183 karma · joined July 12, 2023
Also... I think Halcyon+On+On is amazing, but it's based so heavily on Opus III's cover of It's a Fine Day that it borders on being a (fantastic) remix. Also interesting to look back at the earlier remix of the original recording of that song by A Guy Called Gerald.
It would have been great if the treatment had clinical efficacy at even the safety dosing level, but it's also not especially disappointing that it didn't.
The genetic mix from parents is randomized. Always. Both good and bad results are equally the result of a random process initiated by the parents. A combination of recessive genes to cause disease is not more or less random than a combination of healthy genes. The parents roll the dice, the child gets the result.
In other words: The ethics can't proceed from first principles around consent to experimentation. It has to include, as you say, empirical questions about the technology in question. But that's a different sub-thread.
If I had to say anything about that: I think this is one of those things that is just going to happen whether or not anyone likes it. The fact that it has already succeeded with mice + the massive applications... it's just going to get tried, it's just a matter of which country it happens in. The fact that it could potentially be used by same sex couples is a total side note to how strongly this will be pulled along by the same existing demands that drive IVF currently, the potential is just too powerful. So I imagine we're just going to see eventually.
Which is ethically fine by me! I'm just pointing out that reproduction is one of the areas where the limitations of consent based bioethics are blindingly obvious.
Applications of ideas around consent to human reproduction are confusing and self-contradictory at the best of times.
I think the article is poorly written. What it says can't be true for very high activity levels (eg, marathon training or something), but does seem possible for moderate activity increases like the extra steps people get out of casual fit bit use.
It makes it really unclear what level of activity the Hazda it talks about are at, but sort of implies that it is in this moderate range. At one point it describes "moderately active" people as "the kind of folks who get some exercise during the week and make a point to take the stairs" so it seems like the activity level they are describing is not especially high.
The ethical issue is that to study people taking an unproven vaccine, you do have to specifically have participants not take an existing well proven prevention medicine. Since existing prep works well enough that you would never be able to determine vaccine efficacy if they were using it. Having a vaccine is still strictly better, but that's the issue, not comparing to lifetime treatment.
To your uncertainty, effective treatment (reducing viral load to undetectable) reduces transmission to zero (https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/treatment-prev...).
"In linguistics, mama and papa are considered a special case of false cognates. In many languages of the world, sequences of sounds similar to /mama/ and /papa/ mean "mother" and "father", usually but not always in that order."