47 ms·

To Be Born in a Bag

95 points by mailyk 2y ago

api 2y ago
One of the wilder long-term ideas I've had is this as a third alternative to abortion: give the baby up for adoption before they are born. Of course nobody would like it and nobody would want to pay for it. The pro-choice people don't think it's necessary and the anti-abortion people would react to it in a knee-jerk aesthetic way because it's weird and artificial. (I also don't think the anti-abortion people really care about what they say they care about, but that's another matter.)
- throw49sjwo1 2y ago
  Some countries effectively have exactly that: There are "baby boxes" on the public facing walls of hospitals where you can put a newborn (sometimes older children too) and walk away, no questions asked. The child is assigned a name and put into social care together with other people who have no parents or other guardians.
  - klipt 2y ago
    > no questions asked So what happens if one parent drops off the baby without the other parent's consent (which is technically child abduction)?
    - throw49sjwo1 2y ago
      No idea, but this all happens within a larger social framework, I'm sure it's possible to reverse it.
  - AStonesThrow 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Haven_Baby_Boxes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Haven_Baby_Boxes
- mustyoshi 2y ago
  Realistically, what will happen is once this technology becomes cheaper than a natural birth, you won't be able to have a natural pregnancy paid for by insurance. Probably through the form of "discounts" for having vasectomies or tubal litigation. We'll probably develop better extraction methods so having physical BC becomes less of a stigma because you'll still be able to get the gametes.
- LtWorf 2y ago
  In italy after birth you can just not recognise the kid as your own.
- wingspar 2y ago
  I presume you mean some new technology to transfer the fetus? As it is now, people ‘adopt’ babies before they’re born, all the time. Mother wants to give baby up for adoption. Couple is matched up with the mother and they help the mother during the pregnancy, physically, emotionally and financially. I’ve known several people involved in adoption.
  - shepherdjerred 2y ago
    This is the plot of the excellent movie Juno https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(film)
- ralfd 2y ago
  I think you model Pro-Lifers incorrect. Do you know any dedicated catholics in real life? And yes, while it is a weird/artificial sci-fi tech, per definition unnatural, even people opposed seem to agree that the unborn child is innocent and did nothing wrong. Anyway, I see more cautious interest for artificial wombs by anti-abortion advocates than by pro-abortion advocates. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2579952/anti-abortion-advocates-see-promise-in-artificial-womb-technology/ https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2579952/anti-abortio... > “The term ‘artificial wombs’ is misleading about this technology,” Catholic policy expert Leah Libresco Sargeant told the Washington Examiner. “A [neonatial intensive care unit] incubator is already a kind of artificial womb, trying to provide some of the support the baby would have otherwise gotten from his or her mother. If we’re able to provide better support to extremely premature babies, I’m all for it.” While my feeling currently is that pro-phoicers see it as a “threat to abortion rights”, because it challenges the viability standard. That alone makes pro-lifers want to embrace it! See a typical discussion here among pro-lifers: https://www.reddit.com/r/prolife/comments/1886k8z/abortion_isnt_about_killing_anything_its_about/ https://www.reddit.com/r/prolife/comments/1886k8z/abortion_i... > Artificial wombs are the easiest way to test if someone actually views abortion as simply ending a pregnancy or ending a life. Most of the time, PC don’t want to admit they support the ending a life because it contradicts all their arguments that abortion is simply ending a pregnancy. > It’s the most pro-choice thing ever for us to give them a solution that should be a compromise between our viewpoints, and them to still whine about wanting to kill their babies instead.
  - eggsome 2y ago
    I think api may have been alluding to the potential end state, where conception is performed in the lab.
riehwvfbk 2y ago
The most impactful outcome of this would be the removal of another evolutionary pressure point. If fetuses don't have to be carried they can be grown to be larger. This means they can be left on life support to mature more before "birth", which would reduce postnatal risks. But perhaps more importantly, a newborn brain could be almost arbitrarily large. Come to think of it, childhood could be skipped altogether: simply leave the child dreaming in a vat and train their brain to know everything immediately after birth.
- ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
  What's the end goal of this? Why would we do this? Reducing postnatal risks sounds great but not sure about the stuff after.
  - throw49sjwo1 2y ago
    Some people (me included) think that a huge population is desirable. This would allow humanity to create entire new societies.
  - pvaldes 2y ago
    Is the unique realistic way to conquer space.
- CalRobert 2y ago
  Perhaps you could skip the birth and spend an entire life happily suspended in the vat imagining a wondrous life unconstrained by physical limits. Perhaps you are.
  - baxtr 2y ago
    And while you do someone is using your body as power plant?!
    - ct0 2y ago
      great idea for a movie tbh, maybe a series
teddyh 2y ago
This concept was the subject of the last episode of the 1988 TV show Max Headroom, “Baby Grobags”.
- blipvert 2y ago
  Underrated comment.
- voganmother42 2y ago
  Uterine replicators were a very cool aspect of the Vorkosigan Saga by the very talented Lois McMaster Bujold. It was extra interesting to see how the technology was adopted by different cultures and what a massive impact it had.
  - stevenwoo 2y ago
    She touched on a lot of still topical issues in fertility and genetics. That twins/jane Austen mashup book was so entertaining, too. Axolotl tanks in Dune might be the darkest version of this by book five.
- Smoosh 2y ago
  Bottle of mine, it's you I've always wanted! Bottle of mine, why was I ever decanted? Skies are blue inside of you The weather's always fine; For There ain't no Bottle in all the world Like that dear little Bottle of mine.
WA 2y ago
We just recently discovered, that during childbrith, vaginal microbiota is transferred to the child and this transfer is quite beneficial for the development of the immune system of the child. It's called vaginal microbiota transfer (VMT). It's so beneficial that babies being born via c-section are now artificially covered in their mother's vaginal microbiota. Now imagine the thousands of factors that happen during pregnancy that probably influence the neurodevelopment of a human and which artifical womb doesn't take into account. Simple things such as: hearing and feeling the heartbeat of the mother, feeling the environment, heat, cold, being carried through life and so on.
- chromanoid 2y ago
  I totally agree. Even "mere" breast feeding is still full of mysteries that developed during the millions of years of mammal evolution.
  - jes5199 2y ago
    sure, but take a survey of any group of five year olds - can you tell which ones were born by c-section? which ones were breastfed?
    - micromacrofoot 2y ago
      yes but you can measure various effects on the macro scale, which is why we think breast feeding is a little more beneficial than formula
      - schwartzworld 2y ago
        It’s problematic in some ways. Many new mothers torture themselves unnecessarily about nursing vs formula because they want the best for their baby. The benefits of nursing are real, and if you can do it, great. But if you don’t have the time, biology or even just inclination to breastfeed, your baby will be fine. There’s no evidence that says formula is detrimental, especially compared to not eating enough at all.
eulgro 2y ago
[flagged]
- godsinhisheaven 2y ago
  I would encourage you to change your mind! The vast, vast majority of humanity would consider you a moral monster for believing such a thing. Many awful, awful things "used to be normal", and many things we take for granted today, future societies will (hopefully) see as awful as well! Why should we care about fetuses? Instead of the standard argument, I will appeal to "The Human Experience". I think we should care because at one point, you were a 20 week old fetus, with a mother who loved you. And you were knit in the womb in the Image of God, and when you were born your parents had dreams and hopes for you that you are likely living out now. And hopefully one day you will have children of your own, to love and care for, and you will try to give them everything you didn't have and fail to do so, but when your kids grow up, they will know that you have tried. That is why we should care, not for child mortality rates or cultural customs or anything, but because you are part of an unbroken chain of shattered dreams and undying hopes. edit: (fixed some typos) And eulgro? I hope you read this. I promise you from the bottom of my heart, you are loved.
