READING

(In reference to Stupp's work on neuron growth pages 67-69) Aside from the intended application of replacing damaged or destoryed neurons for the central nervous system; could this develop into technology for body enhancement? (e.g. a spray that increases intellengence or reflexes by stimulating neuron growth; Or connecting mind and machine by using neuron plated conductive staffs that allow signals to be transmitted to inorganic computers.) Also what social ramifications would such technology unlease upon humanity?

[PG 65 talking about scaffolds to place stem cells on] “They are but temporary trailers for cells to inhabit. Will cells cultivated in trailer parks grow up to be Oprah? Or will they turn into Britney Spears? With these as possible outcomes, we cannot afford to gamble.”

"Moving forward simultaneously along many of these paths could achieve a golden age that would be a turning point for human productivity and quality of life.!" Out of all the bullet points made on pages 5 to 6 there were only three that I didn't immediately say "no thank you" to. And if I am to accept that these bullet points are going to bring a "golden age" and the progressive ideals which allow them to be perceived as the elements of a golden age, then what does that say about my present life, how am i to perceive now, the subsequent non-golden age? "The twenty-first century could end in world peace, universal prosperity, and evolution to a higher level of compassion and accomplishment."  And I also fail to see how any of the bullet points will bring about what this quote says, especially if the motivation is a "golden age" and the ideals and mental conditions that made that perception possible still exist.

The 20 points outlined under the "Vision for Enhancing Human Abilities and Societal Performance" sounds scary.  It seems that we will all become machines, tailored to understand people and interact with machines based on a set of prewritten “code.”

I agree that some of these visions will definitely benefit humanity such as right now during our financial crisis. But what about the idea that humans are supposed to learn from mistakes, or take time to interact with people around them? Not have a machine predetermine their decisions and creativity.  

"The twenty-first century could end in world peace, universal prosperity, and evolution to a higher level of compassion and accomplishment. It is hard to find the right metaphor to see a century into the future, but it may be that humanity would become like a single, distributed and interconnected “brain” based in new core pathways of society. This will be an enhancement to the productivity and independence of individuals, giving them greater opportunities to achieve personal goals." (bottom of page 6)

Even with assertions like this one I still am skeptical of nanotechnology because it will be expensive, at least at first, and that will create a huge rift between industrial and third-world countries. That throws out a chance for universal prosperity which, in turn, will lead to war and fighting. So good-bye world peace. And how does technology create compassion? That is something that comes from within a person and I wouldn't be comfortable with them messing with my mind to "teach" me compassion.

"One market research firm estimates that $65 billion in

annual drug revenues (almost 16% of total drug industry sales) come from pharmaceuticals with poor bioavailability, corresponding to higher patient costs, inefficient treatments and increased risk of toxicity."
With this much funding in medicenes not particularily used well by the body, why not attack the pharmaceutical companies for their revenue or a partnership or worse comes to worse some sort of fiscal help.