Page 1,876«..1020..1,8751,8761,8771,878..1,8901,900..»

Category Archives: Transhuman News

Editorial: Striking a balance between access and censorship … – Virginian-Pilot

Posted: April 25, 2017 at 4:33 am

STEVE STEPHENS barbarity in Cleveland on Easter Sunday certainly wasnt the first time onlookers witnessed a slaying an execution, actually in real time.

Go back to 1963, two days after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. TV cameras rolled as authorities walked his suspected killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, in the basement of Dallas police headquarters. Millions saw Jack Ruby jump in front of Oswald and fire a handgun, mortally wounding him. A reporter at the scene described Oswald as ashen and unconscious as rescuers loaded him into an ambulance.

The decades-old footage was a shocking coincidence of action, timing and broadcasting.

Whats different a half-century later? Murderers intend to film themselves live, or nearly so, on Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms. They aim to make a statement, no matter how twisted. They sometimes pick victims at random.

Stephens did just that in targeting 74-year-old Robert Godwin, who was walking on a Cleveland street searching for aluminum cans. Stephens shot Godwin after asking him about Joy Lane, Stephens former girlfriend; his video later showed a trail of blood beside the prone Godwin, a retired foundry worker.

Stephens killed himself Tuesday in Pennsylvania as law enforcement authorities tried to arrest him.

Suspects or accomplices frequently have taken videos of slayings and other violent crimes. They are testimonials in many respects, even if delusional and amoral. Facebook, with its nearly 2 billion users, provides an easily accessible platform for these dark messages:

Vester Flanagan, a former reporter at the CBS affiliate in Roanoke, killed a station reporter and cameraman and wounded a third person during a live televised interview in Moneta, Va., in August 2015. A few hours later, Flanagan (who used the on-air name Bryce Williams) posted a video to Twitter and Facebook from the shooters vantage point, showing him approaching his victims, gun in hand. Flanagan shot and killed himself as police closed in on him the same day.

Chicago police said a 15-year-old girl was allegedly sexually assaulted last month in an incident involving several people. It was streamed on Facebook Live and viewed by dozens of people.

What responsibility do social media companies have? What should they do? Local academics caution that these officials must seek balance. They dont want to be accused of censorship but should work to keep gratuitous violence off our screens.

They also point to compelling, dramatic narratives that have aired. That includes the footage taken by the girlfriend of Philando Castile shortly after he was shot during a traffic stop in July 2016 by a police officer near St. Paul, Minn. The officer faces manslaughter and other charges in the case.

If social media organizations censor footage based merely on the suspicions of the intent of posters, doing so may itself be unethical, said Nikhil Moro, professor and chairman of the Mass Communications and Journalism Department at Norfolk State University.

There are limits in trying to crack down what we view, said Yuping Liu-Thompkins, professor and chairwoman of marketing at Old Dominion Universitys Strome College of Business. Given the sheer volume of content, Im not sure we can have the scrutiny, she said.

Money is a part of the calculations, too: The New York Times reports that Facebook Live has been embraced by users and advertisers. Video advertising commands a premium compared with traditional photo and text formats, The Times reports.

Facebook released a statement from Justin Osofsky, vice president of global operations, saying the Easter shooting in Cleveland has no place on Facebook, and goes against our policies and everything we stand for.

We disabled the suspects account within 23 minutes of receiving the first report about the murder video, he said, and two hours after receiving a report of any kind. But we know we need to do better.

On that, no one disagrees. But Facebook should have foreseen that some individuals would corrupt the live video option. Violent, deranged people will take advantage of whatevers at hand. Such depictions might be only a small fraction of the posts, but they have an outsize effect because Facebook is so ubiquitous.

As such, Facebook must lead the way in discussing where the line should be drawn between free expression and cracking down on certain images. Users expect better, and narcissistic criminals will continue to exploit that service until companies such as Facebook can deliver.

Go here to see the original:
Editorial: Striking a balance between access and censorship ... - Virginian-Pilot

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Editorial: Striking a balance between access and censorship … – Virginian-Pilot

Fight the campus zest for censorship – Philly.com – Philly.com

Posted: at 4:33 am

All who cherish free expression, especially on campuses, must combat the growing zeal for censorship.

Where are the faculty? American college students are increasingly resorting to brute force, and sometimes criminal violence, to shut down ideas that they dont like. Yet when such travesties occur, the faculty are, with few exceptions, missing in action, though they have themselves been given the extraordinary privilege of tenure to protect their own liberty of thought and speech. It is time for them to take their heads out of the sand.

I was the target of such silencing tactics two days in a row earlier this month, the more serious incidentat Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, Calif., and a less virulent one at UCLA.

Claremont McKenna had invited me to meet with students and to give a talk about my book, The War on Cops, on April 6. Several calls went out on Facebook to shut down this notorious white supremacist fascist Heather Mac Donald. A Facebook post from we, students of color at the Claremont Colleges announced grandiosely that as a community, we CANNOT and WILL NOT allow fascism to have a platform. We stand against all forms of oppression and we refuse to have Mac Donald speak.

A Facebook event titled Shut Down Anti-Black Fascist Heather Mac Donald and hosted by Shut Down Anti-Black Fascists encouraged students to protest the event because Mac Donald condemns (the) Black Lives Matter movement, supports racist police officers and supports increasing fascist law and order.

