I just thought I would share this news as I think it's absolutely amazing!
This woman had a trachea transplanted in her from a donor, which has been done before except that she does not need to take and anti-rejection
medicine!! They first implanted the trachea in her arm for a few months so that her body could produce enough tissue of her own on the windpipe before
transplanting it in her neck later!!! I think that it's absolutely amazing!
Perhaps soon we will not need to take drugs if they come up with ways to produce organ tissue on other organs before implanting them in their "usual
Indeed, tissue engineering initiatives have shown remarkable promise for improving our quality and duration of life. It's going to become even more
versatile when combined with forthcoming gene therapy techniques to correct vulnerabilities to environmental factors or replication errors. The demand
for organ donation will drop significantly, allowing recipients to have replacements grown and implanted in only a fraction of the time they would
otherwise be left waiting. On a broader scale, future industrial production of Type O +/- blood via marrow cultures could provide a plentiful source
of universally accepted blood which is currently in short supply.
Additionally, tissue generation is only one of several emerging technologies which will start to converge in the next decade which will bring sweeping
changes to our medical and social infrastructures. Indeed, we are rapidly coming to an era when we will be forced to redefine the very definition of
what it means to be human.
... and I look around at some of the daily postings and headlines here on ATS; the prayers to aliens and gods for rapture, the endorsement of violent
rhetoric of armchair revolutionaries, the embrace of magic and superstition over science and technology...and... I've got to admit, I'm
apprehensive. Something has got to change, because despite popular perception here - "they" (whoever they are) do not want the public to be mindless
sheep. We are moving beyond the scope and breadth of the Industrial Revolution. Information itself is the most prized commodity, and it cannot
be generated in bulk by mindless complacent automatons. They need us to think for ourselves, which I understand may seem like an absurdity to those
who think this site is about thinking outside the box... but thinking outside of the box doesn't free someone from being demonstrably wrong. And the
only difference between ATS and PubMed is a methodology for refining fact from fiction.
Information can be deadly, and it's only going to become more potent as we go forward. If we don't take the responsibility for trying to establish
objective fact from subjective fiction upon ourselves - I can easily see the potential for a case being made in favor of overt social controls on
information in order to promote security. And while I find it ethically repulsive to suggest halting humanities technological development - the
effective indefinite perpetuation of today's level of suffering - based on fear of the dangers of progress, I find the alternative no more palatable.
Even though our societies can be described in terms of complex systems and emergent trends - to treat society in those terms is deeply dehumanizing.
Would human society be worth preserving if the effort to do so would require us to strip away our humanity in order to do so? Transhumanism is not
synonymous with inhumanism.
I don't know how the future will turn out, but I refuse to live in fear of it. I hope it's filled with more stories like that of the OP's Kaitlyne
McNamara and fewer like that of Hypatia and Alan Turing.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.