Our first discussion

Hey, Everyone,

Here’s my newsletter for the week. Prepare to read all the news that’s fit to print. Or if it isn’t exactly fit, then at least it’s been to the gym twice this month. And last Tuesday it had a salad for lunch. So, you know, if it’s not exactly fit, it’s on the healthier side. And besides. It’s the thought that counts.

Where was I? Oh, yes, the newsletter...

A bodyoid

As you’ll recall, I’m starting something new. Now and then, I’ll be asking you questions on topics that I consider interesting and important. I’m hoping that you’ll find time to answer...and maybe pose a few questions yourself.

When you do answer, I’ll try to run what you have to say on my blog in a special, new category of posting that will be labeled “Discussions.”

Today, we’re getting started with our very first “Discussion.” You’ll recall that a while back I asked you about the morality of creating brainless clones of human beings and using them as sources of transplantable organs. This was in reaction to an article I saw in the MIT Technology Review, “Ethically sourced ‘spare’ human bodies could revolutionize medicine,” by Henry T. Greely, Hiromitsu Nakauchi, and Carsten T. Charlesworth. (You can see it here: https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/03/25/1113611/ethically-sourced-spare-human-bodies-could-revolutionize-medicine.)

The authors say that we need to start talking about this issue, now, because we’re getting pretty close to being able to do it. They don’t exactly come out and say that we *should* produce brainless clones (what they call “bodyoids”) as sources of transplantable organs, but they do point out it would save countless lives if we did.

So I asked y’all if you had opinions on the morality of that. I’m happy to report our mutual friend Denise Bafti responded with a most insightful piece. And I’m going to post it to my blog, as the very first “Discussion.” Plus, I’ll include it below as well.

So, without further ado, here’s what she has to say:

I must say that I had not yet heard about this initiative! I agree, Michael, it feels creepy -- now. However, I would imagine blood transfusions and IVF and test-tube embryos felt creepy when they began, as well. I feel that growing an entire vessel (bodyoid) for harvesting takes too many resources and space, not to mention money. I feel that only the 1% (multi-millionaires/billionaires) would be able to afford to do this. Wouldn't it be better to continue the stem-cell approach where we could grow organs and joints from stem cells from the person in need of the organ/body part? I realize that the stem-cell science and technology still has a way to go, but we can't go directly from A to Z without all the steps and iterations in between.

All of this may be moot, however, if the current administration's attitudes toward science and technology do not change. We will at the very least be very delayed in developing ANY science or technology -- particularly when you factor in the crippling of major institutions, the abrupt "rip the bandaid off" cancellation of funding, and the extortion being brought to bear on them to teach a curriculum that the far right deems correct and moral. So as someone who can see The Handmaid's Tale (Margaret Atwood) being used (unofficially) as a blueprint, I don't feel good about much of what science and technology can do right now.

Denise Bafti

Copyright©2025 Denise Bafti

There you have it! Our first Discussion. Thanks again, Denise, for sending it.

Meanwhile, stay tuned. There’ll be lots more questions, and (I hope) more answers to come.

~mjt