Humans as pets

Recently, the UK parliament voted in favor of a series of laws that will allow researchers to push the embryo and steam cell research to new boundaries. Basically, embryos, whether a mixture of human and animal, or straight human, could be used to create spare-parts for adult humans. More daring scenarios even predict the creation of transgenic living creatures. Of course, the range of speculation is unlimited as is the number of ethical, moral or legal issues that are raised by this type of research and its products. As one anonymous reader puts it, an individual who has 99,9 percent human genome will in have human rights or not? I have written before about how serious we should consider a charter of animal rights, if not for more reasons, for the simple fact that we might be “the animals” in some not very distant future. This connects to the broader issue of how we should treat all forms of life, defined in the broadest possible way.
Now, a simple answer to this endless stream of problems would be to out rightly reject any form of further research in this field. The UK MPs didn’t seem to agree with this, and rightly so, I believe. If we look back, any revolutionary idea and technological progress has had its doomsters. And again, rightly so. It could well have happened that a new invention meant for good deeds and for the benefit of the whole society could have had a negative impact to an extent that might lead to our complete extinction as a specie. In fact, the threat of global warming is still with us. Things are not simple. We know of apparently extraordinary useful inventions that have proven to have disastrous consequence years apart (for example, leaded gasoline or chlorofluorocarbons). On the other hand, the creation of atomic bomb, however malefic it might have appeared, in fact it is very likely that has had an enormous contribution to the creation of peace and stability, as Nobel laureate Thomas Schelling graciously argued.
My humble opinion is that we have to be open to research and its products, because nobody can foresee the potential of a new product for an extended horizon of time. Being critical and cautious, however, it is not ruled out. In fact, it is a desired attitude. And if it turns out that a new discovery will have cataclysmic effects and our entire specie or planet will disappear, well, so be it. The story of humans is interesting as long as there is someone to tell it. Otherwise, it is meaningless. But I believe in the human ingenuity and I believe that we are meant for a greater goal and I believe that there will always be someone to carry the torch and to learn from the past mistakes and errors. What is important is tolerance and respect for other forms of life, regardless of the way they have come into existence.
To conclude, I again quote an anonymous reader who was concerned with the kind of a pet he would become, should his genes be mingled with his dog’s genetic material? I agree this is a mind blowing question.

Declining the verb “to blogg”

I have not added anything to my blog since some time. The reason is that, well, I had had little extra time lately. But I have also considered whether it is worth to keep writing since I have seen that many of the bloggers declare that they hope to become famous or at least rich based on their blogs. This is fair enough, except I don’t feel very comfortable about getting famous this way, or even being suspected trying. This is a subtle point and would require a lot of explanation. After all, any author hopes to get to be known someday and eventually materially rewarded. And I would also like to get my ideas noticed and get some recognition if they are original. But I still think that the blogosphere should be a space for sharing ideas and expressing solidarity with others or with some goals, without seeking immediate reward.
However, since I do have a little extra-time I would write a little more as a sort of letters to my future self. I mean it would be interesting after a number of years to see how my views have changed and how I perceived the world when I was a little younger. If you happen to read this, I sure hope you will enjoy it (and feel encouraged to provide any feedback – as comment or e-mail, both allowed). One matter of concern is my posted survey, which kindly asks the reader to vote on the quality of English used on my blog. I have received one vote on the “completely hopeless” entry. And completely hopeless means completely hopeless, no matter how you take it. I am not a native English-speaking person, but I do write scientific articles in English, and some of them passed through peer review processes.
Well, I will surely try to improve on my readability. On the other hand, I don’t know if you have noticed but every technical innovation has a selective effect on humans: some get the most out of it as it improves their native skills, while some they get the worst of it. It’s like a natural selection process, although it is man-made. Take computers: some found them to be crucial for advancements in their career or in their private life while some were certainly adversely affected. They were transformed in drooling monkeys with a keyboard (I apologize for the harsh words). Being able to express freely is one fundamental right that any person should enjoy, even under the cover of anonymity. However, in order to get the most out of it, it would be advisable not to shout out to loud or else this fundamental right will be of no real benefit.