A handy acronym and concept:
SCALE goes hand in hand with scale…
If those ‘artworks’ in the article there are the best ‘she’ (it) can do, I suppose contemporary ‘art’ may be threatened by AI, but not real art… 😉
As the bell rang on a recent morning at an elementary school here and pupils filled the classrooms, anxious adults crowded the corridors outside. It was vaccination day, but many parents in this North Sumatra village did not want their children immunized with a new measles-rubella (MR) vaccine. Some told the teacher their children were at home, not feeling well. Others were there to make sure their kids didn’t get the jab. They whispered the reason with disgust: The vaccine “contains elements of pork.” By the time the vaccination team left, only six out of 38 students had been immunized.
Millions of parents around Indonesia have eschewed the vaccine in recent months, after Islamic clerics declared the MR vaccine “haram,” or forbidden under Islamic law because pig components are used in its manufacturing. Vaccine coverage has plummeted as a result, alarming public health experts who worry that the world’s largest Muslim-majority country could see new waves of measles and more miscarriages and birth defects resulting from rubella infections during pregnancy.
Three years after assisted death became legal in Canada, the medical community is debating a provocative question: should organs be removed from consenting euthanasia patients while they’re still alive?
Some say changing the rules would allow people choosing an assisted death to donate as many organs as possible — in the most optimal condition possible — because blood and oxygen would continue to flow through vital organs until the moment of retrieval.
Under this scenario, people granted an assisted death would, with their full knowledge and consent, be transported to an operating room, put to sleep under general anaesthesia and their organs removed, including the heart and lungs. Death would follow removal of the beating heart. Under so-called “euthanasia by organ donation,” the act of organ donation itself — not a lethal injection or a doctor-prescribed, life-ending dose of barbiturates — would be the mode of death.
Organ donation after euthanasia is already occurring, legally, in Canada. About 30 people who have died by “medical assistance in dying,” or MAID, since the law decriminalizing the act was passed in 2016 have consented to donate kidneys or other organs. In Ontario, 168 more have donated tissues such as corneas, skin, veins, tendons and ligaments — tissues that don’t require the same conditions as organs to survive and can be taken up to 24 hours after death.
However, under the long-standing “dead donor rule,” organs can’t be procured until donors are declared dead — typically, five minutes after the heart has stopped beating — and the organ retrieval itself can’t lead to the death of the donor.
The rule is intended to maintain a “firewall” between the team removing a person from life support — and determining death — and the transplant surgeons waiting to retrieve precious, desperately needed organs.
The idea provokes a visceral kind of horror for some. “Death by donation would, at present, be considered homicide to end a life by taking organs,” Dr. E. Wesley Ely, a professor of medicine at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine wrote in USA Today.
Remember when doctors adhered to the Hippocratic Oath?
Do no harm; don’t perform euthanasia or abortion:
I swear by Apollo Physician, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture.
To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents; to make him partner in my livelihood; when he is in need of money to share mine with him; to consider his family as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they want to learn it, without fee or indenture; to impart precept, oral instruction, and all other instruction to my own sons, the sons of my teacher, and to indentured pupils who have taken the physician’s oath, but to nobody else.
I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment, but never with a view to injury and wrong-doing. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion. But I will keep pure and holy both my life and my art. I will not use the knife, not even, verily, on sufferers from stone, but I will give place to such as are craftsmen therein.
Into whatsoever houses I enter, I will enter to help the sick, and I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm, especially from abusing the bodies of man or woman, bond or free. And whatsoever I shall see or hear in the course of my profession, as well as outside my profession in my intercourse with men, if it be what should not be published abroad, I will never divulge, holding such things to be holy secrets.
Now if I carry out this oath, and break it not, may I gain for ever reputation among all men for my life and for my art; but if I break it and forswear myself, may the opposite befall me.
We’ve strayed so far…
Not for the first time, I recently received an annoying amber phone alert from a far-away (from where I am, though I did previously live there) part of Ontario:
How likely is the apparent kidnapper going to bring her child this way? (Highly unlikely.)
Why do I have to get enlisted in their efforts to locate? Don’t we have cameras already everywhere, anyway? Why not use existing resources rather than send alerts to everyone in the entire province?
Do your paid job, law enforcement officials, and stop accosting me as I go about my business with unnecessary alerts; I expect those to be reserved for situations like tornadoes, etc. Or perhaps if a dangerous-to-the-public-at-large criminal has been observed passing through my part of the province, but not otherwise.
Alerts should be for localized matters of general concern, not for some random domestic dispute in a faraway region. Not everything is an emergency for everyone, even if it feels like one to a parent of a missing child.
The Sun warns… (NSFW)
Or they could just spy on you for Silicon Valley – for Google / Amazon / etc. and THEN report you to the government, or be used to assassinate you if you’re deemed an enemy of the State.
Hey, why do you think the company that makes RealDolls is called Abyss Creations?
From the Abyss, indeed… (Remember what Nietzsche said, that when you gaze into the Abyss, the Abyss gazes into you! 😉 )
Actress Kate Beckinsale took to social media to boast about a procedure to improve her skin that involves “liquefied cloned foreskins” from South Korean infants.
“After a long flight I do like to lie down and be covered in a mask of liquified cloned foreskins-frankly who doesn’t?Thank you @georgialouisesk for an amazing facial. I especially liked you reassuring me it would be ‘light on penis’ as it was my first time x,” Kate Beckinsale wrote in an Instagram post.
According to Daily Mail, the Pearl Harbor actress “underwent a facial for the first time last week that uses an epidermal growth factor serum containing stem cells cultivated from the discarded tissue of Korean baby boys.”
The article also reports, “Experts claim rubbing these stem cells onto the face activates ageing cells, producing more collagen and making fine lines disappear. The secret ingredient is sourced from South Korea because it has a large supply of foreskins obtained during circumcision, the general custom for young boys.”
The 45-year-old actress is far from the first celebrity to undergo this strange facial treatment. Breitbart News has previously reported on the trend, with Cate Blanchett and Sandra Bullock making headlines for using the cream, which they called a “penis facial” in 2016.
I’m surprised that Israel and the Muslim countries haven’t gotten a ‘piece of the action’ regarding foreskin sales; why only South Korea? 😉