Just discovered? That's routinely taught in A-level biology now.
If the cells of the late Henriette Lacks can give us a cure for cancer, the only thing I will say against it is that her children and grandchildren should have been treated better than they have been. Which is what I already say, cure or not.
Taught in biology since when? When I went through uni and did units in human biol, there was never any teaching on this.. so you mean to tell me they are now brainwashing children at school to think this sort of thing is ok?? each to their own i guess.. but this sort of thing in science imo just goes against all common sense and good reason and is totally unethical.. the other thing to say against it - perhaps she should have been asked for her consent before her cells were taken and used in such a manner... there's no justification really.
Well, we did it in my biology degree many, many years ago, I know it has been taught for a couple of years at least as an A-level biology ethics thing... it is unethical but then so is most of the world, at least this may have a positive outcome.
I should have been asked for consent before being carved up, yet no-one thought to do that. Consent and doctors just don't happen, IME. That's the medical world and it won't change very soon.
Haven't actually read the links but if you're interested in the Henrietta Lacks' life and the HeLa line there is a wonderful book about it. It's called The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.
Yes, it's a travesty that whilst many Doctors, scientists and pharmaceutical companies have profited from her cells her family can't afford medical insurance or basic health care. Interestingly enough the researcher who grew her cells (which was a massive, massive breakthrough in medical research) never profited from them - he gave them away for free (and the medium they grew in). He was given cells from many dead patients the HeLa cells were special because they grew and because of them we understand all sorts of things about cells we never would have known. FWIW there is still a question over the ownership of discarded body tissue.
IMO Tuskegee syphilis experiment was far more awful than removing cells from a dead woman without consent.
Onyx - thanks for the info..
Not sure I needed to read this.. but I guess better to be informed. Ive always wondered about this exact thing -what happens to my blood when Ive had a blood test after they've done the tests. Especially with the whole technology of cloning these days.. and who knows what other technology they invent in the future, I want my tissues to remain mine and mine only!! This is the exact reason I decided to take my placenta home from the hospital - just a sneaking suspicion it wouldnt be disposed of properly by the hospital..
If this is happening in Australia, I want to know, and I want my tissues back!!! If I was aware of my tissues sitting in a lab somewhere, I would be absolutely furious and walk straight into that lab and retrieve them myself, and slap the researchers in the face in the process!! Makes me want to go and do a bit of research...
I dont agree with this sort of thing AT ALL. What peeves me off the most is that the medical field is so quick to shoot any researcher down whose study does not meet ethics requirements (as in the case of Wakefield), but then they do these diabolical unethical ridiculous disgusting apalling things in ""medicine"" and think its justified!!! Yes can you tell how angry I am at the thought of this.. and how little trust I have left in the medical field (which is why I started studying naturopathy). Having suffered a similar (very rare) illness to Henrietta Lacks myself, I would be devastated, appalled and feel absolutely sick if my cells were being used in a vaccine being injected to billions of people around the world every day.
Registered User
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks