It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Dead Baby Pills
China is Reportedly Selling Pills Made Out of Dead Babies to Enhance Stamina
Supposedly, the television team paid a lot of money to get some of the pills, and when they tested them, found the pills’ contents were 99.7 percent human, and were also able to discern the babies’ gender from the powder, as well as found hair and nail remnants.
The dead babies used are supposedly used with the mother’s consent. The documentary will air August 6 on SBS TV South Korea.
In 1992, a small biotech company in Cambridge, England announced the creation of "Astrid," the world's first "transgenic" pig. Soon scientists were talking seriously about "organ farms" that would solve the world's chronic shortage of hearts, livers and other spare parts for human transplantation. A new breed of pigs, genetically-altered to be more human--and,so, less likely to be rejected by the immune systems of human recipients--was riding into town to save the day.
Now, five years after the first clinical human trials were first predicted to have begun, the most hopeful members of the xeno community still see trials several years away, and a number of scientists and scientific organizations are expressing new cautions. At the same time, a new possible solution to the organ shortage--creating organs from human stem cells, then cloning them--has emerged as a potentially more promising long-term solution. All of this is effecting the business of xeno: The science ultimately might prove workable, but will the money for the research hold out through more years of unprofitability and potential controversy?
I think the biggest hazard here is:
Who will be regulating it for food safety and so on? (Or if there will be any regulation what so ever....) We already see cases of food born illnesses being tracked to single farms or factory food producers. Now imagine some twit sneezing or dropping H5N1 deliberately into a 'vat' of this stuff... It's literally the perfect breeding environment for that sort of nightmare machinations.
My question is..what's the real agenda in trying to develop food derived from human DNA ?
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by xuenchen
OK, there's where it might get even more controversial though. Suppose that Monsanto or whoever gets a patent on this human DNA. Maybe then they have a basis to patent other forms of DNA and eventually a clone and might even try to go as far as making a patent on a human being. Then they will own life itself and no one will have a right to create a human without their consent. yikes
Published: March 29, 2010
A federal judge on Monday struck down patents on two genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer. The decision, if upheld, could throw into doubt the patents covering thousands of human genes and reshape the law of intellectual property
United States District Court Judge Robert W. Sweet issued the 152-page decision, which invalidated seven patents related to the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, whose mutations have been associated with cancer.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York joined with individual patients and medical organizations to challenge the patents last May: they argued that genes, products of nature, fall outside of the realm of things that can be patented. The patents, they argued, stifle research and innovation and limit testing options.................
Myriad Genetics, the company that holds the patents with the University of Utah Research Foundation, asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that the work of isolating the DNA from the body transforms it and makes it patentable. Such patents, it said, have been granted for decades; the Supreme Court upheld patents on living organisms in 1980. In fact, many in the patent field had predicted the courts would throw out the suit.
Judge Sweet, however, ruled that the patents were “improperly granted” because they involved a “law of nature.” He said that many critics of gene patents considered the idea that isolating a gene made it patentable “a ‘lawyer’s trick’ that circumvents the prohibition on the direct patenting of the DNA in our bodies but which, in practice, reaches the same result.”
Human will be just another side dish. The "source material" is an endless supply.