3 ms·

This reminds me of doctor Mengele[1]. LE: I've only said that it reminds me, not that it's the (exactly) same thing. Making other people to suffer in "the name

This reminds me of doctor Mengele[1]. LE: I've only said that it reminds me, not that it's the (exactly) same thing. Making other people to suffer in "the name of science" is at least arguable. LE2: Also, the experiments took place at almost the same time (only a couple of years difference). [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_Mengele http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_Mengele

sophacles 16y ago
While intentionally infecting unknowing people with a disease is not cool, the motive of "we know this works, we just need an full effectiveness study" is very very very different from "they are not people, we can do random surgery on children to see what happens". I think your reaction is quite dramatic, intellectually dishonest, and worthy of a lot of contempt.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- earl 16y ago
  Bullshit. If this really was no big deal, if we really hard regarded Guatemalens as people, it could have been done here at home in the US on white people. Instead, it was performed on people who didn't matter -- just like the Tuskegee experiments. The difference here between the US and Mengele is one of degree, not kind.
  - sophacles 16y ago
    No, this is not the same as Tuskegee. In that experiment the people were not left to get advanced syphilis for years, and intentionally denied proper care. This is much different than being given the cure after exposure. They both start the same -- someone is intentionally given syphilis. The don't however end the same. Now, if you were saying Tuskegee vs Mengele was one of degree not kind, I would agree with that, as the the disregard and denial of follow-up is mirrored in the two situations. Please also note: I never claimed anything was "no big deal". While the meat of your argument actually is on point, this first declaration frames the whole thing as a strawman, please don't do this anymore.
    - earl 16y ago
      If you don't see how incredibly wrong deliberately infecting a human being with a disease without consent is, there's something wrong with you and you're evil too. And your whole argument is bullshit -- "infecting someone with a disease isn't cool [but isn't all that bad, really]".
js2 16y ago
Just so we're clear: not even close. The researchers who performed these syphilis experiments were profoundly misguided. But, ultimately they likely had good intentions at heart. Note that this in no way justifies their actions. Mengele was so sick I won't even attempt to summarize what's written on that wikipedia page. This is more than just a matter of degree. Please be more careful with your comparisons.

sophacles 16y ago

While intentionally infecting unknowing people with a disease is not cool, the motive of "we know this works, we just need an full effectiveness study" is very very very different from "they are not people, we can do random surgery on children to see what happens". I think your reaction is quite dramatic, intellectually dishonest, and worthy of a lot of contempt.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
earl 16y ago
Bullshit. If this really was no big deal, if we really hard regarded Guatemalens as people, it could have been done here at home in the US on white people. Instead, it was performed on people who didn't matter -- just like the Tuskegee experiments. The difference here between the US and Mengele is one of degree, not kind.
- sophacles 16y ago
  No, this is not the same as Tuskegee. In that experiment the people were not left to get advanced syphilis for years, and intentionally denied proper care. This is much different than being given the cure after exposure. They both start the same -- someone is intentionally given syphilis. The don't however end the same. Now, if you were saying Tuskegee vs Mengele was one of degree not kind, I would agree with that, as the the disregard and denial of follow-up is mirrored in the two situations. Please also note: I never claimed anything was "no big deal". While the meat of your argument actually is on point, this first declaration frames the whole thing as a strawman, please don't do this anymore.
  - earl 16y ago
    If you don't see how incredibly wrong deliberately infecting a human being with a disease without consent is, there's something wrong with you and you're evil too. And your whole argument is bullshit -- "infecting someone with a disease isn't cool [but isn't all that bad, really]".

js2 16y ago

Just so we're clear: not even close. The researchers who performed these syphilis experiments were profoundly misguided. But, ultimately they likely had good intentions at heart. Note that this in no way justifies their actions. Mengele was so sick I won't even attempt to summarize what's written on that wikipedia page. This is more than just a matter of degree. Please be more careful with your comparisons.