Abortion issue, your thought?

[AppleBonker]

Cancer cells are also life. But we're not stopping people from killing them. Just saying.

[C-Kwik]

Oh, do proceed. But please understand I did make the distinction that you could argue whether the fetus is valuable as human life, but there can be no denying that it is life none the less. I would love to hear your reasoning to the contrary.

Understand, my point is that it CAN be argued. I have no strong convictions as to what point life is considered to start. That said, how do we define when life begins? There's subjectivity in that. Some might argue it begins when the sperm enters the egg. Others may define it as the point at which the blastocyst implants in the uterine wall. Maybe its after gastrulation occurs? Perhaps when brain or heart activity occurs? Maybe after the embryonic stage ends? Perhaps when it starts sensing the environment around it? Maybe when we can stop referring to it as "it"? Maybe when it becomes viable outside the womb (including with help from medical equipment)? Maybe its the point at which the child is born?

The problem is that science, in the context of development of a fetus, does not define the word, life. It merely defines the stages of development of the fetus. When it can be considered a life or alive is not well defined. Its quite subjective. The stages of development are not. Assuming no complications occur, then the fetus will eventually become a life. That's not disputable. But when to call the mass of cells that are reproducing and arranging themselves to become an autonomous being a life is absolutely debatable in a scientific context. Any definition that might apply to this particular context is ultimately arbitrary and would have to be based on what traits would define life. How one does this would define where in the development cycle the term would apply. But that would be concluded by how a human or several humans (as a consensus) defines the word. Not by any scientific definition. Life is a fairly broad word that defines at a macro level. As does the term conception. Neither defines a specific moment in a biological process. As such, it is open to interpretation. And as a result is one of the major areas where debates over abortion tend to be focused. You might define life a certain way, and other may define it another way. Science does not define life so specifically.

[C-Kwik]

Cancer cells are also life. But we're not stopping people from killing them. Just saying.

We could also define developing fetuses as parasites too. Just sayin...

[AppleBonker]

Very true. I think the distinction that needs to be made on stebo's previous post is the difference between a life and (a) human life. There is no way to deny that at conception the zygote is, in fact, a living cell (hence it is definitely life). The debate arises when one tries to claim what a human life is, and when that begins.

[IBCoupe]

Thinking about cancer as an independent lifeform, take a look at canine venerial cancer. It's a transmissable cancer from one dog to another, and it's the longest living animal cell line we know of - this continuous blob of disease has been spreading itself from dog to dog for probably the past 2500-5000 years.

[stebo0728]

Thinking about cancer as an independent lifeform, take a look at canine venerial cancer. It's a transmissable cancer from one dog to another, and it's the longest living animal cell line we know of - this continuous blob of disease has been spreading itself from dog to dog for probably the past 2500-5000 years.

<LOL>
Its all about the chromosomal caps, they wear off in normal cells, thats why we age, but they dont in cancer cells. If we could reverse the tables we could cure aging and cancer at the same time.
</LOL>

[IBCoupe]

Actually, I believe they did a half-turn on the tables. They found a way to either remove the chromosomal cap or weaken it, causing the effects of old age to actually reverse in lab mice. Skin tightened, bone strength was restored, mental acuity improved, hair color and hair thickness returned...

They said this could be a very risky procedure to do, because if you have cancer without knowing it, the cancer will eat you.

EDIT:
Link here.

[heliochrome85]

i just want to say since everyone in this thread has a set of "wedding vegetables," its important to note that if they live long enough, every man in the world will have prostate cancer. most people die before they get it, but alot do end up having the disease. chances are 100% that you will get it. scary thought.

[AppleBonker]

Lulz. If you remove every other possible way I could die, then yeah, that's how I'll die. I should be a doctor.

[heliochrome85]

Lulz. If you remove every other possible way I could die, then yeah, that's how I'll die. I should be a doctor.

i thought you already were one. dr. feel good?

[stebo0728]

Actually, I believe they did a half-turn on the tables. They found a way to either remove the chromosomal cap or weaken it, causing the effects of old age to actually reverse in lab mice. Skin tightened, bone strength was restored, mental acuity improved, hair color and hair thickness returned...

They said this could be a very risky procedure to do, because if you have cancer without knowing it, the cancer will eat you.

EDIT:
Link here.

Havent read the link yet, but I must be confused. I thought aging was caused by the wearing away of the caps, so if you removed or weakened them, wouldnt that accelerate the aging? Maybe we'll devolve into Benjamin Buttons one day.

[heliochrome85]

Actually, I believe they did a half-turn on the tables. They found a way to either remove the chromosomal cap or weaken it, causing the effects of old age to actually reverse in lab mice. Skin tightened, bone strength was restored, mental acuity improved, hair color and hair thickness returned...

They said this could be a very risky procedure to do, because if you have cancer without knowing it, the cancer will eat you.

EDIT:
Link here.

Havent read the link yet, but I must be confused. I thought aging was caused by the wearing away of the caps, so if you removed or weakened them, wouldnt that accelerate the aging? Maybe we'll devolve into Benjamin Buttons one day.

there is something called telomerase. this is what you are talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomerase