Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Artificial Human-Like Fingers Grown 175

Posted by Hemos from the fun-with-science dept.
Ristoril writes "Scientists in the Kinki (I'm not making this up) University Hospital in Osaka, Japan, have created artificial fingers in cooperation with Harvard Med School in Boston, Mass. Read the whole story about artificial cow fingers from Yahoo! News. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Artifical Human-Like Fingers Grown More

Artifical Human-Like Fingers Grown

Comments Filter:

  • I've actually worked with the glow-in-the-dark mice before. Apparently the gene for, well, _glowing_ came from plankton.

    The lab I worked at studied ways to keep skin grafts from being rejected. Skin was transplanted from one mouse to another. Glow in the dark skin made for a good marker!

  • Where's Gary Larson and The Far Side when you need him!
  • I've seen mice that grew human ears (cartilage anyway). It was on TLC or Discovery or something like that a few months ago. I would guess these are the same kinds of mice.
  • Posted by Phantom of the Operating Syste:

    Like most things, this will start out intended for only 'Serious' use, then the floodgates will open and it will become the pop thing to do. Remember, Edison never expected or wanted the phonograph to be used for entertainment. He invisioned it only for business and governmental communication.

    @wheeee! you thought piercings were bad, you ain't seen __nothing__ yet!

    -phantom
  • Posted by Phantom of the Operating Syste:

    umm, yeah, that..that is exactly it.
    @.@
    I really shouldn't be suprised. I am
    kinda suprised at what the one twin gave up.

    -phantom
  • Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:

    When I was a kid, it was a big deal that I knew how to use a computer. As time went on everyone learned how. When I was in my teens it was a big deal that I could write computer programs. Now, it's an elective at most colleges.

    And the one thing I had left, the one thing that I thought that only time would take away from me is just about to be made obsolete. Now any jerk with enough money can have a big penis too.

    Bill Gates can walk his (I'm assuming) needle pricked body over to a plastic surgeon and get a special deluxe John Holmes model grown up in a few weeks.

    DAMMIT!!!!

    LK
  • Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:

    His obsession with financial achievement is indicative of a man who feels that he has to make up for something.

    LK
  • Posted by The Incredible Mr. Limpett:

    ugh...probably looks like that one deal where they grew a human ear on a mouse...it was just coming out of it's back...gross. poor mouse.

  • wtf (Score:1)

    by crayz ( 1056 )
    umm what are you talking about? AIDS kills your immune system so if you start off w/o one it really doesn't matter b/c it's just as bad or worse than having AIDS.
  • the body wouldnt live without the brain. So some type of artificial brian would be needed. It would just keep the body alive while the testing was done. The only problem is that this would be incredibly expensive and we are not even close to this point technologically.
  • Why do most people think that the idea of a
    "superior" species using humans as raw material
    is horrific, but this kind of thing is alright?
    If you look at movies like Independence Day and
    The Matrix, the sole justification provided
    for destroying the "enemy" is that they are
    behaving almost exactly as these scientists are
    behaving toward the lab mice. I'm not an animal
    rights nut, but it seems like we've crossed
    some very important ethical boundaries when
    right and wrong are relative to whether we are
    the exploiter or the exploitee. It's a shame
    that throw-away sci-fi movies can seemingly
    grasp how terrible this kind of thing is
    but some of the best minds in the world either
    don't care or don't bother to consider it.
    This is _way _ beyond the usual animal cosmetic
    testing stuff.

    If the storylines of those movies ever came true,
    I think we would probably be getting what we
    deserve. Karma can be a dangerous thing.
  • The fingers would probably be tasty.

    hawk, who is amazed at McDonald's ability to charge a higher price than its competitors for a product with no flavor, and didn't realize the obvious analogy until he typed the first part of this run-on fragment
  • He also did the "East of Eden" (or was it West???) series, in which very primitive, pre-technological, humans stumble into intelligent dinosaurs with advanced biotech . . .

    Many other good things too, but the stainless steel rat stuff are still my favorites.
  • I can just see this -- Some company out there will make Terminators -- except that they won't have metal for skeleton, they'll have real, honest to god FLESH ...they'll be able to infiltrate any organization, pass any security checkpoint..they will be invisible..they will be us..we will be them....they will rebel against us..there will be a big war..... oh the humanity!..er inhumanity!!!

  • Do they actually, really, honest-to-god glow in the dark?

    Talk about the pet fad of the century if they ever came out commercially...
  • A judge around here just sentenced a guy to 10 consecutive life sentences plus 8 other terms. He won't be eligable for parole for 575 years.

  • At UCLA they have the "Hugh G. Dick Library".

    They had to move the sign inside.
  • This is only vaguely related, but I'm *reasonably* sure that most (if not all) "life" sentences are really just for 20 years...

    -harry
  • Am I the only one made nauseous by this story?

    I walked around with a sick feeling for weeks after reading this, and seeing that horrible hand... Bleah!

  • This is wayyy cool! I'm missing part of my right thumb. Now *I* too will hit the space bar with my right hand! Now, *I* too will be able to use the crappy round iMac mouse!!!

    Weeee!!!!!
  • A dog with arms.... then he could let himself out to take a leak.
  • | If it's to replace lost fingers, it sounds
    | slightly unappealing to me -- I don't know
    | if I'd like to have cow tissue grown in mice
    | grafted onto me.

    The story was a bit sparse, but why would cow tissue grow into human fingers anyhow? Strange stuff, this.

    But at any rate, I don't see it making much difference where the finger was grown were a viable replacement available and I needed one.

    I mean, as long as it didn't cause Torgo Knee Syndrome or anything ...
  • My driving finger is just about shot.
  • "Your new arm is big and strong. . . not like that little crummy white one on the other side."
  • I've heard of "two left feet", but damn! That's just silly.

    I'm sure shaking your own hand is an odd experience. As is wearing parts of dead buddies.

    I don't recall the author's name, but I highly recommend everything he's written, the "Stainless Steel Rat" books in particular.

  • "and everybody wants a rock /
    to wind a piece of string around"

    heh. I wonder how many other people caught that reference.

  • Not human-sized, human-proportioned.
  • Why do most people think that the idea of a "superior" species using humans as raw material is horrific, but this kind of thing is alright?

    Um, because humans are intelligent beings and cows and mice aren't. It's the same reason why owning pets and livestock is considered okay (by most reasonable people) but slavery is viewed as evil.

    BTW, ever notice how in SF, "superior" species never seem to really have godlike intelligence --just really big egos. The "inferior" humans always manage to outsmart them in the end. Mice and cows never seem be able to do that to humans, for some reason.
  • Why should intelligence be the criteria for giving animals humane consideration? What does this have to do with the ability to feel pain and suffer?

    It has everything to do with it. All living things (including microbes and plants, which animal rights fanatics never seem to consider) can react mindlessly to stimuli. Heck, even some non-living things like my Mindstorm robots can do that. But only intelligent beings can interpret stimuli in a meaningful fashion and can be logically said to "suffer". Pain isn't just stimulus to humans; we fear pain because we *know* pain is associated with death.

    In 1789, philosopher Jeremy Bentham sounded the rallying cry for animals everywhere: "The question is not, can they reason, nor can they talk, but can they suffer?"

    This is the same Bentham, who, in his "Defense of Usuary" basically said it is morally okay for rich people to screw over everyone else. You'd think that the animal rights people would look for someone a little less callous towards suffering among humans to quote.
  • that's nothing. At the Defense Language Institue in Monterey they have the "Fukio Aiso Memorial Library"
  • *falls off chair in spasmodic fits of laughter as co-workers look on bewilderment*
    ---
  • When I saw the phrase "artificial cow fingers" I suddenly flashed on high school cafeteria names for "mystery meat".
    The second thing I thought of is that this could bring a whole new meaning to the phrase "giving someone the finger".

  • Just take my word for it. And really, really don't follow any of the links.

  • The article was woefully lacking in information. One thing they didn't mention -- what did they have to do to the cow to get the tissue samples? Skin may be easy to come by, but I don't want anyone scrapeing off pieces of my tendons, even if it is so I can have that 11th finger I always wanted.

    I actually kinda like the idea that it was done just to see if it was possible. "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if we could give mice fingers grown from cows?"
  • hmmmm... I was just thinking... those of us who only care about the suffering of animals and don't care about health particularly... a cow finger sandwich sounds pretty good. no cows harmed (or humans) wonder what that sandwich would cost? hehe
  • so I guess I should read the articles first. I guess we can't grow stuff yet outside of a real living thing to supply nutrients... ah the life of a research mouse... that is the life for me.

  • Re:A thought... (Score:3)

    by Oo.et.oO ( 6530 ) on Wednesday June 30, 1999 @11:02AM (#1824574)
    you are nuts if you think this is worse than what the cosmetic testing animals go through. I have no idea what is required to imbed a biodegradable polymer matrix in a mouse and grow human like tissue in it... but what the animals in cosmetic testing labs go through is not to be believed. think about all those chemicals that say on the label that they will cause blindness or death if they come in contact with your eyes or soft tissue. how do you think they figured that out? not by human testing (unless you are talking about gov't testing) ever seen a rabbit whose eye lids have been pinned wide open so a lab tech or computer can squirt super concentrated hair dye or eye makup solutions directly onto the animal's eye balls, only to be left there festering until the animal goes blind dies? ever seen what a chicken or veal farm looks like? 4 hens to a 4 cubic foot cage, cages stacked hundreds high. hens all shitting on each other and pecking each others eyes out because they have goon totally insane, the skin on their feet grown around the chicken wire floor on their cages? and that is just so you can eat them or their eggs. it is enough to make the biggest frat boy go vegetarian! sorry for the little off topic rant... who's superior?
  • So for a criminal with a life sentence, should we extend his life? I mean but are we really extending his life?

    This is real a double edged sword. In the western world, for them most part, we go out of our way to make prisons comfortable for those being held captive. Otherwise the conditions are considered cruel and inhuman. Here we have the oportunity to say to a prisioner, not only are we going to leave you in a cell till you die but, we're also going to make sure that your body stays healthy so we can keep you there for a longer than you naturally would have been. Were I stuck in a cell for years on end, with no hope of ever seeing the outside world, I think I would yearn for the release that death would bring. This is would take that from me. Which is then more humane -to let him/her die, or to keep him/her alive. I guess this is the same sort of question people ask when dealing with euthenasia.

    Further, as I consider it, this appears to put a yet greater burden upon the general population. As it is now the cost of internment of a prisoner (on average) in a Canadian Prision is $60K (cnd) per year. Here we just add more years and more cost to the general public. The public always gets screwed twice. Once when the person commits the crime, and then again when they have to pay to keep him locked up. In the end I think society in general will have to come up with a better solution to crime than internment. But I'm open to suggestions as to what that is. The death of personality seems viable -if we could do it- but it to has its scary side.

    Locust

  • Technically, animals kill for the surivial of the
    gene(s) that make them kill. Group selection is
    not really big among evolutionists anymore. I'd
    suggest "The Selfish Gene" by Dawkins. The basic
    idea is that a gene is only interested in propagating
    itself, not the welfare of the animal as a whole.
    Thus, animals kill their mate because they probably
    share fewer genes with it than the children they'd
    be helping by getting that extra meal. (This type
    of thing is rare anyway).
  • You know.. those sandwitches with fake fingers in them just got alot funnier...



    --

  • OOoooooo 11 fingers.... I can just imagine all of the Emacs bindings that I would create... :)

  • Excellent point. It's sort of the dilemma of living forever. Right now the population of the planet isn't dying as fast as it's expanding. This is leading to some massive problems as people live longer. Pretty soon we'll have to start finding other places to put people - or deal with seeing crime rates skyrocket, employment crises, major racially motivated wars, etc... the list goes on. It's rather scary to imagine what might happen...
  • I sware they have them bubble eyed dog-boys down in linear valey!

    We're all D-E-V-O !
  • I think the Russian comedian Yakov Smirnoff (sp?) said it best:
    "If someone offers you a finger sandwich, gladly accept. If they offer you a knuckle sandwich, politely decline."

  • Minimums of 575 years are just ridiculous. What are they going to do when he dies, keep the body locked up for 500 yeaars?

    For comparison: In Norway, the maximum total prison term "awarded" in a single trial is 21 years (plus 10 years of "securing", normally a mental hospital). Add to that that a prison year is only 8 months, then a 21-year conviction with parole after two thirds of served time means about nine and a half years total.

  • Well, not near Osaka as such... It's the whole Kansai area, covering Osaka, Kyoto, etc.

  • The imact of longer life. (Score:3)

    by Christopher Thomas ( 11717 ) on Wednesday June 30, 1999 @11:01AM (#1824584)
    Right now the population of the planet isn't dying as fast as it's expanding. This is leading to some massive problems as people live longer. Pretty soon we'll have to start finding other places to put people - or deal with seeing crime rates skyrocket, employment crises, major racially motivated wars, etc... the list goes on.


    Firstly, I'd like to take issue with your conclusion. As long as there is physically room for the population, why would more people lead to fewer jobs? On the contrary, it would lead to more jobs, as more people means more _demand_ for goods and services. The number of jobs available per capita should remain the same.


    Secondly, I'm not sure that your first point holds true either. Taken as a whole, the population of the earth is indeed growing. However, break this down by region, and you see huge variances. In many places - most notably North America - the population growth rate is either zero or negative, with immigration making up the difference. This is a cultural effect. Cultures in which families have many children will naturally have populations that grow quickly. Cultures where the average number of children that an individual has over the course of their lifetime is two or less have populations that are stable or declining. A longer lifespan would not inevitably lead to a population explosion - it just means that people would have to have children less frequently in order for the population to be stable (the same number of children per person, just over a longer period of time).

  • Re:The imact of longer life. (Score:3)

    by Christopher Thomas ( 11717 ) on Wednesday June 30, 1999 @01:21PM (#1824585)
    but in the end, the population grows much faster in third world countries. Which causes lots of other problems, because 3rd world countries are in general much less able to support more people (lack of infrastructure and *food*), and generally lead to a much lower quality of life. Which in turn leads to higher birth rates. So essentially it makes one giant circle! But the people are starting to live longer due to medical advances live in developed countries. So if you add all of these effects together, it means there is a significant population growth, and its likely to keep growing until we run out of space


    How so? You yourself point out that the regions in which people are living longer are the regions that have low birth rates, and a _culture_ of few children. There isn't the _transport_ capacity to pull in _billions_ of immigrants - so in the worst possible case, the first world survives (not that that makes overpopulation consequences elsewhere acceptable).


    Now, the point about the feedback effect in third world countries holds true. IMO, the best way of breaking this loop is to work on helping the third world build up its infrastructure, and work on making the idea of small families acceptable within large-family cultures. Both are being attempted, and both have shown promising signs. Keep this up for a few decades, and population growth in the third world may look like less of a problem. We'll see what happens.

  • First of all, I agree that what an average finger-growing mouse experiences is likely to pale in comparison to the trauma of the average Avon bunny. Second, it seems we've been making reasonable (read: technology viable in 20 years) progress on getting appendages to grow themselves using native DNA instructions, rather than having to organize the cells ourselves. This would eventually be the only viable solution. I seem to remember someone working on regeneration of limbs in mice (doubtless the most well-understood mammal, due to all the experimentation). If we can do this genetically/automatically, current research with cow cells will be less than useless. Still, impressive stuff. Hopefully we'll soon see eyeballs sold in storefronts, like in Neuromancer.
  • I want to see where they stuck the human-sized fingers on these poor mice. The image is sort of sadistically funny.
  • "Yes, this was an April Fools prank!"

    For those of you whose gag reflexes won't let you make it that far.
  • Is hitting the link to the e-mails page. All of those people that didn't know it was a joke and are _really_ into this sort of thing. How long before life imitates art.
  • Sorry... it was wide open.
  • Just read a few posts about animal testing on this topic, so I think I will share a few of my thoughts. You know what would be really nice? If they could grow practically a whole human (without a brain of course, not living) and use THAT for tests on chemicals and such, instead of animals in labs. Say something were to cause blindness, they could squirt some of the testing matter into the artificial eye, and have the eye hooked up to a computer for readings. That could maybe be more accurate considering how animals differ from humans and I think I read around 40% of products tested on animals have to be recalled because they did not react the same way to humans. That would be awesome.
  • This may sound sci-fi, but maybe a computer could act as a brain to test this stuff. Anyone up for an open source brain project?.....hehe

  • Who knew?

    Personally, I'm going to wait for the
    snake elbows before I start upgrading
    to body v1.1.
  • Yeah, but I bet the mice they grew the fingers in were harmed. This operation was probbly fatal.

    Unless you're one of THOSE vegetarians who thinks not all animals are created equal, this is just as bad as taking a trip to the local McDonalds for a burger.

    -Smitty
  • It seems to me like the next step would be joint replacement/reconstrution. It mentions in the article that the joints were very well-formed...

    Now we can keep those sports stars going well into their 70's. Not that I care, but my brother would be overjoyed...

    Also, this could be a major thing to recover from arthritis. "Wow! I feel like I have a new hip! Well, I guess I do. That would explain it."

    -Smitty
  • Um, because humans are intelligent beings and cows and mice aren't.
    Why should intelligence be the criteria for giving animals humane consideration? What does this have to do with the ability to feel pain and suffer?

    From altweb (alt. to animal testing) [jhsph.edu]:
    In 1789, philosopher Jeremy Bentham sounded the rallying cry for animals everywhere: "The question is not, can they reason, nor can they talk, but can they suffer?"
  • But only intelligent beings can interpret stimuli in a meaningful fashion and can be logically said to "suffer". Pain isn't just stimulus to humans; we fear pain because we *know* pain is associated with death.

    Animals are perfectly capable of feeling pain and suffering, as well as fearing and anticipating their deaths: a pig in an abbatoir, a dog about to be put to sleep. Most animals are conscious and therefore pain isn't just stimuli to them. Try torturing a dog or a cat and telling me it doesn't suffer -- this is why we've laws against this kind of thing.

    The difference in intelligence between higher animals like primates is more of a matter of degree than kind. So even based on intelligence, there's no reason to deny that animals suffer. After all, it's conceivable that the intelligence gap between some alien race and us, would be the same as the intelligence gap between us and say chimpanzees. Would it be ok to make humans suffer then?

    Certainly some intelligence is needed to appreciate pain and suffering, but to argue that human-like intelligence is needed to suffer is just human-centrism designed to justify the torture of animals.

    This is the same Bentham, who, in his "Defense of Usuary" basically said it is morally okay for rich people to screw over everyone else.

    Bentham's other views are not very relevant to the validity of a particular statment.


  • I saw it too, a mouse with an ear on it's back looks quite bizzare.

  • So, you whip out twelve inches and tell your girlfriend that you pulled it out of some rodent's butt and had it grafted on? I'm sure she'll be impressed.

    "Don't come near me with that thing!"

    Maybe some of the M$ programmers already have a second one. You couldn't get that stupid only playing with one...
  • I don't think that the cows will find the fingers very useful without the cow thumbs.
  • I accidentally hit "submit" instead of "reply". The ability to alter our lifespans, and every other factor of our existence, is also part of the natural order. What do you think makes species adapt and speciate? Outside pressure does, such as the pressure exerted by humans on other species. Well over 99 percent of the species that ever lived on this planet have gone extinct because of this natural selection process.

  • It hasn't shown us to be unsuitable yet. It just might show that all the species that die because of our actions are unsuitable.

  • I'm nauseated, and I don't have graphics!

  • Wrong. The vast majority of the ecosystem (greater than 90 percent of the biomass) are one-celled critters under our feet. The ocean also contains alot that we don't touch. If us humans destroyed the surface of the Earth, most living organisms wouldn't notice.

  • This is stupid. Every species I know of on this planet do not "instinctively" make an equilibrium, they reproduce alot. It is predator/prey cycles, and other various cycles, that keep the population in check. (ie. wolves reproduce, eat too many rabbits, rabbits now scarce, wolves die down, rabbits come back, wolves come back, wolves eat many rabbits, ad infinitum (until outside factors come in)).

    Us humans are the same way, we just haven't reached an equilibrium state yet; at least not in many places. Our brains and technical capabilities give us the ability to keep on pushing the equilibrium farther. Things like this also happen when species are introduced into an environment in which they have no natural predators/plentiful prey; this is probably how the South American Marsupials went extinct (when S. America hooked up with N. America).

