There's absolutely nothing wrong with what I've proposed.
Typically only people that believe in a soul or that humans "should die" take issue.
Neither of these is correct in my world view. I can understand the religious perspective, but the romantic idea that limited live spans are good is incredibly twisted.
I think people should be immortal, but that's just not feasible. The next best thing is using all of the tools around us to extend our lives as much as possible.
I'm tired of biology being so punch-card slow while the compiler is literally staring us in the face. The human is the perfect model organism for everything we want to accomplish, and I've shown that we can ethically build upon it as a platform without harming anyone. Moreover, we can farm it. Never deal with blood or organ shortages, end immunosuppressants for many people, and potentially perform purely regenerative surgeries.
A human grown in a lab without a brain is a plant. Dogs, apes, and octopuses are more human than that. Before you fight me, go take on the many acts of animal cruelty in the world.
The people that would hold this back are Luddites.
This is a faster path to curing cancer. All fifty thousand types of it.
edit: Down voters, why not argue your point instead? Because from my perspective your views are a dated death wish.
THere definitely are a number of things "wrong" with what you've proposed. The first is that society simply wouldn't accept it; by the time people learned what you were doing, the government would make laws against it. People really are averse to growing brainless humans in vats for medical experimention and spare parts.
I'm not interested in "fighting" you,but the reality is that you're starting from a non-starter position that would never fly in the larger general public.
It's not worth debating, because you're absolutely, totally convinced that you're right. Most of us here agree that in principle it would be great to be able to run experiments that truly address human medical problems without ethical concern, but I think "decephalized humans" don't really qualify.
> non-starter position that would never fly in the larger general public
At one point in time the majority of the general public was against gay marriage. Two hundred years ago many were pro slavery. Everyone used to be against cutting up dead bodies so we could learn how they worked, so it was conducted in secrecy.
Most people are illiterate about the science behind this. The benefits are real and substantial. This isn't a money grab or vanity project - it pushes humanity forward a notch, and it should be done.
Anti-vax, anti-GMO, anti-scientific thought shouldn't prevent us from developing a tool that saves countless lives.
Where is the line? Is it okay to use human stem cells for experimentation? Is it okay to grow whole organs for replacement? Is it okay to grow muscles, ears, skin, eyes, bones...? Why is not okay to grow them all at once? I don't see any difference. All of this literally is "decephalized humans", just with more modification/specialization and a simpler process.
We're even growing brain tissue that exhibits actual human-like brain waves for experimentation - how is that okay with you!?
I'm an emergency physician and I think what you have proposed is unethical and immoral. Good luck getting any type of experimentation through the Institutional Review Boards(IRB), bioethicists, and scientists.
Call us Luddites but this type of science is not looked at kindly. There's no argument or debate to be had when what you are proposing is a red line for many and a non-starter.
