Medical Nanotechnology. 1

[CajunCenturion]

In another thread, the following article was referenced:
Inventor sets his sights on immortality

Let's assume that the technology is available.

1) What are the ethics of using this technology if it is only available to the wealthy?
2) What are the ethics of using this technology is it is affordable for the masses?

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[RiverGuy]

It will never exist.

 

[edfair]

No ethical problems with people using part of their wealth purchasing services not available to those with less wealth proviced that the services were not developed with public funds, public facilities, or using tax write-offs or deferrals.
Any smell of public funding would make it unethical, IMHO.

No problem with the use by "common folk", provided access is fairly apportioned to other potentiao users.

Ed Fair
Give the wrong symptoms, get the wrong solutions.

 

[DrJavaJoe]

Not much different from AIDS medicines today or other high cost treatments. Some people have the opportunity to extend their life due to income and their social positions, egs living in an industrialized nation.

Now what's ethical will be a matter of opinion. The capitalist will argue that if the market isn't aloud to drive the prices of medicine then the incentive to create them in the first place will be lost. The socialist will argue that every person in the world should have access to any medical care needed without concern of cost.




Two strings walk into a bar. The first string says to the bartender: 'Bartender, I'll have a beer. u.5n$x5t?*&4ru!2[sACC~ErJ'. The second string says: 'Pardon my friend, he isn't NULL terminated'.

 

[chiph]

Right now, nanotechnology in the US seems to be a synonym for organic chemistry. No one is working on Drexler's "universal assemblers", which would be required to do something like the article says.

Chip H.


____________________________________________________________________
Click here to learn Ways to help with Tsunami Relief
If you want to get the best response to a question, please read FAQ222-2244 first

 

[Dimandja]

Nanotechnology R&D tribulations

__________________________________________
Try forum1391 for lively discussions

 

[MasterRacker]

I wanted to let this go a couple of days before possibly "hijacking" the thread. (Apologies, CC)

I think initially it will be available only to the wealthy. This is natural as there needs to be some kind of return on the developement costs. In return, however, at least in this case, I think the wealthy will pay an extra price in being Guinea Pigs for this technology. I have a suspicion that the mechanisms for keeping the body alive will turn out to be much easier than keeping the brain healthy. Just looking at some of the recent drug recalls, I think some of our researchers are possibly suffering some hubris regarding their opinion of their understanding of human chemistry.

What happens if we have a whole crew of bodies that go on and on, but housing minds suffering complete dementia? When do you turn the machines off? We've now added the quality of life and euthanasia issues to the ethical debate.




[purple]Jeff
It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day

 

[Onyxpurr]

If we have the ability to repair the body, would we be able to repair the brain as well?

I believe that no matter what solution we come up with to extend human life, nature takes over to control the population.

I think we have seen this with Alzheimers especially. It hasn't been until recently that people have been living a much longer life span and we've started to see the downsides to that.

of course, we'll come up with different solutions, but something will always come up to negate those.

I also agree in that the wealthy will be the guinea pigs, however have not heard it put so bluntly (thanks). I would not want to be the first few to undergo this experiment.

I'm not sure if there are any ethical dilemmas that arise from this, that haven't already been brought up by other technologies. e.g. drugs and treatments that currently extend life (just not as far along as we hope this nanotechnology will)

 

[cdogg]

If using public funds is unethical, then that's just what it will be. Apparently, Bush set aside $500 million of the nation's budget to start research. This article might help explain the technology at a lower level and better understand the questions CC asked:

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/resource/speakm.html

It just doesn't seem that the "know-how" is anywhere close to being a reality. Having the ability and coming up with the methodology are two very different beasts. Perhaps the ability is close, but the methodology will continue to evolve over many generations.

Ethical for the masses? That depends on how you view free will. Ethical in the sense of saving lives that would have ended prematurely. But to extend lives well beyond today's average is crossing the line, IMHO. Then again, how do you let someone pass away due to a curable condition, once the technology is available?

~cdogg
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884

 

[svanels]

Surely it would be only accessible to very very rich.
I have seen a comedy (I don't recall the name) with Goldy Hawn, very amusing. You would live longer, see more of the unjustice that is commited in this world, and start asking yourself if there is another better place after dead...

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr