Team:UCL/Practice/TED

From 2013.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Undo revision 305722 by Weiling (talk))
 
(15 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:
<script>
<script>
-
var word1 = "ESSAY";
+
var word1 = "TED";
-
var word2 = "PAGE";
+
var word2 = "DEBATE";
</script>
</script>
Line 43: Line 43:
<div class="gap">
<div class="gap">
</div>
</div>
-
 
<div class="full_page">
<div class="full_page">
-
<div class="main_image"></div>
+
<div class="small_image_right" style="background-image:url('https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2013/e/ec/TED.png');height:400px;width:470px;">
 +
</div>
 +
 
<p class="major_title">TED DEBATE</p>
<p class="major_title">TED DEBATE</p>
<p class="minor_title">The Conversation</p>
<p class="minor_title">The Conversation</p>
Line 56: Line 57:
<p class="minor_title">Snippets From The Debate</p>
<p class="minor_title">Snippets From The Debate</p>
<p class="body_text">
<p class="body_text">
-
Here are some excerpts from thee discussion:
+
Here are some excerpts from the discussion:
</p>
</p>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
-
<p class="citation_text">
+
<p class="citation_text"><b>
  “...we must be careful not to "replace" anything in the brain unless we can be sure that it won't CHANGE THE PERSON'S THINKING PROCESS COMPLETELY”
  “...we must be careful not to "replace" anything in the brain unless we can be sure that it won't CHANGE THE PERSON'S THINKING PROCESS COMPLETELY”
</p>
</p>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
-
<p class="citation_text">
+
<p class="citation_text"><b>
“Side effects and complications may cause problems, potentially fatally so, but the long term benefit outstrips the risk--we couldn't advance medical science without it.”
“Side effects and complications may cause problems, potentially fatally so, but the long term benefit outstrips the risk--we couldn't advance medical science without it.”
</p>
</p>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
-
<p class="citation_text">
+
<p class="citation_text"><b>
“...on a fundamental level, it has no more ethical limitations than say, a new drug or surgical procedure that requires further testing.”
“...on a fundamental level, it has no more ethical limitations than say, a new drug or surgical procedure that requires further testing.”
</p>
</p>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
-
 
+
<p class="citation_text"><b>
-
<p class="citation_text">
+
“As long as the researcher is fully honest and open with the people he is working with, I see no ethical problems at all with brain research or genetic modification research.”
“As long as the researcher is fully honest and open with the people he is working with, I see no ethical problems at all with brain research or genetic modification research.”
</p>
</p>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
-
<p class="citation_text">
+
<p class="citation_text"><b>
“It is the nature of medical research that not all of the risks can be quantified.”
“It is the nature of medical research that not all of the risks can be quantified.”
</p>
</p>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
-
<p class="citation_text">
+
<p class="citation_text"><b>
“What is unethical today becomes ethical tomorrow. It happened time and again in the human history. The speed of innovation has always been faster then the evolution of morality and ethics in society.”
“What is unethical today becomes ethical tomorrow. It happened time and again in the human history. The speed of innovation has always been faster then the evolution of morality and ethics in society.”
</p>
</p>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="gap">
 +
</div>
 +
</b>

Latest revision as of 01:29, 5 October 2013

TED DEBATE

The Conversation

On TED conversations, an engagement part of a site renown for spreading innovative ideas, we posed the question ‘Should the neuronal environment of the brain be genetically modified to treat some forms of neurodegeneration?’ Specifically, we wanted to know if users thought it ethical for scientists to use genetic treatments which involve introducing new genes into native cells and injecting them into the brain for the benefit of patients; how much external intervention into the brain they deemed appropriate; to what degree resources ought to be spent on such an ethically grey area. The responses were used, along with the responses from our speed debate, to inform and help shape the direction of our Neuroethics Speed Debate and our feasibility reports. They also helped to lead to the conception of ‘Eternal Sunshine’ as a good entry point for the public into our ideas, by emphasising the gravity of Alzheimer’s disease.

Snippets From The Debate

Here are some excerpts from the discussion:

“...we must be careful not to "replace" anything in the brain unless we can be sure that it won't CHANGE THE PERSON'S THINKING PROCESS COMPLETELY”

“Side effects and complications may cause problems, potentially fatally so, but the long term benefit outstrips the risk--we couldn't advance medical science without it.”

“...on a fundamental level, it has no more ethical limitations than say, a new drug or surgical procedure that requires further testing.”

“As long as the researcher is fully honest and open with the people he is working with, I see no ethical problems at all with brain research or genetic modification research.”

“It is the nature of medical research that not all of the risks can be quantified.”

“What is unethical today becomes ethical tomorrow. It happened time and again in the human history. The speed of innovation has always been faster then the evolution of morality and ethics in society.”

You can follow the debate here.

Retrieved from "http://2013.igem.org/Team:UCL/Practice/TED"