When I arrived on campus, I was shuttled to what was in effect a safe house: a guest suite for campus visitors, with blinds drawn. I could hear the growing crowds chanting and drumming, but I could not see the auditorium that the protesters were surrounding. One female voice rose above the chants with particularly shrill hysteria. From the balcony, I saw a petite blonde walk by, her face covered by a Palestinian head scarf and carrying an amplifier on her back for her bullhorn.

Just before 6p.m., I was fetched by an administrator and a few police officers to take an out-of-the-way elevator into CMCs Athenaeum. The massive hall, where I was supposed to meet with students for dinner before my talk, was empty the mob, by then numbering close to 300, had succeeded in preventing anyone from entering. The large plate-glass windows were covered with translucent blinds, so that from the inside one could only see a mass of indistinct bodies pounding on the windows.

The administration had decided that I would live-stream my speech in the vacant room in order to preserve some semblance of the original plan. The podium was moved away from a window so that, as night fell and the lights inside came on, I would not be visible to the agitators outside.

I completed my speech to the accompaniment of chants and banging on the windows. I was able to take two questions from students via live-streaming. But by then, the administrators and police officers in the room, who had spent my talk nervously staring at the windows, decided that things were growing too unruly outside to continue. I was given the cue that the presentation was over. Walkie-talkies were used to coordinate my exit from the Athenaeums kitchen to the exact moment that a black, unmarked Claremont Police Department van rolled up. We passed startled students sitting on the stoop outside the kitchen. Before I entered the van, one student came up and thanked me for coming to Claremont. We sped off to the police station.

Theseevents should be the final wakeup call to the professoriate, coming on the heels of the more dangerousattacks on Charles Murray at Middlebury College and theriots in Berkeley, Calif.,against Milo Yiannapoulos.

When speakers need police escort on and off college campuses, an alarm bell should be going off that something has gone seriously awry. Of course, an ever-growing part of the faculty is the reason that police protection is needed in the first place. Professors in all but the hardest of hard sciences increasingly indoctrinate students in the belief that to be a non-Asian minority or a female in America today is to be the target of nonstop oppression, even, uproariously, if you are among the privileged few to attend a fantastically well-endowed, resource-rich American college.

Those professors also maintain that to challenge that claim of ubiquitous bigotry is to engage in hate speech, and that such speech is tantamount to a physical assault on minorities and females. As such, it can rightly be suppressed and punished. To those faculty, I am indeed a fascist, and a white supremacist, with the attendant loss of communication rights.

We are thus cultivating students who lack all understanding of the principles of the American Founding. The mark of any civilization is its commitment to reason and discourse. The great accomplishment of the European enlightenment was to require all forms of authority to justify themselves through rational argument, rather than through coercion or an unadorned appeal to tradition. The resort to brute force in the face of disagreement is particularly disturbing in a university, which should provide a model of civil discourse.

But the students currently stewing in delusional resentments and self-pity will eventually graduate, and some will seize levers of power more far-reaching than those they currently wield over toadying campus bureaucrats and spineless faculty. Unless the campus zest for censorship is combated now, what we have always regarded as a precious inheritance could be eroded beyond recognition, and a soft totalitarianism could become the new American norm.

Heather Mac Donaldis the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor ofManhattans City Journal,and the author of The War on Cops. She wrote this for InsideSources.com, and it is adapted from Manhattans http://www.city-journal.org.

Published: April 24, 2017 3:01 AM EDT

We recently asked you to support our journalism. The response, in a word, is heartening. You have encouraged us in our mission to provide quality news and watchdog journalism. Some of you have even followed through with subscriptions, which is especially gratifying. Our role as an independent, fact-based news organization has never been clearer. And our promise to you is that we will always strive to provide indispensable journalism to our community. Subscriptions are available for home delivery of the print edition and for a digital replica viewable on your mobile device or computer. Subscriptions start as low as 25 per day. We're thankful for your support in every way.

Read this article:
Fight the campus zest for censorship - Philly.com - Philly.com

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Fight the campus zest for censorship – Philly.com – Philly.com

What The Free Speech Debate Misses – National Review

Posted: at 4:33 am

I basically agree with everything Wesley Smith says about that tortured op-ed in todays New York Times.

But I still have misgivings with some of the pro-free speech arguments I often hear from my friends and colleagues on the right, including here at National Review.

That may be because Ive long been a defender of censorship, rightly understood. I came to this view by way of Irving Kristol.

Irving wasnt for political censorship, and neither am I (depending what you mean by the term). Irving argued that, If you care for the quality of life in our American democracy, then you have to be for censorship. But he more famously said, The liberal paradigm of regulation and license has led to a society where an 18-year-old girl has the right to public fornication in a pornographic movie but only if she is paid the minimum wage.

These two quotes are perfectly consistent. What Kristol was getting at was the fact that societies survive by upholding minimum standards of decency. Such views seem awfully quaint in the era of online porn and whatever-the-Hell-this-is. But I think he was basically right. Progressives spent decades arguing for maximalist free speech in areas not traditionally considered speech at all. I am highly dubious that the authors of the First Amendment ever had strip clubs in mind.

But Im no Comstock and, besides, these horses left the barn long ago. What vexes me is that at the same time progressives have maximized the right to free expression to even cover federal subsidies for craptacular art, they have worked assiduously to constrain the only speech the founders really cared about: Political speech.

As Ive written many times, this approach puts the whole argument of free speech rights on its head. Normally, we defend extreme forms of free speech on the grounds that if we maintain these freedoms on the frontiers of our civilization, our core freedoms will not be threatened. This is the form arguments for everything from abortion rights to gun rights usually work. We must protect this questionable thing less we risk this other, unquestionable, core right.

The argument about free speech on campuses is so maddening because these petty magistrates want to crush the free exchange of serious ideas in a setting that is supposed to encourage such exchanges.

But the more important point, at least for me, is not the censoriousness of the campus commissars, but the ideology. Most of the speakers they want to ban arent spewing hate speech whatever that is theyre offering heresy speech. Defenders of murderous Communist regimes arent banned from speaking on campuses heck they often get tenure. Christina Hoff Sommers, Ayan Hirsi Ali and Charles Murray are kept off campuses because they are dangerous to leftwing orthodoxy and they expose the inability of college students to deal with arguments that undermine the secular religion of campus leftism.

That said, in a morally and intellectually healthy society, Id have no problem with campuses refusing to lend resources to certain speakers. The idea that, say, the administrators of Yeshiva University, should be required to offer a venue to David Duke strikes me as silly as silly as saying he has a right to run an article in National Review.

In other words, the problem isnt a lack of commitment to free speech (though that is a problem). The free speech argument is downstream of the real dilemma: The people running what should be citadels of civilizational confidence have turned against our civilization. Maybe some atheist speaker has been banned because he would hurt the feelings of religious students, but Ive not heard about it. In other words, these administrators arent principally concerned with the sensitivities of students or even students of color or female students, but of particular students who adhere to a specific ideology. The administrators use them as props and excuses to justify their ideological, quasi-religious, agenda.

The irony comes when the defenders of these totalitarian enclaves must defend their stance to the larger society. Normal people and other elite critics shout What about free speech? And so the secular priests contort themselves into pretzels trying to make the case that their censorship is somehow consistent with some nonsensical notion of a higher principle of what free speech is. They cant be honest and say, We have a hecklers veto for anything that smacks of heresy and were not afraid to use it.

So much of the arguments about free speech would be better served if they skirted the issue of rights and stuck to old-fashioned notions of decency, good manners and sound judgment. But such antiquarian considerations dont do the work the left wants them to do. Those standards wont keep Charles Murray & Co out (though they might leave Richard Spencer in the anonymity he deserves). Worse, such values stem from a mainstream tradition of what college is supposed to be and how democracy is supposed to work, and in the new time religion, those wellsprings have been rendered off-limits.

Read this article:
What The Free Speech Debate Misses - National Review

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on What The Free Speech Debate Misses – National Review

Ron Paul: Donald Trump’s Dangerous Wikileaks Flip-Flop – FITSNews

Posted: at 4:32 am

JULIAN ASSANGE, OTHER WHISTLEBLOWERS ARE HEROES

I love Wikileaks, candidate Donald Trump said on October 10th on the campaign trail. He praised the organization for reporting on the darker side of the Hillary Clinton campaign. It was information likely leaked by a whistleblower from within the Clinton campaign to Wikileaks.

Back then he praised Wikileaks for promoting transparency, but candidate Trump looks less like President Trump every day. The candidate praised whistleblowers and Wikileaks often on the campaign trail. In fact, candidate Trump loved Wikileaks so much he mentioned the organization more than 140 times in the final month of the campaign alone! Now, as President, it seems Trump wants Wikileaks founder Julian Assange sent to prison.

Last week CNN reported, citing anonymous intelligence community sources, that the Trump Administrations Justice Department was seeking the arrest of Assange and had found a way to charge the Wikileaks founder for publishing classified information without charging other media outlets such as the New York Times and Washington Post for publishing the same information.

It might have been tempting to write off the CNN report as fake news, as is much of their reporting, but for the fact President Trump said in an interview on Friday that issuing an arrest warrant for Julian Assange would be, OK with me.

Trumps condemnation of Wikileaks came just a day after his CIA Director, Michael Pompeo, attacked Wikileaks as a hostile intelligence service. Pompeo accused Assange of being a fraud a coward hiding behind a screen.

Sponsored Content

Pompeos word choice was no accident. By accusing Wikileaks of being a hostile intelligence service rather than a publisher of information on illegal and abusive government practices leaked by whistleblowers, he signaled that the organization has no First Amendment rights. Like many in Washington, he does not understand that the First Amendment is a limitation on government rather than a granting of rights to citizens. Pompeo was declaring war on Wikileaks.

But not that long ago Pompeo also cited Wikileaks as an important source of information. In July he drew attention to the Wikileaks release of information damaging to the Clinton campaign, writing, Need further proof that the fix was in from President Obama on down?

There is a word for this sudden about-face on Wikileaks and the transparency it provides us into the operations of the prominent and powerful: Hypocrisy.

The Trump Administrations declaration of war on whistleblowers and Wikileaks is one of the greatest disappointments in these first 100 days. Donald Trump rode into the White House with promises that he would drain the swamp, meaning that he would overturn the apple carts of Washingtons vested interests. By unleashing those same vested interests on those who hold them in check the whistleblowers and those who publish their revelations he has turned his back on those who elected him.

Julian Assange, along with the whistleblowers who reveal to us the evil that is being done in our name, are heroes. They deserve our respect and admiration, not a prison cell. If we allow this president to declare war on those who tell the truth, we have only ourselves to blame.

Ron Paulis a former U.S. Congressman from Texas and the leader of the pro-liberty, pro-free market movement in the United States. His weekly column reprinted with permission can be foundhere.

Banner via iStock

View original post here:
Ron Paul: Donald Trump's Dangerous Wikileaks Flip-Flop - FITSNews

Posted in Ron Paul | Comments Off on Ron Paul: Donald Trump’s Dangerous Wikileaks Flip-Flop – FITSNews

Cato VP Attacks Ron Paul, Calls His Ideas a Hideous Corruption Of Libertarian Ideas – The Liberty Conservative

Posted: at 4:32 am


The Liberty Conservative
Cato VP Attacks Ron Paul, Calls His Ideas a Hideous Corruption Of Libertarian Ideas
The Liberty Conservative
Following his attack on Ron Paul, Lindsey also attacked libertarian theorist and luminary Murray Rothbard, whom Ron Paul had called the founder of the modern libertarian movement. In the tweet, Lindsey blamed Rothbard for the ugly illiberal streak ...

See the rest here:
Cato VP Attacks Ron Paul, Calls His Ideas a Hideous Corruption Of Libertarian Ideas - The Liberty Conservative

Posted in Ron Paul | Comments Off on Cato VP Attacks Ron Paul, Calls His Ideas a Hideous Corruption Of Libertarian Ideas – The Liberty Conservative

Libertarianism Needs To Become More Realistic – Forbes

Posted: at 4:31 am


Forbes
Libertarianism Needs To Become More Realistic
Forbes
Libertarianism is important, and I want it to be more influential. For it to do this though it has to become more realistic. I believe a major impediment is that many -though not all- libertarians imagine a vision of society that the vast majority of ...
Why Foreign Policy Trips Up LibertariansBeing Libertarian

all 2 news articles »

See the original post:
Libertarianism Needs To Become More Realistic - Forbes

Posted in Libertarianism | Comments Off on Libertarianism Needs To Become More Realistic – Forbes

The Right Engle: How to Talk to Non-Libertarians – Being Libertarian

Posted: at 4:31 am

The United States Libertarian Party is a strange beast. It has a wide following within the movement and is comfortably the countrys third largest party. Yet, its had little meaningful electoral success in the decades of its existence. Smaller parties in other countries, with far less widespread support have managed to convert their core base into electoral breakthrough; so, what is causing this failure in the Libertarian Party?

Part of the problem is the dual mandate the party has given itself to both compete in elections and be an educator on libertarian principles and policy.

A political party, by its nature, is distinct from any think tank, club, or foundation, because it is designed to engage directly in the political process and fight real campaigns. An additional mandate to educate the public is fine to have, but that mandate should not alter the unique position and role the party has, as a political agent.

The Libertarian Party must take up its unique position in the libertarian movement and do all that is necessary to professionalize its messaging and organizational strategies to be competitive in the political sphere.

If the party truly believes that its platform, if enacted, would make the country and the world better, then it has an obligation to fight for this enactment; If its going to happen, we need to rethink how we approach both the electoral and educational mandates.

We need to focus less on making statements or proving points, and more on convincing people in their hearts. This will require a fundamental reevaluation of the way libertarians (in the party or otherwise) spread the message to those not yet convinced.

Perhaps even more importantly, the Libertarian Party, and the libertarian movement more broadly, must think in terms of how to convince people.

Too often we get caught up in internal factionalism and disagreements on philosophy. Worse still, libertarians often become dogmatically attached to notions they determine to be axiomatically true; such as the claim that taxation is theft, or that the non-aggression principle is an a priori moral absolute. While libertarians may be convinced of these principles and may even consider them intuitively self-evident that is not the case for society at large. They need to be convinced of these principles.

The problem is that libertarians usually fail to engage skeptics in a way that could potentially convert them to our way of thinking.

Because we are convinced of the axiomatic truth of our beliefs, we treat opponents like they are wrong, ignorant, or even morally perverse. This attitude throws up a barrier between the libertarian and the skeptic, that, once raised, is very hard to break down.

We are a long way from a libertarian world because not enough people have adopted the libertarian mindset. We need to change those minds before we can meaningfully change society. Libertarianism can only succeed if it reconciles all its sides and factions purist, radical, pragmatic, or whatever other sub-label a group chooses. This squaring of the circle can only begin when we start to think about messaging as a unifying, rather than a divisive, exercise. The Libertarian Party and other libertarian organizations should look toward exploring the effects of their messaging strategies, and to refashion them to engage outsiders.

This is not a matter of abandoning our principles or beliefs. It is a matter of understanding how people think and how they respond emotionally and psychologically to new, and often radical, ideas. We need to understand how people think and feel, and talk to them like human beings. Maybe then well at last begin to see the world we want to live in take shape.

This post was written by John Engle.

The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions.

John Engle is a merchant banker and author living in the Chicago area. His company, Almington Capital, invests in both early-stage venture capital and in public equities. His writing has been featured in a number of academic journals, as well as the blogs of the Heartland Institute, Grassroot Institute, and Tenth Amendment Center. A graduate of Trinity College Dublin, Ireland and the University of Oxford, Johns first book, Trinity Student Pranks: A History of Mischief and Mayhem, was published in September 2013.

Like Loading...

Read more:
The Right Engle: How to Talk to Non-Libertarians - Being Libertarian

Posted in Libertarianism | Comments Off on The Right Engle: How to Talk to Non-Libertarians – Being Libertarian

How poor tobacco farmer Henrietta Lacks became a medical superstar after her death – Toronto Star

Posted: at 4:31 am

Oprah Winfrey discusses the challenges of playing Deborah Lacks, a woman intent on learning about the mother she never knew, in true-life HBO film, "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks". ( The Associated Press )

Some 66 years after her death, Henrietta Lacks lives on daily and quite literally atop laboratory benches at Torontos Mount Sinai Hospital.

Indeed, cells taken from the cervical cancer that killed her in 1951 are still being cultured and used by the tonnes in labs around the globe, says biochemist Jim Woodgett, director of the hospitals Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute.

Oh, we use them all the time, Woodgett says of the thriving cells dubbed HeLa after the two first initials of their original owners given and last names.

HeLa cells, which have unique properties, have become a basic and ubiquitous tool of biomedical research. Theyve also inspired a best-selling book, a long-running ethics debate, and are taking a star turn this weekend in an Oprah Winfrey movie debuting on HBO.

Without the knowledge of Lacks, a poor, African-American tobacco farmer from Virginia, cells harvested from that long-ago tumour biopsy began to be grown for human tissue research at Johns Hopkins Hospital, where she was being treated in the Baltimore facilitys coloured ward.

And they just kept growing.

Unlike any seen before, Lackss cells would divide outside the body with abandon overspilling Petri dishes and test tubes that all previous human counterparts were hard-pressed to fill.

In medical terms, they proved immortal, says Woodgett, whose lab has used them to study cell division and protein function.

Lackss cells were famously used in the development of Dr. Jonah Salks polio vaccine in the early 1950s and in the creation of countless drugs and research advances worth untold billions of dollars since.

But they also entered a vortex of mounting ethics controversies and compensation claims that are explored as part of the Winfrey production, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.

The movie is based on a 2010 book of the same name by author Rebecca Skloot. It also tells the story of Lackss life and the effect her cellular immortality had on her family and on medical research worldwide.

Her own life was short but spirited in the face of poverty, Skloot says in a phone interview.

She grew up in the very rural South during the era of segregation, Skloot says. She was descended from slaves who had worked this tobacco plantation that eventually she came to own a piece of.

Lacks had lived in one of the plantations former slave shacks, and she had borne five children before falling ill at age 30.

But she loved it down there; every story about her in the (nearby) town of Clover was about how much she loved it.

She was also loved by her family, friends and neighbours touched by her generosity.

She was sort of like this uber-mother, Skloot says. She just took care of everyone: her kids, her cousins kids, the neighbours kids. If you didnt have a girlfriend, shed find you one; if you didnt have a place to stay, you slept on a mattress in her hallway.

Her giving would extend far beyond the grave.

Lacks was first seen in 1951 by Johns Hopkins doctors, who would take two biopsies for diagnosis and research. About eight months later, she died. Even before her death, the cells had already spread to labs around the world.

But their human provenance had been largely forgotten.

In one of the books many memorable passages, a lab assistant at Lackss autopsy took in her painted toenails and was jarred by the sight, Skloot wrote.

Oh jeez, he thought, Shes a real person.

It dawned on him only then that the cells that had rocketed to scientific stardom had come from a live woman, one who bent down in a bathroom and carefully painted her nails red.

This type of human recognition by scientists acknowledging the people who produced the clusters of cells they detachedly employ was greatly bolstered for many researchers by Skloots book, says Woodgett, who also teaches a course on research ethics at the University of Toronto.

I think the movie will do the same, Woodgett says. I think the scientific community should embrace this as yet another learning lesson.

And the more that lesson is taken up, the greater the satisfaction for Skloot, who began to study the Lacks story as a graduate student in 1999.

That was one of the biggest motivations behind telling (it) in some ways, she says. Putting a human face to this incredibly important advance that every single person has benefited from.

Like most cervical cancers, Lackss was caused by the human papillomavirus, or HPV.

HPV can spark tumour growth by invading cells on the surface of the cervix, latching onto segments of their DNA and creating cancer-causing mutations.

The genome, Skloot explains, has three billion places where the virus can potentially land.

And by chance, the place where the HPV virus landed happened to turn on the most aggressive tumour gene that it could have, she says. So it really was like a one-in-three-billion chance that it could have landed right there and switched her cancer on in a way that was so incredibly aggressive for her and for science in a way that turned out to be very good.

HeLa cells have proven an undeniable boon to medicine for more than six decades, Skloot says.

Among other things, they have been used to grow viruses for vaccine development, study cancer, AIDS and cell division and to test the effects of radiation and poisons on human tissues. Theyve even been to space, where they were used to test the effects of microgravity on human tissues.

Also among their assets, Woodgett says, is the uniform platform they provide for researchers in every corner of the globe.

The worldwide use of the cells, he says, helps ensure that experiments conducted in Tokyo or Paris can be reliably reproduced and verified in Toronto or Boston.

Pretty much every university, every hospital research lab has these cells, he says.

Cells, including the HeLa versions, are grown in labs using mediums rich in glucose and other nutrients that prompt them to divide.

But normally cells will divide only a certain number of times, even under the best conditions, and then theyll stop, Woodgett says.

Normal cell lines will grow, in a Petri dish for example, until they are all touching and then theyll stop, he says, a process known as contact inhibited. Further growth relies on splitting these up and placing the separated cells into other vessels. But even then, cells will stop growing after two or three of these separations or passages, Woodgett says.

Immortalized cells will just divide and divide and divide and they dont tend to be contact inhibited, he says. Theyll pile up on top of each other and they also grow indefinitely.

For the Lacks family, which now includes great-grandchildren, theres an ongoing pride in the lifesaving advances the cells have supported and in their reminder for scientists like Woodgett of the humanity beneath their microscopes.

They talk about that a lot, how they feel its so important for scientists to really learn the story of Henrietta and her family and the impact all of this had on them, Skloot says. They hope that in the future other people dont have to have the same experiences.

For Henriettas husband, David, and their children, those experiences began in 1973, 22 years after her death, when researchers came knocking to enrol them in studies. Having had no notion that their wife and mother was living on in medical fame and cellular reality, this scientific onslaught was traumatic.

Her daughter Deborah Lacks the Winfrey character and the soul of Skloots book was especially disturbed by the researchers arrival, thinking theyd come to tell her that she too might be dying of cancer.

She knew her mother died around the age of 30 and Deborah always lived in fear of her own 30th birthday (which was then approaching), Skloot says. So this just seemed like her worst fears coming true.

Eventually, Deborah, who died of a heart attack in 2009, came to see the cells in a spiritual fashion, as the selfless presence in the world of a mother shed barely known.

She really believed that her mother was chosen as an angel, brought back to life to take care of these people, says Skloot, who became close with the daughter over the decade she worked on the book.

She felt that Henrietta in life was such a caretaker and such a mother to so many people and that in death shes essentially doing the same thing curing diseases and really taking care of people.

Other members of the family, however, felt hurt and resentful at the absence of their consent to use the cells and over the huge amounts of money theyd generated.

Learning from journalists in the 1970s that the cells were being bought, sold and employed in medical breakthroughs, Henriettas sons became enraged, says Skloot, who is played in the movie by Australian actress Rose Byrne.

They found that out and they were like, Oh, wait a minute, if her cells are so important to medicine, why cant we (afford to) go to the doctor? And if people are buying and selling them wheres our cut?

Courts and legislators internationally have weighed in on the money issue, deciding that payments will not be owed for tissues or genetic information used in research or biotech advances.

Most of the Lacks family has come to accept this, Skloot says. Many family members have made extensive speaking appearances extolling Lackss legacy, and fostering pride in her contributions.

But the current generation met a new outrage in 2013 when a group of German scientists sequenced the HeLa cells genome and posted the results online.

It was the German work that finally revealed the genetic secrets of the cells immortality raising the possibility they could be used to immortalize other cell lines.

But it also exposed genetic information about any of Lackss living descendants who would share large segments of her genome but, yet again, were not informed about and gave no consent for the sequencing or its publication.

Legally, researchers didnt have to seek consent, Skloot says. For the scientific community, however, the sequencing and posting caused an uproar.

They were like what? Skloot says. Of course we were all curious about the genome, but are you kidding? You did this without talking to her family? Have you read the book?

After consulting the family, Skloot persuaded the researchers to remove the information. And now two of Lackss descendants sit on a U.S. National Institutes of Health board that decides who can use her genetic information and for what purposes.

Nothing like this ever happened where either research participants or tissue donors are part of the process, Skloot says. The family wanted this genome to help the world, but also basically wanted this whole (lack of consent) process to stop with this generation.

Still, other legal and ethical issues raised by Lackss case remain sticking points.

Key among these, says clinical ethicist Michael Szego, is informed consent: the right of a patient to explicitly approve involvement in medical trials or the laboratory use of tissues or other clinical information with a clear understanding of the research involved.

The notion of consent, however, was largely absent at the time of Lackss treatments, Skloot says.

They went in and they took these samples and it was totally standard at the time, she says. They were taking samples from really anybody they could get their hands on.

We didnt even have the term informed consent.

Today that has partly changed under rules observed in most advanced medical systems, says Szego, acting director of the Centre for Clinical Ethics, a joint venture of St. Michaels Hospital, St. Josephs Health Centre and Providence Healthcare.

If Henrietta Lacks were to walk into Johns Hopkins today and get her cervical cancer biopsied (for research) they would need to get her consent prior to doing that, he says.

And Woodgett notes that patients would often need to give further consent before their tissues were used in new and different research.

As well, Szego says, no tissues of genetic anomalies used in research today can be labelled with identifying information.

Yet even today, consent is strictly required only for tissues explicitly obtained for medical research, Szego says.

Cells or other materials taken during routine treatments an artery snipped out during heart surgery for example are considered medical waste and can be used in labs without the approval of patients from whom theyre taken, he says.

So does the movie do justice to Lackss story and the medical and ethical complexities it has raised?

Like many authors whose books have been brought to the screen, Skloot is somewhat ambivalent about the Winfrey movie.

I had 400 pages to tell the story so I got to say everything I wanted to say about Henrietta, about the science, about just everything, she says.

Much of this rich detail was jettisoned for the 95-minute movie. As a writer I want every single fact in a movie, Skloot says. But on balance, she believes Deborah Lacks would have approved.

Of course there are some things in it that are fictionalized, she says.

But I think in essence it really captures Deborahs desires and her quest and her journey in a way that I think she would be happy with.

The Toronto Star and thestar.com, each property of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited, One Yonge Street, 4th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5E1E6. You can unsubscribe at any time. Please contact us or see our privacy policy for more information.

Read the original post:
How poor tobacco farmer Henrietta Lacks became a medical superstar after her death - Toronto Star

Posted in Immortality Medicine | Comments Off on How poor tobacco farmer Henrietta Lacks became a medical superstar after her death – Toronto Star

Cheating Death: A Neurosurgical History of Human Resuscitation, Reanimation, and the Pursuit of Immortality – Newswise (press release)

Posted: at 4:31 am

Newswise Winner of the Vesalius Award, Michael Bohl, MD, presented his research, Cheating Death: A Neurosurgical History of Human Resuscitation, Reanimation, and the Pursuit of Immortality, during the 2017 American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) Annual Scientific Meeting.

For millennia, adventurers searched for the mythical Fountain of Youth in hopes of achieving immortality. The late European Renaissance saw the emergence of a more practical method for pursuing longevity: evidence-based medicine. This historical analysis details the last 500 years of physician-led efforts to cheat death, and specifically, the neurosurgeons role in the scientific and literary canons of human immortality.

Case reports of hypothermic patients surviving typically fatal circumstances prompted early surgical pioneers, such as John Hunter, to perform the first methodical experiments on human resuscitation. His work with hypothermia and electrical stimulation interested The Royal Humane Society, which years later sponsored an infamous attempt by Giovanni Aldini to reanimate the body of an executed criminal before a crowd of Londons social elite. Attending this reanimation was William Godwin, whose descriptions of this event inspired his daughter, Mary Shelley, to write Frankenstein. Temple Fay introduced modern medicine to the neuro-protective power of hypothermia. Although his work was derailed by Nazi physicians at the Dachau concentration camp, he successfully inspired a new generation of neurosurgeons, such as R.J. White. Under hypothermic cerebrovascular arrest, R.J. White successfully performed the first primate head transplant, catching the attention of Russian scientists who were hoping to achieve a method for extending life indefinitely via head transplantation. These efforts coincided and prompted the release of numerous literary and visual works depicting neurosurgeons as mad-scientists and inspired Italian neurosurgeon Sergio Canavero to plan the first human head transplant for 2017.

Author Block: Tyler Steed, MD/PhD; Evgenii Belykh, MD; Nilkolay Martirosyan, MD, PhD; and Mark Preul, MD

Disclosure: The author reported no conflicts of interest.

Media Representatives: The 2017 AANS Annual Scientific Meeting press section will include releases on highlighted scientific research, AANS officers and award winners, Neurosurgery Awareness Month and other relevant information about the 2017 program. Releases will be posted under the Media area on the 2017 AANS Annual Scientific Meeting website. If you have interest in a topic related to neurosurgery or would like to interview a neurosurgeon either onsite or via telephone during the event, please contact Alice Kelsey, AANS associate executive director, via email at aik@aans.org.

About the 2017 AANS Annual Scientific Meeting: Attended by neurosurgeons, neurosurgical residents, medical students, neuroscience nurses, clinical specialists, physician assistants, allied health professionals and other medical professionals, the AANS Annual Scientific Meeting is the largest gathering of neurosurgeons in the nation, with an emphasis on the fields latest research and technological advances. The scientific presentations accepted for the 2017 event will represent cutting-edge examples of the incredible developments taking place within the field of neurosurgery. Find additional information about the 2017 AANS Annual Scientific Meeting and the meeting program here.

Founded in 1931 as the Harvey Cushing Society, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) is a scientific and educational association with more than 10,000 members worldwide. The AANS is dedicated to advancing the specialty of neurological surgery in order to provide the highest quality of neurosurgical care to the public. Fellows of the AANS are board-certified by the American Board of Neurological Surgery, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada or the Mexican Council of Neurological Surgery, A.C. Neurosurgery is the medical specialty concerned with the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of disorders that affect the spinal column, spinal cord, brain, nervous system and peripheral nerves.

For more information, visit http://www.AANS.org.

Read more here:
Cheating Death: A Neurosurgical History of Human Resuscitation, Reanimation, and the Pursuit of Immortality - Newswise (press release)

Posted in Immortality Medicine | Comments Off on Cheating Death: A Neurosurgical History of Human Resuscitation, Reanimation, and the Pursuit of Immortality – Newswise (press release)

Dragon Ball Super Episode 87 Recap And Review: "Universal … – Bam! Smack! Pow!

Posted: at 4:31 am

Image Courtesy of Toei Animation

Gotham Season 3, Episode 15 Synopsis: Heroes Rise: How The Riddler Got His Name by Steve Lam

Chris Pratt Explains What Fans Can Expect From Avengers: Infinity War by Erik Swann

The Universal Survival Saga for Dragon Ball Superfocuses on the Tournament of Power. The tournament involves eight out of the twelve existing universes. Ten of the strongest in each universe will fight in a Battle Royal-style match. The losing universes will be eliminated by the Omni-Kings.

On the previous episode of Dragon Ball Super, Goku and No.17 met for the first time. Goku visited No.17 to convince him to join the team. What we ended up getting was the fight that we never had the chance to see in Dragon Ball Z. In the end, No.17 declined Gokus request. Will Goku convince him this episode?

The episode begins with Goku continuing to persuade No.17. Giving one last effort, he mentions that the reward for the winning team is the Super Dragon Balls. He adds that the Super Dragon Balls are planet-sized and more powerful than the Earth ones. No.17 is slightly intrigued.

Before No.17 can decide, his attention is averted by the roar of the Minotaurus. An alien ship (which we saw at the end of the last episode) appears above the island. The ship starts beaming up all the animals on the island. We learned on the last episode that the aliens main target was the Minotaurus.

Goku and No.17 race to enter the spaceship. However, the ship closes before they can enter. Goku uses his Instant Transmission to enter the ship. They are confronted by henchmen. No.17 tells Goku to be careful. He mentions damaging the spaceship will cause it to crash, killing all the animals.

The episode shifts to Krillin and No.18. No.18 expresses concern over Goku and No.17. She mentions that both are similar and have an immature side.

We return to Goku and No.17. They easily deal with the henchmen. Theyre confronted by two bigger henchmen. No.17 tells Goku to deal with them, and hell go after the main boss. Goku mentions that he wants to fight the main boss. The two henchmen attack the two. No.17 dodges them and escapes, able to pursue the main boss. This leaves Goku to deal with the two henchmen.

No.17 confronts the boss. The boss summons two henchmen to attack No.17. He deals with them with ease. The boss is surprised at No.17s strength. The boss decides to attack, but No.17 counters, knocking him back.

Image Courtesy of Toei Animation

Goku catches up with them. No.17 asks the boss why hes after the Minotaurus. The boss mentions that the Minotaurus horns sell for a lot of money. He adds that some believe the horns can create immortality medicine. But the boss only cares about the money. He offers Goku and No.17 money, but both refuse.

No.17 approaches the boss and kicks him to the side. The boss reveals that he has a device that can self-destruct the whole ship. This stops Goku and No.17 in their tracks.

The boss pushes the button on the device and the ship explodes. Well, not really. We transition to Beerus, who wakes up from a dream. He mentions that he had a dream that Goku had died (the dream being that the ship exploded). Beerus screams that the dream is a bad omen.

We return to Goku and No.17 (still alive and well). The boss is still threatening the two with the device. He mentions a self-destructive device implanted in his body. He tells them that if they let him go, he wont destroy the ship. No.17 decides to sacrifice himself to save the animals. He tells Goku to take care of the animals. He then grabs the boss and flies out of the spaceship. Goku uses his Instant Transmission to catch up with them. He transfers them to King Kais planet.

Image Courtesy of Toei Animation

He tells King Kai that the boss has a self-destructive bomb in him. And he brought him to the planet like he did with Cell. Goku notifies King Kai that the boss isnt strong enough to handle the gravity on the planet, so King Kai has nothing to worry about.

Goku receives a message from Dende. He tells Goku that the boss was lying about having a self-destruct device in his body. No.17 tells the boss to press the switch on the device. The boss presses the switch and confetti flies out his nose. It turns out the device was for a surprise birthday party planned for later.

Goku and No.17 return to Earth. They land the ship safely back on the island. The animals are all let out. As for the boss, he and his henchmen are all arrested by Jaco (the Galactic Patrolman)turns out he had been after the aliens for years. Jaco leaves with the aliens in his own ship.

No.17 lets Goku know that he will join the team. He mentions that hell leave the island to Trunks and Goten. He adds that he will use the Super Dragon Balls to wish for a large cruise ship. His dream is to travel the world with his family. The episode ends with 23 hours and 20 minutes until the start of the tournament.

The episode had a lot of fun elements to it. The highlight was Goku teaming with No.17. The ending of the episode played on how Gokus villains eventually turn to allies. No.17 told Goku that he couldnt believe he wanted to kill him before. Goku responded that Tien, Piccolo, Vegeta, and Buu were all the same.

This episode had nice comedic elements to it also. Beerus and King Kai both provided laugh out loud moments. Even in a serious storyline, the anime still manages to sneak in that famous Dragon Ball humor.

In terms of the storyline, this was another filler episode. The only story advancement is No.17s joining the team. But with the tournament closing in, we expect things to pick up.

What were your thoughts on this episode? Let us know in the comments.

View post:
Dragon Ball Super Episode 87 Recap And Review: "Universal ... - Bam! Smack! Pow!

Posted in Immortality Medicine | Comments Off on Dragon Ball Super Episode 87 Recap And Review: "Universal … – Bam! Smack! Pow!

Page 1,876«..1020..1,8751,8761,8771,878..1,8901,900..»