Pages:
Author

Topic: Don't lose your head! Full-body transplants will be possible within two years - page 5. (Read 3997 times)

hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
This source doesn't do me much good. It includes a lot of medical jargon which I do not understand. I surmise that doctors reattached a severed spinal cord? If this is accurate, it's still the existing spinal cord of one individual that was previously intact. That's not nearly the same as attaching the brain stem and spinal cord of one individual into the body of another individual and having any degree of mobility. Based just on my impression of the feasibility of the procedure, I still have to side with the two other neurosurgeons they quoted in the original article as saying such a transplant is not feasible.

Okay, in my previous post I mentioned about a German farmer who lost his hands. Here's the video (strictly 18+).

Is he a Frankenstein?

I'm a bit apprehensive clicking on anything that says "strictly 18+". Is this a grisly and/or graphic video?

That was a joke really (Frankenstein style). The video seems to be from the news, there is nothing grisly or gory about it. Go watch without fear.

I didn't make the Frankenstein comment, so I'm not sure that was supposed to be directed at me. I don't think people with transplanted organs or appendages necessarily are. But a head is another thing entirely, because the replacement of appendages isn't the replacement of the self. Identity travels with the head, so attaching a head to another body would qualify as Frankenstein-level, if that is relevant to anything discussed here. And the successful attachment of an appendage, like hands, does not foretell the feasibility of something far more complex, like brain stem and spine. Having useful hands after a hand transplant doesn't translate to having useful motor functions after a head transplant.

Just attaching hands is not enough, but if these "new" hands are controllable (and they are), it is quite another story. And yes, it does foretell that attaching the whole body AND making it controllable is feasible.
legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
I can't see it ever being feasible, let alone in two years. That's the type of time frame you slap on your proclamation so the press covers it.

What is not feasible? Finding a decent body if you have billions in your pockets? There had been similar surgeries on dogs (by the Soviets in 1950s) and on a monkey in 1970, the main obstacle being rejection by the body’s immune system (which is now mainly overcome).

Sewing a monky's head on another monkey body is not analogous to a human head transplant where you hope to have any quality of life afterwards. The science is what I find unfeasible, or the fact that it would ever be deemed ethically acceptable.

Ethical questions aside, did you follow the link I provided?

To the article? Yeah. I also noted the two neurosurgeons they quoted who said this wasn't feasible.

No, I meant this link. Note that the article by this link got included in Pubmed.

This source doesn't do me much good. It includes a lot of medical jargon which I do not understand. I surmise that doctors reattached a severed spinal cord? If this is accurate, it's still the existing spinal cord of one individual that was previously intact. That's not nearly the same as attaching the brain stem and spinal cord of one individual into the body of another individual and having any degree of mobility. Based just on my impression of the feasibility of the procedure, I still have to side with the two other neurosurgeons they quoted in the original article as saying such a transplant is not feasible.

Okay, in my previous post I mentioned about a German farmer who lost his hands. Here's the video (strictly 18+).

Is he a Frankenstein?

I'm a bit apprehensive clicking on anything that says "strictly 18+". Is this a grisly and/or graphic video? I didn't make the Frankenstein comment, so I'm not sure that was supposed to be directed at me. I don't think people with transplanted organs or appendages necessarily are. But a head is another thing entirely, because the replacement of appendages isn't the replacement of the self. Identity travels with the head, so attaching a head to another body would qualify as Frankenstein-level, if that is relevant to anything discussed here. And the successful attachment of an appendage, like hands, does not foretell the feasibility of something far more complex, like brain stem and spine. Having useful hands after a hand transplant doesn't translate to having useful motor functions after a head transplant.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
I'm heading out, and when I return will plunge head-long into making headway on a new digital hedge-fund. Everyone remain headstrong and buy lots of BTC.  Cheesy

Don't lose you head!
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Maybe as vegetables moving around in wheelchairs if that. But if someone can somehow scam the wealthy out of money for this, good for them.

You seem not to understand the term vegetative state in this context, which is a disorder of consciousness. And many elders are already in the wheelchairs, so what's the difference?

I understand the term vegetative state but I don´t understand why anyone would be upset by imagining that I don´t. I do appreciate the concern though, I think.

What about Steve Hawking then? Is he a vegetable or what?

No, I didn´t have his state in mind. Nor elderly and otherwise alert people in wheelchairs. My vision of those with the transplanted heads is ugly beyond words, let´s leave it at that  Grin
legendary
Activity: 2114
Merit: 1040
A Great Time to Start Something!
I'm heading out, and when I return will plunge head-long into making headway on a new digital hedge-fund. Everyone remain headstrong and buy lots of BTC.  Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
Maybe as vegetables moving around in wheelchairs if that. But if someone can somehow scam the wealthy out of money for this, good for them.

You seem not to understand the term vegetative state in this context, which is a disorder of consciousness. And many elders are already in the wheelchairs, so what's the difference?

I understand the term vegetative state but I don´t understand why anyone would be upset by imagining that I don´t. I do appreciate the concern though, I think.

What about Steve Hawking then? Is he a vegetable or what? Would you deny him a healthy body from someone who shot himself in the head?
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
Ugh, it's not like I don't know about the black market organs, but that's the thing, if it goes past organs then we're going to see people getting their body parts randomly hacked off for transplanations, as Ramsay just wrote, that's the kind of thing I'm thinking about too.

Good morning, sir! Sewing back cut-off body parts is common now. Not from the original body as well. I remember a German farmer who had lost his both arms got "new" ones a few years ago. It was in the news.

*head desks* Sad
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Maybe as vegetables moving around in wheelchairs if that. But if someone can somehow scam the wealthy out of money for this, good for them.

You seem not to understand the term vegetative state in this context, which is a disorder of consciousness. And many elders are already in the wheelchairs, so what's the difference?

I understand the term vegetative state but I don´t understand why anyone would be upset by imagining that I don´t. I do appreciate the concern though, I think.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
Maybe as vegetables moving around in wheelchairs if that. But if someone can somehow scam the wealthy out of money for this, good for them.

You seem not to understand the term vegetative state in this context, which is a disorder of consciousness. And many elders are already in the wheelchairs, so what's the difference?
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Maybe as vegetables moving around in wheelchairs if that. But if someone can somehow scam the wealthy out of money for this, good for them.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
I can't see it ever being feasible, let alone in two years. That's the type of time frame you slap on your proclamation so the press covers it.

What is not feasible? Finding a decent body if you have billions in your pockets? There had been similar surgeries on dogs (by the Soviets in 1950s) and on a monkey in 1970, the main obstacle being rejection by the body’s immune system (which is now mainly overcome).

Sewing a monky's head on another monkey body is not analogous to a human head transplant where you hope to have any quality of life afterwards. The science is what I find unfeasible, or the fact that it would ever be deemed ethically acceptable.

Ethical questions aside, did you follow the link I provided?

To the article? Yeah. I also noted the two neurosurgeons they quoted who said this wasn't feasible.

No, I meant this link. Note that the article by this link got included in Pubmed.

This source doesn't do me much good. It includes a lot of medical jargon which I do not understand. I surmise that doctors reattached a severed spinal cord? If this is accurate, it's still the existing spinal cord of one individual that was previously intact. That's not nearly the same as attaching the brain stem and spinal cord of one individual into the body of another individual and having any degree of mobility. Based just on my impression of the feasibility of the procedure, I still have to side with the two other neurosurgeons they quoted in the original article as saying such a transplant is not feasible.

Okay, in my previous post I mentioned about a German farmer who lost his hands. Here's the video (strictly 18+).

Is he a Frankenstein?
legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
I can't see it ever being feasible, let alone in two years. That's the type of time frame you slap on your proclamation so the press covers it.

What is not feasible? Finding a decent body if you have billions in your pockets? There had been similar surgeries on dogs (by the Soviets in 1950s) and on a monkey in 1970, the main obstacle being rejection by the body’s immune system (which is now mainly overcome).

Sewing a monky's head on another monkey body is not analogous to a human head transplant where you hope to have any quality of life afterwards. The science is what I find unfeasible, or the fact that it would ever be deemed ethically acceptable.

Ethical questions aside, did you follow the link I provided?

To the article? Yeah. I also noted the two neurosurgeons they quoted who said this wasn't feasible.

No, I meant this link. Note that the article by this link got included in Pubmed.

This source doesn't do me much good. It includes a lot of medical jargon which I do not understand. I surmise that doctors reattached a severed spinal cord? If this is accurate, it's still the existing spinal cord of one individual that was previously intact. That's not nearly the same as attaching the brain stem and spinal cord of one individual into the body of another individual and having any degree of mobility. Based just on my impression of the feasibility of the procedure, I still have to side with the two other neurosurgeons they quoted in the original article as saying such a transplant is not feasible.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
I can't see it ever being feasible, let alone in two years. That's the type of time frame you slap on your proclamation so the press covers it.

What is not feasible? Finding a decent body if you have billions in your pockets? There had been similar surgeries on dogs (by the Soviets in 1950s) and on a monkey in 1970, the main obstacle being rejection by the body’s immune system (which is now mainly overcome).

Sewing a monky's head on another monkey body is not analogous to a human head transplant where you hope to have any quality of life afterwards. The science is what I find unfeasible, or the fact that it would ever be deemed ethically acceptable.

Ethical questions aside, did you follow the link I provided?

To the article? Yeah. I also noted the two neurosurgeons they quoted who said this wasn't feasible.

No, I meant this link. Note that the article by this link got included in Pubmed.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
Ugh, it's not like I don't know about the black market organs, but that's the thing, if it goes past organs then we're going to see people getting their body parts randomly hacked off for transplanations, as Ramsay just wrote, that's the kind of thing I'm thinking about too.

Good morning, sir! Sewing back cut-off body parts is common now. Not from the original body as well. I remember a German farmer who had lost his both arms got "new" ones a few years ago. It was in the news.
legendary
Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
I can't see it ever being feasible, let alone in two years. That's the type of time frame you slap on your proclamation so the press covers it.

What is not feasible? Finding a decent body if you have billions in your pockets? There had been similar surgeries on dogs (by the Soviets in 1950s) and on a monkey in 1970, the main obstacle being rejection by the body’s immune system (which is now mainly overcome).

Sewing a monky's head on another monkey body is not analogous to a human head transplant where you hope to have any quality of life afterwards. The science is what I find unfeasible, or the fact that it would ever be deemed ethically acceptable.

Ethical questions aside, did you follow the link I provided?

To the article? Yeah. I also noted the two neurosurgeons they quoted who said this wasn't feasible.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
Ugh, it's not like I don't know about the black market organs, but that's the thing, if it goes past organs then we're going to see people getting their body parts randomly hacked off for transplanations, as Ramsay just wrote, that's the kind of thing I'm thinking about too.
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001
Nasty.

Frankenstein for real. No thanks.
Yeah, I'm creeped out by this subject as well. Thoughts about severing spinal cords and reattaching heads to other bodies is like the "Brave New World" on steroids. If possible, we're no way near anything like this being legitimately possible nor legal to try. Then again we're talking elitists most likely the beneficiaries of such things - so all bets are off.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
I can't see it ever being feasible, let alone in two years. That's the type of time frame you slap on your proclamation so the press covers it.

Even if it is possible, it would be like Necromancy except without the magic, utterly fucked up medical science piecing peoples' body parts together onto one person for the sake of lengthening their lifespan and you also have the issue of the black market and what criminals would do with that kind of technology.

I don't think that kind of technology in particular should exist in the first place.

What about transplantation of hearts, kidneys, livers, etc? Do we not have the black market for organ transplantation right now?

Besides that, the real necromancy is bringing dead people back to life. Should we ban resuscitators?

I knew people would bring that up Tongue yeah but they aren't from living unwilling victims are they? Which is where my worry comes from,  besides, we have embryo's etc. for growing that shit now without killing off a healthy human being that's already fully grown.

I'm afraid that you have never heard about organ theft in Kosovo, i.e. kidnapping people, organ harvesting and then killing the victims. Now the same is allegedly happening in Ukraine, where organs of heavily wounded Ukrainian soldiers are said to be used for transplantation.

Actually, I don't see much difference between taking an organ from a not yet dead body, or the whole body. In fact, usually not just one organ is taken from one body.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
I can't see it ever being feasible, let alone in two years. That's the type of time frame you slap on your proclamation so the press covers it.

What is not feasible? Finding a decent body if you have billions in your pockets? There had been similar surgeries on dogs (by the Soviets in 1950s) and on a monkey in 1970, the main obstacle being rejection by the body’s immune system (which is now mainly overcome).

Sewing a monky's head on another monkey body is not analogous to a human head transplant where you hope to have any quality of life afterwards. The science is what I find unfeasible, or the fact that it would ever be deemed ethically acceptable.

Ethical questions aside, did you follow the link I provided?
legendary
Activity: 1090
Merit: 1000
Nasty.

Frankenstein for real. No thanks.
Pages:
Jump to: