Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx
I didn't see anything terribly new in the article (but then we have a subscription to Nature at our house thanks to #2 son) but it was a nice summation article for the educated layperson on "stuff thats happened since long ago year of biology class". Nice catch by Kyuusai - I like finding articles like this for "here, read this and get back to me" moments to stop stupid debates in their tracks.
So much has happened in biology in the last 20 years that it is kind of painful trying to have ethics, social, or political discourse with people who are using mid-20th Century fuzzy ideas.
|
That's pretty much it. My post was very poorly worded (I shouldn't have used the word "news", for instance), but I'm in rapid-posting mode most of the time due to my limited time online. It's not
news, but it's an excellent layperson summary for a field that's getting near-zero attention. I've been reading news snippets for years about research results that clearly showed more was going on than the old DNA model, but never did those stories actually have anything to say about what's actually being learned in this field.
On the issue of AMA... I really don't find those figures surprising at all. Not only does it sound like a process most people would be willing to go through, but I can't think of any legal process which the general public is sufficiently educated about in any country, so I don't imagine that something like this would be well understood by the populace.
On the other hand, I really have to wonder what could have caused confusion such as people mistaking it for a euthanasia. I can't imagine how a person could confuse being able to die naturally with being euthanized. Surely there must have been some misinformation being spread?