjelm stated that the decisions are based on the assumption that those playing games "are impressionable children who would play out anything they saw."
"Yet the internet is now awash with all manner of unpleasant images involving real people, not computer generated [characters], while violent crime around the world is in decline," he said. "It makes wonder how is it that adults are not trusted to make choices about video games, and yet they are allowed to vote?"
"Video games do not hurt anybody," Leyonhjelm said, "and the government Classification Board should leave gamers alone."
There is now a troubling decision to be made by Red Barrels - censor your product and remove that which we have personally deemed offensive, or our entire country will lose access to your product. There doesn't appear to be any reliable Australia-specific data on whether or not those 68 percent of Australian gamers would prefer a watered-down, altered version of a game intended for adults, or if they would, in fact, prefer that their standards of morality, decency and propriety remain unoffended.
There's also the unintended consequence of asserting that feeling offended by potentially offensive content is somehow a bad thing. Video games, as a medium, have evolved dramatically over the years, and the goal of each unique game is different. Much of the content in the award winning film 12 Years a Slave can easily be deemed offensive - but there is an understanding that the film is more than the sum of its parts. The same can easily be argued in favor of any film that features uncomfortable content. Like film, many video games expose the player to a range of situations and, consequently, a range of emotions. In truth, and at the risk of sounding breathlessly hyperbolic, the Board is not placing a ban on a video game, but rather on an emotion that the aforementioned video game is likely to evoke. It is also asserting that there is inherent shame in trusting yourself to react to that content and accompanying emotion. You wouldn't want to be *clutches chest* unreasonable.
It's worth noting, before I continue, that Outlast 2 is one of many video games refused classification in Australia. Postal and Postal 2 were both refused classification due to their "abhorrent and revolting content," while Saints Row IV was refused classification because of "illicit drug use related to incentives and rewards and visual depictions of implied sexual violence that are not justified by context," although an edited version of the game was later made available as an R18+ title with that content removed.
It's easy to assume that the Board's decision was made not because of the fact that "reasonable adults" are sure to be offended, nor was it solely based on their effort to play the role of diligent mother to grown adults, but rather is tied to the stigma that still surrounds the very idea of video games and those who play them. There is, still, the assumption that video games are designed for children and enjoyed primarily by children. The decision to restrict access based on archaic logic risks... well, I'll let John Denver tell you:
"In a mature, incredibly diverse society such as ours, the access to all perspectives of an issue becomes more and more important. Those things which in our experience are undesirable generally prove to be unfurthering and sooner or later become boring. That process cannot and should not be stifled. On the other hand...That which is denied becomes that which is most desired, and that which is hidden becomes that which is most interesting. Consequently, a great deal of time and energy is spent trying to get at what is being kept from you. Our children, our people, our society and the world cannot afford this waste."
Excerpt from:
The Classification and Censorship of Video Games in Australia ... - The Escapist
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on The Classification and Censorship of Video Games in Australia … – The Escapist
Hollywood puts its spin on censorship – The Boston Globe
Posted: at 1:20 pm
IMBD homepage on March 22, 2017.
You would think the First Amendment is a bulletproof defense against censorship of the Internet. But then you are not reckoning with the awesome political power of the Screen Actors Guild.
The union representing Hollywood stars and role players somehow persuaded California lawmakers to enact a law that would bar the popular IMDb website from revealing the ages of actors. Its a law that sounds crazy even by California standards, yet Governor Jerry Brown signed it last fall.
Advertisement
Youve probably heard of the entertainment-focused IMDb. Owned by Amazon.com, it was founded by a British computer programmer and movie buff in 1990, when the Internet was in diapers. Today, its among the worlds most popular websites, with over 250 million visitors every month.
The basic IMDb service is free. Its content, like that of Wikipedia, is crowdsourced. Members love to post information about their favorite movies, directors, stars, and this is the important fact the actors ages.
Get Talking Points in your inbox:
An afternoon recap of the days most important business news, delivered weekdays.
Many stars arent happy about that. Its not just vanity, they say; Hollywood is rife with ageism, and older actors dont want directors to think theyve passed their sell-by dates.
IMDb has a paid version of its service called IMDbPro that has become the Hollywood equivalent of LinkedIn, the social network for business. Actors and others pay about $150 a year to see and be seen by the industry elite, and to hunt for jobs. And a role might be harder to come by if its known that a certain actor is on the far side of 50.
But you cant ban the whole Internet from publishing someones age. Or can you? California legislators figured out a way around that by framing their law as a defense against age discrimination. They wrote a publishing restriction that applies only to a commercial online entertainment employment service provider, allowing paying members to demand that his or her age be deleted from that site.
Advertisement
You wont be surprised to learn that IMDb and IMDbPro are virtually the only sites on earth that fit the criteria described in the law. Sure enough, as of Jan. 1, IMDb had received more than 2,300 takedown requests, including 10 from people whove won Oscars and another 71 whove been nominated for Oscars, Emmys, or Golden Globes.
IMDb hasnt honored a single one of these requests, insisting the law is flagrantly unconstitutional. Besides, it wont work. The same information is usually available elsewhere online, for the price of a quick Google search. And so IMDb argues the law harms its business by driving its users to other sites, without achieving its purpose.
IMDb filed suit against the law in federal court, and in February, US District Court Judge Vince Chhabria issued an injunction against it until the case can be heard.
There is an exceedingly strong likelihood that IMDb will prevail, the judge predicted. Thats putting it mildly.
The IMDb law is merely the nuttiest recent effort by governments here and abroad to censor unwelcome Internet content. Other examples are less ridiculous but equally pernicious.
Google, for instance, is headed to court in France, hoping to fend off a ruinous global expansion of the right to be forgotten. A 2014 ruling of the European Court of Justice held that citizens of the European Union can demand the deletion of embarrassing search results that are no longer relevant to a persons life. For instance, if a Frenchman went bankrupt 10 years ago, he could ask Google not to display this fact when someone ran a search of his name.
Google has complied with over a quarter-million such requests, but only in Europe. The Frenchmans bankruptcy would still come up if someone ran his name through Google in the United States. But in 2015, a French court ruled that Google must wipe embarrassing search results worldwide. Its a radical attempt to force the entire world to play by Europes censorious rules.
Some American lawmakers would be happy to comply. Last month, a couple of New York state legislators filed a bill that would require Internet search services to remove, on request, listings that hurt a persons reputation, and which are no longer material to current public debate or discourse.
Im sympathetic; weve all done things wed like the world to forget. But its no different from trying to block the publication of Brad Pitts age. Thats not the governments job.
Other ongoing disputes over online expression are more complex. Even now, European companies are pulling ads from Facebook and YouTube because users of those services sometimes post racist and anti-Semitic messages that are illegal overseas but protected here.
You cant blame advertisers for fleeing such stuff, even where its legal to publish it. And Internet companies arent bound by the First Amendment. They have every right to bar materials that dont meet their ethical standards, or those of their customers. Websites are also entitled to use their own judgment in flagging stories that might be considered fake news; I might disagree with their decisions, but I dont see it as censorship.
But governments cant ban the online publication of truth, at least not on this side of the Atlantic. Somebody tell the Screen Actors Guild.
See the original post here:
Hollywood puts its spin on censorship - The Boston Globe
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on Hollywood puts its spin on censorship – The Boston Globe
At the Whitney, Frances Stark’s Giant Paintings Argue Against the Censorship They Promote – artnet News
Posted: at 1:20 pm
THE DAILY PIC (#1757Whitney Biennial edition): I guess my all-around favorite objects in this years Biennial were a suite of huge paintings by Frances Stark that simply reproduce whole pages from a book called Censorship Now!! by the cranky, radicalbut not dismissableIan Svenonius. His text, so painstakingly reproduced via Starks brushstrokes, argues for the censorship of many of the nastier bits of mainstream and establishment culture, in just the way that parts of the establishment have wanted to censor parts of the counterculture that it disapproves of.
The enlargement that Stark does is of course the direct opposite of censorship, and could be generalized as a defense of free speech in all cases. Theres clearly some kind of celebration of Svenonius in Starks paintings. But in their sheer, unavoidable legibility, they might also stand as a counterweight to Svenoniuss call for silencing voices he doesnt like.
One other thing I like about these pictures. The vast majority of contemporary paintings are hobbled by the weight of authority their ancient medium carries. (Worse, they dont even notice that they are.) Stark is using just that weight to make us consider the words of a radical anti-authoritywho seems to have an authoritarian streak. (Photo by Lucy Hogg)
For a full survey of past Daily Pics visit blakegopnik.com/archive.
Read the original post:
At the Whitney, Frances Stark's Giant Paintings Argue Against the Censorship They Promote - artnet News
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on At the Whitney, Frances Stark’s Giant Paintings Argue Against the Censorship They Promote – artnet News
French Biz Decries Censorship As Far Right Mayor Pulls Pic On Populism’s Rise – Deadline
Posted: at 1:20 pm
Deadline | French Biz Decries Censorship As Far Right Mayor Pulls Pic On Populism's Rise Deadline In what French film industry group l'ARP sees as a potential sign of what's to come should France's far right presidential candidate Marine Le Pen advance in May's local elections, a feature seen as critiquing her National Front (FN) party has been ... |
Read more here:
French Biz Decries Censorship As Far Right Mayor Pulls Pic On Populism's Rise - Deadline
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on French Biz Decries Censorship As Far Right Mayor Pulls Pic On Populism’s Rise – Deadline
Censorship pointless in the age of internet, says Anurag Kashyap – Hindustan Times
Posted: at 1:20 pm
Anurag Kashyap, who had multiple face-offs with the Central Board of Film Certification over several films such as Udta Punjab, Gulaal and Black Friday, says that if he doesnt like something, he never sees that.
Bollywood director Anurag Kashyap believes that in a world exposed to the internet, censorship doesnt hold any meaning. To have some kind of censorship in the age of YouTube and Internet is pointless. Its not even what I think is right or wrong. What are you trying to block people from? You have to start treating your audiences as adult people who can think for themselves, said Kashyap at the discussion panel at ongoing FICCI frames 2017 on Wednesday.
Read more
The Gangs of Wasseypur helmer who had multiple face-offs with the Central Board of Film Certification over several films such as Udta Punjab, Gulaal and Black Friday, says that if he doesnt like something, he never sees that. I dont see many things. If I want to watch something, I will go to the cinema hall, he said.
While the CBFC wanted to cut a large number of scenes in Kashyaps recent film Udta Punjab, claiming obscenity and defamation, the filmmaker had approached the courts, which ruled in his favour. The film was finally passed with one cut.
Honestly, I have a problem when I watch movies which have cuts. I wait for movies to come out on blue ray or watch them when I am travelling, said Kashyap.
Read this article:
Censorship pointless in the age of internet, says Anurag Kashyap - Hindustan Times
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on Censorship pointless in the age of internet, says Anurag Kashyap – Hindustan Times
Right-libertarianism – Wikipedia
Posted: at 1:19 pm
The non-aggression principleEdit
The non-aggression principle (NAP) is often described as the foundation of present-day right-libertarian philosophies.[4][5][6] It is a moral stance which forbids actions that are inconsistent with capitalist property rights. The principle defines "aggression" and "initiation of force" as violation of these rights. NAP and property rights are closely linked, since what constitutes aggression depends on what libertarians consider to be one's property.[7]
Because the principle redefines aggression in right-libertarian terms, use of the NAP as a justification for right-libertarianism has been criticized as circular reasoning and as rhetorical obfuscation of the coercive nature of libertarian property law enforcement.[8]
The principle has been used rhetorically to oppose such policies as victimless crime laws, taxation, and military drafts.
There is a debate amongst right-libertarians as to whether or not the state is legitimate: while anarcho-capitalists advocate its abolition, minarchists support minimal states, often referred to as night-watchman states. Minarchists maintain that the state is necessary for the protection of individuals from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud. They believe the only legitimate governmental institutions are the military, police, and courts, though some expand this list to include fire departments, prisons, and the executive and legislative branches.[9][10][11] They justify the state on the grounds that it is the logical consequence of adhering to the non-aggression principle and argue that anarchism is immoral because it implies that the non-aggression principle is optional, that the enforcement of laws under anarchism is open to competition.[citation needed] Another common justification is that private defense agencies and court firms would tend to represent the interests of those who pay them enough.[12]
Anarcho-capitalists argue that the state violates the non-aggression principle by its nature because governments use force against those who have not stolen or vandalized private property, assaulted anyone, or committed fraud.[13][14] Many also argue that monopolies tend to be corrupt and inefficient, that private defense and court agencies would have to have a good reputation in order to stay in business. Linda & Morris Tannehill argue that no coercive monopoly of force can arise on a truly free market and that a government's citizenry can't desert them in favor of a competent protection and defense agency.[15]
Libertarian philosopher Moshe Kroy argues that the disagreement between anarcho-capitalists who adhere to Murray Rothbard's view of human consciousness and the nature of values and minarchists who adhere to Ayn Rand's view of human consciousness and the nature of values over whether or not the state is moral is not due to a disagreement over the correct interpretation of a mutually held ethical stance. He argues that the disagreement between these two groups is instead the result of their disagreement over the nature of human consciousness and that each group is making the correct interpretation of their differing premises. These two groups are therefore not making any errors with respect to deducing the correct interpretation of any ethical stance because they do not hold the same ethical stance.[16]
While there is debate on whether left, right, and socialist libertarianism "represent distinct ideologies as opposed to variations on a theme," right-libertarianism is most in favor of private property.[17] Right-libertarians maintain that unowned natural resources "may be appropriated by the first person who discovers them, mixes his labor with them, or merely claims themwithout the consent of others, and with little or no payment to them." This contrasts with left-libertarianism in which "unappropriated natural resources belong to everyone in some egalitarian manner."[18] Right-libertarians believe that natural resources are originally unowned, and therefore, private parties may appropriate them at will without the consent of, or owing to, others (e.g. a land value tax).[19]
Right-libertarians (also referred to as propertarians) hold that societies in which private property rights are enforced are the only ones that are both ethical and lead to the best possible outcomes.[20] They generally support the free market, and are not opposed to any concentrations of economic power, provided it occurs through non-coercive means.[21]
Libertarianism in the United States developed in the 1950s as many with Old Right or classical liberal beliefs in the United States began to describe themselves as libertarians.[22]H. L. Mencken and Albert Jay Nock were the first prominent figures in the United States to call themselves libertarians.[23] They believed Franklin D. Roosevelt had co-opted the word liberal for his New Deal policies, which they opposed, and used libertarian to signify their allegiance to individualism. Mencken wrote in 1923: "My literary theory, like my politics, is based chiefly upon one idea, to wit, the idea of freedom. I am, in belief, a libertarian of the most extreme variety."[24]
In the 1950s, Russian-American novelist Ayn Rand developed a philosophical system called Objectivism, expressed in her novels The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, as well as other works, which influenced many libertarians.[25] However, she rejected the label libertarian and harshly denounced the libertarian movement as the "hippies of the right."[26] Philosopher John Hospers, a one-time member of Rand's inner circle, proposed a non-initiation of force principle to unite both groups; this statement later became a required "pledge" for candidates of the Libertarian Party, and Hospers himself became its first presidential candidate in 1972.[citation needed]
Austrian School economist Murray Rothbard was influenced by the work of the 19th-century American individualist anarchists, themselves influenced by classical liberalism.[27] However, he thought they had a faulty understanding of economics: they accepted the labor theory of value as influenced by the classical economists, but Rothbard was a student of neoclassical economics which does not agree with the labor theory of value.[citation needed] Rothbard sought to meld 19th-century American individualists' advocacy of free markets and private defense with the principles of Austrian economics: "There is, in the body of thought known as 'Austrian economics,' a scientific explanation of the workings of the free market (and of the consequences of government intervention in that market) which individualist anarchists could easily incorporate into their political and social Weltanschauung".[28]
The Vietnam War split the uneasy alliance between growing numbers of self-identified libertarians, anarchist libertarians, and more traditional conservatives who believed in limiting liberty to uphold moral virtues. Libertarians opposed to the war joined the draft resistance and peace movements, as well as organizations such as Students for a Democratic Society. They began founding their own publications, such as Reason magazine and Murray Rothbard's The Libertarian Forum,[29] and organizations like the Radical Libertarian Alliance[30] and Society for Individual Liberty.[31]
Arizona United States Senator Barry Goldwater's libertarian-oriented challenge to authority had a major impact on the libertarian movement,[32] through his book The Conscience of a Conservative and his run for president in 1964.[33] Goldwater's speech writer, Karl Hess, became a leading libertarian writer and activist.[34]
The split was aggravated at the 1969 Young Americans for Freedom convention, when more than 300 libertarians organized to take control of the organization from conservatives. The burning of a draft card in protest to a conservative proposal against draft resistance sparked physical confrontations among convention attendees, a walkout by a large number of libertarians, the creation of libertarian organizations like the Society for Individual Liberty, and efforts to recruit potential libertarians from conservative organizations.[35] The split was finalized in 1971 when conservative leader William F. Buckley, Jr., in a 1971 New York Times article, attempted to divorce libertarianism from the freedom movement. He wrote: "The ideological licentiousness that rages through America today makes anarchy attractive to the simple-minded. Even to the ingeniously simple-minded."[36]
In 1971, a small group of Americans led by David Nolan formed the U.S. Libertarian Party.[37] The party has run a presidential candidate every election year since 1972. Educational organizations like the Center for Libertarian Studies and the Cato Institute were formed in the 1970s, and others have been created since then.[38]
Modern libertarianism gained significant recognition in academia with the publication of Harvard University professor Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia in 1974, a response to John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. The book proposed a minimal state on the grounds that it was an inevitable phenomenon which could arise without violating individual rights. Anarchy, State, and Utopia won a National Book Award in 1975.[39][40]
Since the resurgence of neoliberalism in the 1970s, free-market capitalist libertarianism has spread beyond North America and Europe via think tanks and political parties.[41][42]
Right-libertarianism has been criticized by the Left for being pro-business and anti-labor [43] and also for desiring to repeal government aid for people with disabilities and the poor.[44]
Corey Robin describes right-libertarianism as fundamentally a reactionary conservative ideology, united with more traditional conservative thought and goals by a desire to enforce hierarchical power and social relations:[45]
Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and libertyor a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental forcethe opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere. Such a view might seem miles away from the libertarian defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic and autonomous individual. But it is not. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals; he sees private, often hierarchical, groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees.
Within right-libertarianism, many reject associations with conservativism, and often reject traditional left-right labels.
In the 1960s, Rothbard started the publication Left and Right: A Journal of Libertarian Thought, believing that the left-right political spectrum had gone "entirely askew" since conservatives were sometimes more statist than liberals. Rothbard tried to reach out to leftists.[46] In 1971, Rothbard wrote about right-wing libertarianism which he described as supporting self-ownership, property rights and free trade.[47] He would later describe his brand of libertarianism as anarcho-capitalism.[48][49]
Anthony Gregory points out that within the libertarian movement "just as the general concepts 'left' and 'right' are riddled with obfuscation and imprecision, left- and right-libertarianism can refer to any number of varying and at times mutually exclusive political orientations". He writes that one of several ways to look at right-libertarianism is its exclusive interest in economic freedoms, preference for a conservative lifestyle, view that big business is "a great victim of the state," favoring a strong national defense, and sharing the Old Right's "opposition to empire." However, he holds that the important distinction for libertarians is not left or right, but whether they are "government apologists who use libertarian rhetoric to defend state aggression."[50]
Some pro-property libertarians reject association with either right or left. Leonard E. Read wrote an article titled "Neither Left Nor Right: Libertarians Are Above Authoritarian Degradation."[51]Harry Browne wrote: "We should never define Libertarian positions in terms coined by liberals or conservativesnor as some variant of their positions. We are not fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We are Libertarians, who believe in individual liberty and personal responsibility on all issues at all times."[52]Tibor R. Machan titled a book of his collected columns Neither Left Nor Right.[53]Walter Block's article "Libertarianism Is Unique and Belongs Neither to the Right Nor the Left" critiques libertarians he described as left and right, the latter including Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Edward Feser and Ron Paul. Block wrote that these left and right individuals agreed with certain libertarian premises but "where we differ is in terms of the logical implications of these founding axioms."[54]
Author Ilana Mercer draws even further distinction between right-wing libertarianism and left-leaning libertarianism, which she refers to as "Lite Libertarianism" stating that the "difference between lite libertarians and the Right kind is that to the former, the idea of liberty is propositionala deracinated principle, unmoored from the realities of history, hierarchy, biology, tradition, culture, values. Conversely, the paleolibertarian grasps that ordered liberty has a civilizational dimension, stripped of which the libertarian non-aggression axiom, by which we all must live, cannot endure"[55] and "that Classical Liberalism of the 19th century certainly allows for the individual to do as he pleases ... but the authentic libertarian emphasizes the right to life, liberty and property."[56]
Herbert Kitschelt and Anthony J. McGann contrast right-libertarianism"a strategy that combines pro-market positions with opposition to hierarchical authority, support of unconventional political participation, and endorsement of feminism and of environmentalism"with right-authoritarianism.[57]
See more here:
Right-libertarianism - Wikipedia
Posted in Libertarianism
Comments Off on Right-libertarianism – Wikipedia
Cancer killed Henrietta Lacks then made her immortal – Virginian-Pilot
Posted: at 1:18 pm
Sonny Lacks is known for his smile. Wide and welcoming, it's a feature that others tell him he shares with his mother.
He wishes he knew that for himself, but he was only 4 when she died.
On a recent Monday afternoon, Sonny and his older brother, Lawrence, sat at a dining room table in Baltimore and examined sketches of what will be their mother's tombstone. They've never had enough money for one. Finally, after all these years, a gift will allow their mother to be remembered as they want her to be.
Lawrence looked at the images but said little. He doesn't like talking about the mother he lost when he was 16.
"Don't know why; I never could," he said, taking off his glasses and rubbing his moist eyes. "I just can't."
The course of their lives changed in 1951 when their mother visited what was then Johns Hopkins Hospital, just 20 minutes down the road from where her boys now live. It was there that doctors discovered her strange illness and removed mysterious cells from her body.
The sons are one legacy of Henrietta Lacks a poor woman from the tobacco fields of south-central Virginia. The other is this: Her cells are still multiplying ferociously nearly six decades after her death. They have led to medical miracles such as the vaccine for polio and have produced millions of dollars in revenue for others.
The family's great loss has become the world's great gain.
___
Henrietta Lacks, died in 1951 at 31, but millions have been helped by study of the cells that killed her.
Henrietta Lacks was born Loretta Pleasant on Aug. 1, 1920, in Roanoke. The boys aren't sure how she became Henrietta, which was shortened to Hennie after her mother's death when the girl was 4.
Hennie and her nine siblings were sent to live with aunts, uncles and cousins in the tiny farming town of Clover, about four hours west of Norfolk.
Hennie landed with her grandfather, who also was raising one of her first cousins, David. They lived in what was called the "home-house," a two-story cabin built of hand-hewn logs and pegs that once was the slave quarters of their ancestors.
It looks toward the family cemetery, where the white relatives Hennie's great-grandfather and great-uncles were plantation owners are buried behind a row of boxwoods. The bushes separate their resting places from those of the family's black members, many of whom are in unmarked graves in a meadow.
The hundreds of acres surrounding the home-house were, and still are, known as Lacks Town. Those living in nearly every dwelling dotting the tobacco fields were, and still are, kin.
Growing up, the cousins scared each other with tales about the cemetery and phantom dogs and pigs that roamed Lacks Town Road, which runs alongside the house and up a half-mile to where cousin Sadie Grinnan was born in 1928.
Sadie remembers Hennie as the most beautiful thing, with honey-colored skin, a round face and a smile that made boys act like fools.
Sadie said she was surprised when Hennie and David, who went by "Day," started acting like a couple; they'd been raised like brother and sister.
But Lawrence was born to them in 1935 and Elsie four years later. Elsie was as striking as her mother but was born different, what some called "deaf and dumb."
Hennie and Day married in 1941, and the family left their life of farming tobacco to join the flood of blacks making their way to Baltimore and Washington, D.C., where wartime prosperity awaited in the shipyards and steel mills.
They were headed, they thought, to an easier life.
Sadie moved to Baltimore in the mid-1940s and often caught the No. 26 trolley to Turner Station, where Hennie had settled in as a housewife in the brick apartments built for the workers swelling the waterfront.
But Hennie missed the country and often piled the kids onto a bus for trips back to Clover.
Whether in Virginia or Maryland, she loved being a mom. Sadie watched her braid Elsie's long, brown hair and fret about the way the girl ran wild and darted off if they weren't looking.
Hennie could be as strict as she was sweet. After Sonny came along in 1947 and Deborah two years later, Lawrence was in charge of hand-washing the babies' diapers. If they weren't clean enough, Mama made him do it again.
About the time their fifth child, Joe, was born in 1950, Hennie and Day decided it was best to put Elsie in Crownsville State Hospital, once known as The Hospital for the Negro Insane of Maryland.
It broke Hennie's heart, "but she would visit her all the time," Sadie said.
___
A statue of Jesus dominates the original entrance to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. The tradition is for those passing to rub the foot or touch the robe. Members of the Lacks family say they remember rubbing the toe when they arrived with Henrietta Lacks for cervical cancer treatment in the early 1950s.
A few months later, Hennie shared a secret. She'd started bleeding even though it wasn't her time of the month. And one morning she took a bath and discovered something. She told Sadie: "I feel a lump."
Dr. Howard Jones was the gynecologist on duty Feb. 1, 1951, in the outpatient center at Johns Hopkins when Henrietta Lacks came in.
Jones, who with his wife would later found the Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Norfolk, examined her and saw something so peculiar it would stay with him for decades: A glistening, smooth growth that resembled purple Jell-O.
It was about the size of a quarter at the lower right of her cervix, and it bled easily when touched.
Jones thought it might be an infection and tested Lacks for syphilis, but the results came back negative. He ordered a biopsy cutting away a small portion of the tissue and within 48 hours had the diagnosis: cancer.
When Lacks returned for treatment eight days later, a second doctor sliced off another sliver of her tumor. Following the practice of the day, Lacks was not told.
Radium capsules were packed around her cervix to kill the cancer cells, and she later was released from the hospital.
At home, Lacks didn't tell anyone about her illness.
She continued to take care of her babies, two still in diapers; visit Elsie when someone would drive her to Crownsville; and cook her husband his favorite foods, such as white pinto beans.
She regularly returned to Johns Hopkins for treatment, but the cancer cells were swarming faster than the radium could kill them. It was becoming difficult for her to hide the pain. Cousins would enter the house and hear her upstairs, wailing, "Oh, Lord, oh, Lord, I can't get no ease! Jesus, help me, Jesus!"
On Aug. 8, shortly after her 31st birthday, she was readmitted to Johns Hopkins for what would be the last time.
Just after midnight on Oct. 4, 1951, Henrietta Lacks died. Doctors performed an autopsy that revealed firm white lumps studding her body, her chest cavity, lungs, liver and kidney. Her bladder appeared to be one solid tumor.
The cells seemed uncontrollable.
Sonny's only memory of his mother is from her funeral in Clover.
She was buried in an unmarked grave near the home-house, and he remembers how rain poured from the sky, as though heaven were weeping for Hennie.
___
Lawrence Lacks, 75, the oldest son of Henrietta Lacks lives in Baltimore, where most of the Lacks family still lives. Lacks was a teenager when his mother died in 1951 of cervical cancer.
Back in Baltimore, cousins came to help the widowed Day, who was trying to pull shifts at the shipyard and manage his three youngest children. Visits to Elsie became rarer.
Lawrence helped out, but he soon left to join the Army. Two relatives, one the family would later describe as evil, moved in to care for his brothers and sister.
Sonny recalls being beaten for no reason and having little food, maybe a biscuit, each day. The cabinets were locked so the kids wouldn't try to get more.
As they grew older, the children spent summers in Clover, plucking and stringing tobacco as their mom had done. They kept the abuse to themselves. Stoic, like their mom.
After his Army stint, Lawrence returned to Baltimore, married and took in his brothers and sister when their dad became ill. Elsie died at Crownsville in 1955; the family learned years later that she had been abused and may have had holes drilled in her head during experiments.
No one in the family talked about Hennie. Lawrence and his father didn't want to, and the younger kids didn't ask. Part of the Clover upbringing was that children didn't bother grown-ups with a lot of questions.
Henrietta's children had children of their own, and they, too, didn't ask about Grandma. It was as though she hadn't existed.
Then, in the early 1970s, the family got a call.
Researchers wanted Sonny and other family members to give blood samples so more could be learned about their mother's genetic makeup. The family wanted to know why.
Part of their mother, they were told, was alive and growing more than 20 years after her death.
Tissue from their mother's second biopsy in 1951 had been given to Johns Hopkins researcher Dr. George Gey, who for years had been trying unsuccessfully to grow human cells outside the body in his search for a cancer cure.
Technicians expected Lacks' cells to do what previous samples had done: nothing, or perhaps live a few days then die. Instead, the cells multiplied in petri dishes, spreading and piling atop one another. Uncontrollable.
On the day Lacks died, Gey appeared on a television program called "Cancer Can Be Conquered." He held Lacks' cells in a bottle close to the camera and discussed his scientific breakthrough: the first human cell line ever grown.
Gey called the cells "HeLa" the first two letters of Henrietta Lacks' first and last names and gave samples to other researchers around the country. Cancer cells work enough like normal cells that doctors could test and probe them and unlock their secrets.
Jonas Salk at the University of Pittsburgh Medical School infected HeLa cells with the polio virus and studied the reaction. By 1955, he had created a vaccine that helped nearly eradicate the crippling disease.
Companies used HeLa to test cosmetics. Researchers put flasks of HeLa near atomic test sites to measure the effects of radiation on human cells. Scientists sent HeLa into space with white mice to determine what happened to human flesh at zero gravity. HeLa helped scientists discover genetic mapping.
The cells multiplied so rapidly that they often contaminated other laboratory samples. In the 1970s, Soviet researchers thought they had discovered a virus that caused cancer, but it turned out HeLa cells had permeated the Iron Curtain.
The revelation led to improvements in the way labs handle cells and cultures.
Other cell lines were being born, but HeLa cells had become the gold standard. They shipped and stored well, and were incredibly robust. Jones said most cells can duplicate themselves in a culture in 36 hours; HeLa doubles in 24. The chromosomes in most cells shorten with each duplication until the cells can't divide anymore. Not HeLa.
Doctors still aren't sure why. Jones, 99, said recently: "They are still that unique."
___
David Sonny Lacks, 62, right, and Lawrence Lacks, 75, both of Baltimore, talk about their mother, Henrietta Lacks, who died in 1951. Sonny doesnt remember his mother but is told he has her smile. Lawrence doesnt like to talk about her; she died when he was 16.
Over the years, the Lacks family became used to the occasional phone calls from reporters and researchers.
They told what little they knew to Rolling Stone and Jet magazines and to the BBC.
What family members couldn't get used to was what had happened to Hennie.
They were angry at Johns Hopkins because they felt the hospital removed her cells without her permission.
They were bewildered by all the scientific jargon and how researchers took their blood but did not follow up or explain the results, they said. None of the children have developed their mother's aggressive cancer.
They were enraged by biomedical companies that produced the cells like they were printing money and sold them for millions, while many in the family couldn't afford health insurance.
Cousin Sadie Grinnan, now Sadie Sturdivant, 81, lives in Nathalie, near Clover, and is bothered by it, too.
"These other people," she said, "are making billions and billions."
What was hardest for Hennie's children to deal with was that so many people knew so much about their mother, while they knew so little.
"That's what hurts," Sonny said.
Now, he's looking for closure. It began in earnest with the release earlier this year of Rebecca Skloot's book, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks."
The book recounts the family's struggle, the science and the ethical implications surrounding the use of the cells.
Sonny's sister Deborah had worked closely with the author but died last May from heart disease. Deborah, who was 59, went to her grave wanting to honor her mother.
Sonny now is determined to fulfill her wish.
___
Henrietta Lacks great-granddaughter Aiyana Rogers, 11, looks at a family photo and a book about Lacks at her grandmother's home in Baltimore on April 12, 2010. Aiyana says shes proud of her great-grandmother. I just like that the world knows her now, she says. And that she is the most important woman in the world.
The family is working with an attorney to get a handle on all things Henrietta. For example, Sonny recently heard that a group in New York is holding a Henrietta Lacks race, and he wondered how people could do that without the family's permission. He and his brothers don't have the time or know-how to answer those kinds of questions.
Lawrence, now 75, rehabilitates houses for a living. Sonny, 62, is a truck driver who often picks up his grandkids in the afternoons. He helps out his younger brother, Joe, who changed his name to Zakariyya Abdul Rahman and goes by Abdul. At 59, Abdul has problems with his legs and can't get around easily.
The family has pooled its money to buy headstones for their father, who died in 2002 and is buried in Baltimore, and for Elsie, whose body was relocated to a grave near her mother's in Clover.
The Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta has volunteered to pay for Hennie's tombstone, and Skloot will buy one for Deborah, who was buried in Baltimore. The author also has established a scholarship fund for the family.
In a ceremony in October, Johns Hopkins will honor the contributions of Henrietta Lacks and others who have participated in scientific research.
Administrators say they think the medical center's role in Lacks' story often has been misrepresented. Dr. Daniel Ford, director of the Institute for Clinical and Translational Research at Johns Hopkins, said the hospital's critics are applying modern rules to a different era.
Patient consent, now a medical standard, wasn't even considered in 1951. Ford noted that Lacks' tissue was given away by researcher Gey and that the hospital never patented HeLa cells or sold them commercially.
"Gey's whole goal was to find a human cell line that would reproduce," Ford said. "It would be a platform, a model that scientists could learn human cell function from."
Gey had no idea what would happen.
Over the years, HeLa cells have multiplied to the point that they could weigh more than 20 tons, or 400 times Lacks' adult body weight. According to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, there are close to 11,000 patents involving HeLa. The cells are so prevalent that they can be ordered by the vial on the Internet.
The family tries to concentrate on all the good that's come from them. On Memorial Day weekend in Lacks Town, they will install their mother's headstone, made of granite with a rose-colored tint that hints of flowers sweet, like Hennie, and growing, like her cells.
Her grandchildren came up with the words that will be carved into the stone:
"In loving memory of a phenomenal woman, wife and mother who touched the lives of many. Here lies Henrietta Lacks (HeLa). Her immortal cells will continue to help mankind forever."
Aiyana Rogers, one of Sonny's granddaughters, flopped down at the dining table in Baltimore where the Lacks brothers talked about the memorial. She brought out a family portrait and Skloot's book, which she has started to read.
Aiyana's intrigued by the science and by the cures, but mostly she's just proud of her great-grandmother.
"I just like that the world knows her now," the 11-year-old said, with a wide, welcoming smile. "And that she is the most important woman in the world."
Originally posted here:
Cancer killed Henrietta Lacks then made her immortal - Virginian-Pilot
Posted in Immortality Medicine
Comments Off on Cancer killed Henrietta Lacks then made her immortal – Virginian-Pilot
The Yamanaka affair – Bangalore Mirror – Bangalore Mirror
Posted: at 1:18 pm
By: Santanu Chakraborty
We can now use our own cells to replenish the ones that are lost, weak or old
Observing the news from around, rather depressing and mostly violent, the world these I cannot but feel that the desire for immortality is part of what might fuel the end of our species. The level of conflict that can be provoked by unverifiable untestable ideas is rather striking. But there is another sphere, another kind of immortality that mankind perhaps covets even more than the lasting fame, power and grip of its belief systems. The literal one. I mean the power to be physically alive, preferably young, forever. Stories from many lands over many eons have eulogized various elixirs of life. Potions with the power to present eternal youth, at least life, to those who consume them.
Now these dreams havent really come true for humans. Now biological science has certainly advanced over the past century. So much so that if the ancients could peer into the future they might have seen the tremendous gain in life expectancy in our generation and wondered if we were onto somekind of elixir of life. After all the average life expectancy has more than doubled since the middle ages. Quite a remarkable achievement for medical science. Yet the methods used could be called death prevention instead of life extension, as the technolgies that have driven humans living longer are really things like antibiotics: things which have prevented that extraordinary number of premature deaths. You could say that better nutrition amounts to some life extension. It does but you wont live forever no matter how well you eat. In fact there is a growing body of evidence that suggests that eating a diet rich in nutrients but low in calories - which means hunger - actually promotes longevity. So its all very confusing with only one certainty. Death.
Now that is unless we can turn our cells new again. A tremendous advance towards this end was made when John Gurdon, an English scientist, did an unthinkable experiment. Gurdon knew that a fertilized egg, one made when a sperm and a naiive egg fuse together, is what gives rise to an entire animal. It was in 1962 that John Gurdon replaced a fertilized frog egg cells nucleus with another nucleus, this one from the intestine of a tadpole. Think of cells as two concentric balloons, the smaller one (nucleus) contained within the larger one. The spaces inside these membranes contain a tremendous amount of molecular machinery that enables these cells to divide and produce near perfect replicas of themselves. And that is just the begining. A fertilized egg divides into two cells first and then they divide again. The cells start out identical but soon start producing different cells to make the varying organs of the body. What would you expect to happen when a nucleus that was made after many many replications inside the tadpoles intestine is reimplanted into a from egg, its raisondetre not to mention its ancestral environment.