  • I think all life sentences that do not specifically prohibit parole eventually wind up in a parole-able state (after 20 years, as you suggest, although I don't know the exact amount myself).

    Life sentences without the possibility of parole are truly life sentences, and consecutive life sentences can screw somebody over even if they have the opportunity for parole.

  • I think that this is a topic the Human Race[TM] will be arguing about for the rest of existence. I agree with what you are saying, it sounds really gruesome and fortunately I have not had the opportnity to witness it. Something that is always said is that we are messing with nature, there are two sides to this story. Yeah, we've blown a hole in the ozone layer, we spray perfume in rabbits eyes, we spread diseases, we hunt for game, and we have enough recklessness to drive every organism on this planet to the point of extinction. But why is this not natural. We create these products and do these things because we_think_of them. Who are we to say that nature is NOT taking it's course? For all we know the libratory mice will take over-in the future they will dig up our remains and try to figure out how we fit in their family tree....And Mickey Mouse will be GOD! ;)
  • Apparently the 'cultivated in mice' part is nothing new. Apparently, the same polymer matrix stuff has been used to grow human ears on the backs of mice. They look funny, too. I saw this on one of those Fox Thursday Night Trash-TV shows. It must be true.

  • Thing? (Score:1)

    by glen ( 19095 )
    Can these mice run around like Thing from the Adams Family?

    Now that would be cool.

    I want a couple of extra fingers on the side of my head so I can hold the phone.
  • But I guess this way you could really give someone the finger.
  • Humans use their brains to control the food chain. Thet are not necessarily on top of it though. I guy with a gun is on top of the food chain. Take that gun away and stick him in a cage with a tiger and we'll see whose on top.

    Humans are actually pretty weak creatures. It's only through our intellgence that we dominate the animal world.
    --
  • What I was saying was sort of a generalization. Most humans couldn't take on tiger.

    "In a world of scientific wonders, the human body is still the most dangerous weapon."
    --Fatal Fury


    --
  • > No mention of purpose was made in this article.

    It's a stepping stone towards a long standing holy grail of genetics: the five-assed monkey, a creature far superior to man.
  • Animal-Human organ transplants create new opportunities for animal virii to mutate and jump to humans. Some of the ugliest bugs out there started off as innocuous infections of animals that jumped to humans - AIDS originally was an infection of monkeys that mutated to infect humans. Imagine that process going a thousand times faster, that's what animal-human transplants do.

    OTOH, if I ever get a finger chopped off by a deli slicer, it would be nice to use these polymer matrices to grow a new one out of my own cells.

  • it's amazing what a little fooling around with genetics and some sneaky biomedical engineering will get you.

    in 'discover' magazine a few years ago, some scientists were able to make mice that would bioluminesce under fluorescent light. glow-in-the-dark mice!

    and along the same lines as the finger, i think it was also in 'discover' that they showed the same type of thing with a human ear. there was a little picture of hairless mouse with a big ear sticking right out of its back.

    it isn't going to be long until...

    LL
  • >lasses fair capatialists

    nice looking girl capitalists?

    ...you mean Laisez Faire?


    I think I know what your point is, but man do you look like an idiot the way you put this, dude.

  • hmm, I guess I'll throw out american heritige - I DID LOOK IT UP!

    :-P

  • Well, you got me :OD

    I typoed and left out an 's'

    I'll still take a typo over not even knowing how the word is spelled at all any day. :-)

    And I did look it up (twice now) :-P
  • Do you really think the first heart/lung/kidney/etc transplant was tested on a human? Is mutating bacteria as bad as mutating a fruit fly? Is mutating a fruit fly as bad as mutating a mouse? Who draws the line on what's bad?

    Come on man. We farm cows. They are grown for our consumption. We mutate other organisms for our own benefit. Is it any worse than how parasites, carnivores, insects, etc survive? Nature does not have ethics.

  • I say we strap down these so called doctors and grow tails on them. After all, it's only fair.
    I am sure these mice don't appreciate or have any use for fingers.

  • Very cool but also scary (Score:3)

    by Shafik ( 29058 ) on Wednesday June 30, 1999 @10:11AM (#1824624)
    It is great maybe in 25 or 50 years we will be able to replace failing organs and such but what will the impact on soceity be? Example if you can now replace dying organs, conceivably we could live many decades longer. So for a criminal with a life sentence, should we extend his life? I mean but are we really extending his life? Would we not just be treating an illness, failure of organs, tissue, etc... so it would really not be elective it would be standard life saving procedures. This is not the only possible dilemma, either. Most people don't talk about issues like this, so I thought I would throw it out.
  • The article states that these "polymer matrices were implanted into a special breed of mice". What? They are growing fingers in mice?

    This is beyond your standard sci-fi becomes science stuff. This is really creepy. If they can grow fingers in mice, I could see them growing limbs in larger animals.

    This makes cloning look tame to me.
  • What are we going to do tomorrow night, Brain?
    The same thing we do every night -- Try to take over the world!
  • Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy:

    "You look great. The extra arm suits you." (or something like that)
  • "...quite a feet." :)

  • Extra fingers? (Score:3)

    by DonkPunch ( 30957 ) on Wednesday June 30, 1999 @11:50AM (#1824629) Homepage Journal
    Cool. 12 fingers would just about make Emacs usable.

    /* It's just a joke! */
  • Oh well. I guess that shows that the advertising machines missed their mark on me. :)
  • Hmmm. Somehow I don't think the Beef Institute had this in mind when they came up with that slogan.
  • Why? Because they are doing those things to US.

    It's that simple. When they start doing that kind of stuff to us, they are a threat to our survival and, thus, a enemy we need to destroy. It doesn't matter that they may be doing it for their own survival, as in ID4. Our concern should be with our own species' survival and advancement first and foremost, not in rolling over for other species.
  • Cool!

    When can I go down to a plastic surgeon and get my Beefcake(tm) bio-modifications? Hell, who needs steroids when you can get muscle added the easy way? How about specialized hand work for fine manipulation. What about combat oriented modifications for military and police? Replacement eyes for the blind? That's nothing in light of the eventual potential for replacing your eyes with modified feline eyes for better night-vision and cosmetic reasons.

    The ability to fully customize your body to specification with the right amount of money is coming in less than a century, and it's going to have rather freakish social ramifications. Welcome to the dawning of the Post-Human Age.

  • Re:A thought... (Score:3)

    by Valdrax ( 32670 ) on Wednesday June 30, 1999 @11:51AM (#1824634)
    Would you rather we tested on humans first, or would you rather we just not tested at all?
  • My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die.
  • this [freeq.com]

  • Re:A thought... (Score:3)

    by CJ Hooknose ( 51258 ) on Wednesday June 30, 1999 @02:50PM (#1824650) Homepage
    We use up natural resources, destroy ecosystems for short term gain, screw around with the genetics of virulent diseases...

    Other critters use up resources and destroy ecosystems too. Elephants can deforest areas just like logging companies, albeit more slowly. And bacteria tend to exchange DNA with each other and even with completely different bacterial species through various bacteriophages. Genetic engineering on a small scale, to be sure, but since many bacteria have generations every hour, the rate of evolution is fast.

    If the actions of humans can be viewed in a larger sense as perfectly natural then I believe we will find ourselves on the WRONG side of natural selection. Think of AIDS and Ebola as Human Destroyer alpha products. Anybody want to try for beta?

    The only thing that's keeping us alive right now is that so far, our learning has advanced just fast enough to keep us from eating/polluting ourselves into oblivion. So as I see it, we have two options:

    1. Learn as much as we can as fast as we can
    2. Stop taking advantage of the fruits of technology, go back to the land, and become a world of organic farmers.
    I'd say choice #1 has it. Live in a 2-bedroom ranch, or live in a thatched hut? Easy choice. Live with the infrastructure and problems necessary to support the huge industrial complex, or go without TV/your 56K connection/your Honda? Some might opt for going without, but the vast mass of humanity won't. Ever.

    As for AIDS/Ebola being "Human Destroyers in Alpha," I think the Beta was demonstrated quite well over Hiroshima. [run and cower]

  • Any day now, ordering "chicken fingers" could take on a whole new meaning.

Slashdot Top Deals

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Close