4 ms·

> It's unreasonable and very dangerous if you do biohacking without actually knowing what you're doing The question is whether you can really know what you are

> It's unreasonable and very dangerous if you do biohacking without actually knowing what you're doing The question is whether you can really know what you are doing with this kind of process. There is a reason why biotech companies are spending billions on rigorous scientific research and well constructed, multi-stage studies. But even then a lot of that research fails to produce anything useful. Or something like the infamous Contergan slips through and causes massive harm despite all of this effort. How much can we really expect from a bunch of outsiders doing (at best) very flimsy science when even the best and brightest experts in the field regularly waste years pursuing ideas that do not work out?

LyndsySimon 8y ago
> How much can we really expect from a bunch of outsiders doing (at best) very flimsy science when even the best and brightest experts in the field regularly waste years pursuing ideas that do not work out? I'd guess "a lot". Certainly this is higher risk. It's also much faster and less constrained - there's nothing stopping someone who believes a certain process will have a certain effect from trying it, regardless of what others believe. That will result in data that can be potentially useful for subsequent research regardless of the outcome. At the end of the day, I believe that people own themselves. If they want to risk their life and health to be their own test subject, more power to them. Consider that someone, somewhere, once saw the round white thing that came out of a chicken's butt and though "Hmm... I wonder how that tastes..." If not for that intrepid soul we might never have discovered omelets :)
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Since you mention it, let's have a moment of silence for all our ancestors who died trying out random things they found in the forest, so that future generations could know exactly what is and what isn't edible.

LyndsySimon 8y ago

> How much can we really expect from a bunch of outsiders doing (at best) very flimsy science when even the best and brightest experts in the field regularly waste years pursuing ideas that do not work out? I'd guess "a lot". Certainly this is higher risk. It's also much faster and less constrained - there's nothing stopping someone who believes a certain process will have a certain effect from trying it, regardless of what others believe. That will result in data that can be potentially useful for subsequent research regardless of the outcome. At the end of the day, I believe that people own themselves. If they want to risk their life and health to be their own test subject, more power to them. Consider that someone, somewhere, once saw the round white thing that came out of a chicken's butt and though "Hmm... I wonder how that tastes..." If not for that intrepid soul we might never have discovered omelets :)

TeMPOraL 8y ago
Since you mention it, let's have a moment of silence for all our ancestors who died trying out random things they found in the forest, so that future generations could know exactly what is and what isn't edible.