A crude analogy would be grafting organs from an old human into a young one. Out gut instinct is to think that this would not work, except in the reverse. Young tissue can replace old but never the other way around. What Gurdon found was that the egg cell implanted with an old nucleus grew into a frog without breaking a sweat. Thus was the worlds first clone was born. Its more famous sister Dolly, the sheep, was cloned by nuclear transfer many years later in 1997 by Ian Wilmut. Many scientists looked beyond the excitement to discern a subtle fact. Gurdons idea was a demonstration that even cells that have divided many times and settled into their final form - fully differentiated cells - contain all the genetic information required to turn into an entire living organisms. Within each of our cells then is contained the elixir of life. An especially remarkable finding in light of the legends that indicate mankind has perhaps looked far and wide searching for fountains of eternal youth.
How could we then turn our own cells to a slightly more primordial state so that they may divide and replenish the ones that are lost, weak or old. These cells we could pluripotent - with the potential to turn into many different cell types. The ability to make them at will would be particularly valuable, in fact they would be a revolution for medicine. Shinya Yamanaka, a Japanese doctor, took up the challenge. His answer came after a long and winding road full of challenges tackled over many years. It was almost unbelievably simple. Of the thousands of genes that make protein in the nucleus of a cell, and their many potential combinations, Yamanaka showed that forced activation of only four genes would turn the clock back all the way to make what he called induced pluripotent stem cells.
Today these cells are taking center stage as scientists develop the next generation of regenerative therapies and even in the fight against cancer.
Life may just get a little longer in the decades to come thanks to the courage of scientists who persisted against considerable social odds to get humanity tantalizingly close to immortality.
Read more from the original source:
The Yamanaka affair - Bangalore Mirror - Bangalore Mirror
Posted in Immortality Medicine
Comments Off on The Yamanaka affair – Bangalore Mirror – Bangalore Mirror
Of man and machine: The evolution of transhumanism – Baylor College of Medicine News (press release) (blog)
Posted: at 1:18 pm
A tragedy of being human is that our organs often fail before our brains do. If you agree with this statement, you may agree with transhumanist Zoltan Istvan, who believes the next life-extending medical breakthrough will be in the field of synthetic organ replacement.
The longest life now clocked is 122 years. Transhumanists believe humans will soon be able to live far longer than this even hundreds of years with the help of technological advancements that enhance human physical, intellectual, and cognitive capacities.
A prime example is also the subject of my previous research: patients with a failing heart are opting more and more to be implanted with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) instead of waiting for a heart transplant. That is, they are increasingly choosing to put an electromechanical device made of titanium and plastic in their chests as a permanent rather than temporary solution instead of facing the unlikely arrival of a natural, human heart.
These LVAD patients may not consider themselves transhumanists, but they ascribe to the distinctly transhumanist idea that human life and health spans can benefit from using medical devices to assist or even replace our organs. This choice to assist our bodies with technology that is immediately available, rather than wait for scarce organic commodities to appear, marks an increasing, if not inevitable, acceptance of mechanical, electrical, and digital devices into our lives and into our bodies.
Companies like SynCardia in the United States. and Carmat in Europe manufacture artificial human hearts to extend the life span of terminally ill patients by up to four or five years. That may not sound like much, but consider that it took David Foster Wallace less than five years to write his magnum opus, Infinite Jest. Composer Franz Schubert composed over a thousand works of music in only six years. You can do a lot in five years, no matter your age. Look at the physicist Sir William Crookes, who invented the first instruments to study radioactivity at the ripe age of 68.
Transhumanists like Istvan say this is just the beginning. He predicts artificial organs will help not only to replace our hearts, but our kidneys, our lungs, virtually any parts of us that are failing due to sickness or old age.
The assumptions underlying transhumanism, or the more widespread drive to enhance human longevity through technology, force us to think critically and imaginatively about our future. They are also the subject of my current work, which looks at the visions, aspirations, and promise of human longevity research.
The study, lead by Dr. Christopher Scott, explores how major stakeholders in longevity and aging research imagine and anticipate the future. In this study, we will help identify the major players, like Istvan, in the quest to extend human life, and how they are helping to transform not just our lifespan, but our very beliefs and assumptions about what constitutes a fully human life.
The question of whether artificial organs will help to extend life has been answered. Millions of people are already living longer not just with LVADs, but with artificial or even bioartifical organs.For example, asynthetic trachea grown entirely in a London lab using a patients own stem cells saved the life of a Swedish man with late-stage tracheal cancer. With growing knowledge of synthetic tissue growth and improvements in 3D printing, the medical devices we are putting in our bodies may soon all be made of our very bodies. The distinction between man and machine will become difficult to make when the two are of the same, organic material.
For some of us, this sounds promising and amazing. To others more accustomed to strong distinctions between man and machine, it sounds justifiably scary.
Whatever your position, we are undeniably witnessing an increasing cultural acceptance of integrating our bodies with technology not just so that we can open the front door of our house by waving our micro-chipped hand in front of it, as Istvan can, but to live longer and healthier lives.
-By Kristin Kostick, Ph.D., research associate in the Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy at Baylor College of Medicine
Follow this link:
Of man and machine: The evolution of transhumanism - Baylor College of Medicine News (press release) (blog)
Posted in Transhumanist
Comments Off on Of man and machine: The evolution of transhumanism – Baylor College of Medicine News (press release) (blog)







