[tifik]

I know these are scientists and a 'Human embryo model' is a perfectly valid name, because it's a model of a human embryo, but it's a disaster from a marketing perspective. People will see 'human embryo' and it doesn't matter that it's just a model of one. You are now growing fetus-slaves.

Please call it something else.

Edit: they are calling it 'hematoids' and make it clear that it is quite different from an embryo. I'm not sure why it's compared to them in the first place then.

[falcor84]

Just on a philosophical level, is there anything that would make such embryos more "slaves" than embryos or fetuses in a womb? It's not as if in a womb they have any ability to assert conscious control over their environment, even if they had the cognitive and sensorial capacity.

[Terr_]

> is there anything that would make such embryos more "slaves" than embryos or fetuses in a womb?

Arguably much-less-so, given the complicated and morally-ambiguous mechanics of primate gestation [0] where a fetus in the womb exercises a degree of biochemical control and extortion over the mother.

[0] https://aeon.co/essays/why-pregnancy-is-a-biological-war-bet...

[pseudosaid]

it wouldnt matter because of the context. It is expected that an embryo grows into a baby that is born. The very delaying of that expectation that denotes the slave label. Preventing the natural progression is a retardation of freedom. Since these embryo units are designed and purpose built, they are no more slave than the native embryo. If these designer embryos have capacity to develop further on their own, then there is an argument and correlation to be made.

[voxl]

The hilarity of the very first comment I read after this one being someone complaining that this is the work of the anti christ and nothing will be sacred anymore.