this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
1085 points (99.0% liked)

Science Memes

13427 readers
2949 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] stopforgettingit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 minutes ago* (last edited 1 minute ago)

I think a really exceeding important clarification here is he edited the genomes of human embryos, not babies. Babies are already born humans, embryos are a clump of cells that will become a baby in the future. I do not condone gene editing without consent, which is what he did, and yes there is lots of questionable ethics around gene editing but he did NOT experiment on babies.

[–] Schmuppes@lemmy.today 9 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Mengele vibes right there.

[–] unused_user_name@lemm.ee 5 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Well, the nazis did make a lot of scientific progress…

/s, just in case

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 0 points 51 minutes ago (2 children)

The nazis were ethical compared to what was happening at Unit 731...

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 minutes ago

doesn't get enough attention, true, but both are so far over the moral event horizon, anyone who tolerates either one living should be shot.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 2 points 29 minutes ago

We don't need to compare the two, they both considered atrocities horrific beyond comprehension.

[–] DrownedRats@lemmy.world 12 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

"Speed limits are holding me back from getting from a to B in as little time as possible" yeah, and they reduce the likelihood of injuring/killing a people in the process.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 minutes ago

yeah, but, consider: I really want to get to point B. like, so badly. and I'm pretty sure I'm a good driver.

[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 8 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Wasn't he the guy who was trying to find a way for HIV-positive couples to have HIV-negative babies?

[–] Hirom@beehaw.org 3 points 26 minutes ago

Antiretroviral therapy for pregnant women already is a safe and effective way to avoid HIV transmission to the baby. It's part of standard treatment guidelines https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1701216324003748

So the guy has genetically engineered babies as a potentially risky and certainlycontroversial solution for a problem that already has a safe and non-controversia solution.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 115 points 9 hours ago (9 children)

Ethics are supposed to throttle human activity. That's their fucking job. That guy is a goddamn sociopath.

[–] melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 minutes ago* (last edited 2 minutes ago)

not necessarily throttle, but divert into more ethical directions.

the nazi twin 'experiments' for example, were monstrous but produced like no useful data.

atrocities do not necessarily mean better science. sometimes you're just being an edgelord.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 4 hours ago

I honestly think that is the most important point to make. It is a fundamental truth and force the person to talk specifics. Why is it bad there?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Railcar8095@lemm.ee 71 points 10 hours ago (23 children)

Is nobody concerned that illegal experiments on babies only gets you 3 years?

Maybe they were Uyghurs so it was classified as "property damage" in Chinese law.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 hours ago

Depends how successful the experiment is (and probably on what the goal is as well).

If he'd been testing the effects of grass vs grain feed on human fat marbling, I'd imagine the sentence would have been a little more severe

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 14 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The devil is in the details....

You are likely thinking (as I am) that he implanted robotic arms on babies but he may have just rubbed sage oil on them for all we know

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 12 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (7 children)

He used CRISPR to make babies immune to HIV.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

No, he inserted a gene that is associated with resistance to HIV, but is also associated with increased risk of some cancers. He did this without informed consent, he did this without running it by an ethics board, he did this without knowing whether it would work or not.

Let’s stop pretending that he’s a good guy that just magically made HIV immune babies.

Edit: it also didn’t work. The babies have genes both with and without the mutation.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 36 points 9 hours ago (12 children)

Be careful, you might get banned from lemmy dot ml for hatespeech against dictatorships.

[–] Railcar8095@lemm.ee 1 points 16 minutes ago

I've blocked that instance, but if they need more material to ban me I have it.

[–] Aux@feddit.uk 1 points 1 hour ago

Who cares about a tankie instance?

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 hours ago

It's literal misinformation, so it probably should be removed, yes.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)

Average CCP party member

load more comments
view more: next ›