Horrific, not surprising, but horrific. It’s a little slice of Niven-esque sci-fi hell, here and now. Still, while a crackdown on the groups that based their research on these organs is a must, I’m not sure that retracting the research is the way to do it. Suspend their licenses to practice, cut their funding and subject them to scrutiny, but if the research is good it should be agnostic as to the source.
It should be possible both to set an example which discourages this practice in the future, without the loss of the research itself.
I understand your suggestion about not retracting the research and I am certain reasonable people would fall on both sides of this question. But it is not unreasonable to destroy something useful that appeared thanks to something horrible, in a show of moral leadership and an absolutist refutation of the horrible practice.
For a much lower stakes example: The bounty confiscated from poachers (ivory for instance) is destroyed instead of being legally sold to fund the anti-poaching efforts.
The corollary of this argument is that the deaths contribute to some noble purpose and and are thus justified to some degree. That instinct to engage in retroactive bargaining is understandable but dangerous. What is the point of having ethical standards if there isn't a high cost for breaking them?
Do you take the same position regarding evidence found in searches executed without a valid warrant, i. e. fruit of the poisonous tree?
In any case, a retraction would not necessarily erase that knowledge. It would, however, limit its usefulness for the authors of these papers, in terms of reputation and citation count. That should serve as an incentive to more thoroughly investigate the provenance of that brain with a gun shot wound you're dissecting.
>>While the government says 10,000 transplants occur each year, hospital data shows between 60,000 to 100,000 organs are transplanted each year. The report provides evidence that this gap is being made up by executed prisoners of conscience.
This indicates between 50,000 and 90,000 'prisoners of conscience' EVERY YEAR are executed and have their organs harvested. That is 1,000 to 2,000 people per week executed essentially for opposing the govt.
Yet we continue to do business with this government and allow them into world trade and govt organizations as if they were somehow ethical or legitimate.
Surely each executed prisoner could be expected to provide multiple organs, the transplantation of each being recorded as a separate operation?
Although obviously that's a pedantic quibble rather than a defence of the practice, as even a highly reduced number of such executions remains appalling.
That rate of execution is only a single order of magnitude shy of the rate of killings during the Holocaust. It likely is on par with the rate of killings during the earlier parts of the Holocaust, during which mass murder hadn't been optimized in the way it was later.
In news that will make you want to shut the blinds, go back to bed until next week ... there's disturbing news out of South Korea that since August, officials have found over 17,000 pills filled with human flesh, in particular the placentas and ground up bodies of dead Chinese babies.
Maybe I'm missing something; it mentioned it was using organs from executed prisoners. Is that a bad thing?
Again, I feel like I missed a part of this article, so I'm genuinely confused.
EDIT: I was under the (erroneous) impression that these people were being executed for other crimes, like murder or rape or something. I didn't realize people were being executed on demand. That's terrifying.
Even if you were going to be executed anyway, you obviously have a right to determine what happens to your organs, particularly in cultures like China's, where it's seen as very important that the body remain whole.
Morality of the death sentence aside, I think the underlying issue here is that this may also be a driver for killing people in the first place. For example, the presence of "re-education" camps was brought up again recently, in particular relating to Uighur muslims and more generally political and ideological dissidents, whereby the camps have grown considerably (despite contradicting statements on the international scene) and people seem to get "re-educated" indefinitely.
[+] [-] gotocake|7 years ago|reply
It should be possible both to set an example which discourages this practice in the future, without the loss of the research itself.
[+] [-] krastanov|7 years ago|reply
For a much lower stakes example: The bounty confiscated from poachers (ivory for instance) is destroyed instead of being legally sold to fund the anti-poaching efforts.
[+] [-] lbj|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anigbrowl|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shaki-dora|7 years ago|reply
In any case, a retraction would not necessarily erase that knowledge. It would, however, limit its usefulness for the authors of these papers, in terms of reputation and citation count. That should serve as an incentive to more thoroughly investigate the provenance of that brain with a gun shot wound you're dissecting.
[+] [-] WalterSear|7 years ago|reply
Anyone can now replicate it.
[+] [-] toss1|7 years ago|reply
This indicates between 50,000 and 90,000 'prisoners of conscience' EVERY YEAR are executed and have their organs harvested. That is 1,000 to 2,000 people per week executed essentially for opposing the govt.
Yet we continue to do business with this government and allow them into world trade and govt organizations as if they were somehow ethical or legitimate.
This needs to be re-thought.
[+] [-] Rumperuu|7 years ago|reply
Although obviously that's a pedantic quibble rather than a defence of the practice, as even a highly reduced number of such executions remains appalling.
[+] [-] p1esk|7 years ago|reply
Are you going to stop, now that you think they are unethical?
[+] [-] DeonPenny|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bdamm|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 99_00|7 years ago|reply
In news that will make you want to shut the blinds, go back to bed until next week ... there's disturbing news out of South Korea that since August, officials have found over 17,000 pills filled with human flesh, in particular the placentas and ground up bodies of dead Chinese babies.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/ho...
[+] [-] tombert|7 years ago|reply
Again, I feel like I missed a part of this article, so I'm genuinely confused.
EDIT: I was under the (erroneous) impression that these people were being executed for other crimes, like murder or rape or something. I didn't realize people were being executed on demand. That's terrifying.
[+] [-] xiii1408|7 years ago|reply
Even if you were going to be executed anyway, you obviously have a right to determine what happens to your organs, particularly in cultures like China's, where it's seen as very important that the body remain whole.
[+] [-] noname120|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] quotha|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] x220|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grownseed|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] downrightmike|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] crb002|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aaron695|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]