  - _dain_ 2y ago
    kudos, this is a much kinder reply than I was going to write.
  - faggotbreath 2y ago
    [dead]
- ARandomerDude 2y ago
  > And to go further: I don't recall anything from before I was 2 years old. What difference would it have made… You’re putting forward the idea that your personal memory is the thing that makes you valuable. Why should we think that’s true? Memory is frail, too. How much do you have to be able to remember before your life is worth protecting? Besides, one day you won’t remember anything anyway. Is it OK to jump forward just a bit and have you killed today? You won’t remember it.
ilaksh 2y ago
Artificial wombs are fascinating and I hope they eventually become a viable alternative for mothers. But I see them as being perhaps a somewhat more distant future possibility to fully replace a real womb due to the all of challenges. When I think about the long term future of humanity and human development, I can't help but assume that things like artificial intelligence and simulation will have a significant role. In other words, trans-human and post-humanism. Many techno-optimists like myself already anticipate superhuman artificial intelligence in less than 10 years. We might eventually (some decades further down the road) arrive at the point where it is easier to produce a "son" or "daughter" with the exact qualities we desire by 3d printing and model/knowledge configuration.
- foobarian 2y ago
  > I hope they eventually become a viable alternative for mothers. Sadly it seems that modern liberal societies that don’t enslave their women seem to not achieve sufficient fertility rates to avoid going extinct. Artificial wombs would be a huge advance toward fixing that problem.
  - grugagag 2y ago
    And while at it give them artificially simulated parents as well?
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      Well in "Brave New World", they replaced parents with institutions where children grew up and were raised by the (basically) teachers. Similar to how schoolchildren are handled today, with one teacher leading a class of 15-30 kids. Looking at the average state of parenting in the US today, it seems like a potentially huge improvement.
      - hakfoo 2y ago
        I always figured a kibbutz-style scheme might be something to encourage. Let's try to make spaces where families raising children can live together and cooperate. From a sheer economic standpoint, sharing the breadwinning and parenting duties might allow the children to get more hours of hands-on parent time. There might be economies of scale in sharing and handing down equipment, clothing, toys, or even provisioning services (if you have 10 families loving together, maybe at that point keeping a pediatrician or tutors on retainer might work?) There might also be benefits in a more diverse set of ideas in the shared house-- when the kid reaches an age where they develop more complex interests and questions, more "parents" means a better chance they have someone with the appropriate knowledge or skills to help their development.
mjfl 2y ago
The day the first human is born in an artificial womb is the day we cease to be humans, and become something else.
- kibwen 2y ago
  Premature infants already might only spend half the normal gestation time in the womb. This ship sailed long ago.
  - mjfl 2y ago
    completely different.
    - blueflow 2y ago
      To you. From the "we cease to be humans" phrase i would assume that you have some more extra ideas on what is a "proper" human and what isn't.
      - mjfl 2y ago
        Suddenly babies can be born without parents to advocate for and protect them, opening them up to exploitation. Persons can be born en mass, in factories, genetically engineered, as in Brave New World. Men and women no longer have families as anchoring purposes with some sort of corporate overlord as 'parent'. That's not a human life. I think this should be obvious to people and obvious why premature care is not the same thing.
        sharlos201068 2y ago
        That already can and does happen. Orphans are still human, even if they never had parents or family to care for them. Humanity is something you are, not how you were made, or the circumstances of your birth.
        deleted 2y ago
robertclaus 2y ago
This is cool!
arrobbiato 2y ago
This is just as promising as cell-cultured meat, and for the same reasons.
peterbonney 2y ago
> Complicating this further is the fact that outcomes differ significantly across the U.S., with some leading hospitals able to keep twice as many 22-week-old babies alive as the national average, and occasionally able to keep babies born as early as 21 weeks alive. The hard truth that many don’t want to face about prematurity is that the odds of survival at 24 or even 23 weeks are actually quite high, IF the baby is lucky enough to be born in the right facility. The odds at 22 weeks and even 21 weeks are not a lock but actually much better than you’d think. We don’t actually need new science to radically improve prematurity outcomes. We just need to invest money in equipping and training more NICUs. My son was born at 26 weeks, luckily in New York City where the standard of care is excellent (level 3 on a scale of 1-4) at even the second-tier NICUs, and where the highest possible standard of care is never more than a short ambulance ride away. To put it bluntly: in NYC, a 26-weeker is 90% likely to survive to term. In some areas of the country a 26-weeker is 90% likely to die. The averages cited here flatten out this reality and make the problem seem more scientific and less social than it actually is.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  >To put it bluntly: in NYC, a 26-weeker is 90% likely to survive to term. In some areas of the country a 26-weeker is 90% likely to die This is probably because of a shortage of highly competent medical personnel, especially in rural areas where no top medical school graduate in her right mind would want to work, just like they probably wouldn't want to live and work in someplace like Iran. I don't really see any way to fix this. Getting excellent medical care means having excellent medical professionals living and working in proximity to you, and since they're humans with free choice, they tend to move to places that are nice for them to live in, which not surprisingly usually doesn't include economic backwaters.
  - oofabz 2y ago
    A lot of people, including myself, prefer living in rural areas. They have more natural beauty, more solitude, tighter knit communities, cultures that prioritize family. Not everyone shares your own personal preferences. It is true that there are fewer economic opportunities in the country. Cities are a labor market, after all. But there are hospitals everywhere, so if you work in medicine, you have the opportunity to work in the country and still earn good pay.
xvilka 2y ago
Maybe genetically modifying some organism to have multiple sack-like wombs would be more promising and energy/nutrient-efficient approach. Something like a tree with many such wombs, that are able to grow mammals (why limit ourselves only to particular species? Likely it's possible to make a "generic" solution). Though it's harder from the technological point of view since our biotechnology and genetics is not there yet. What worries me though, we still don't know so much about the intricacies of the baby development and birth process itself. For example, there is ongoing scientific discussion of (possible) negative consequences of C-section vs natural childbirth. And seeding human microbiome during that process. And many other aspects. To fully achieve artificial wombs all those unknown spots in medicine should be researched well and in depth.
- Terr_ 2y ago
  > why limit ourselves only to particular species? Likely it's possible to make a "generic" solution I dunno, at least for primates and mice, pregnancy is a carefully balanced fight between rejection by the mother and cancerous parasitism by the embryo [0], complete with mind control drugs. [0] https://aeon.co/essays/why-pregnancy-is-a-biological-war-between-mother-and-baby https://aeon.co/essays/why-pregnancy-is-a-biological-war-bet...
- russdill 2y ago
  I realize many take your comment as naive, but it may be that such a process won't be possible with non-biological solutions (ECMO, dialysis, etc) but will need to wait for fully bio-engineered solutions.
_def 2y ago
> Despite this enthusiasm, however, a number of technological challenges remain before scientists can test such wombs on human babies. Philosophical and ethical challenges aside
- kibwen 2y ago
  It's possible to have a non-functioning womb while still having functioning ovaries. I don't see any philosophical or ethical problems with artificial wombs as an alternative to surrogacy.
- Terr_ 2y ago
  It seems to me most of the big ethical challenges would involve acts which would already be atrocity-proximate even involving regular wombs. Weird experiments, clone armies, etc. The common case seem much more straightforward, such as laws to prevent a hospital/creche from early-terminating a 9-month lease on Uterine Replicator #123 for non-payment, different fields on "birth certificate", some case-law around, er, "miscarriage" events, etc.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  They’d be ethically valid to use on babies born too early to survive.
kazinator 2y ago
> Despite these hurdles, it might not be very long before the first human baby is birthed from a bag. If that baby is Japanese, they can literally refer to their mom as ofukuro, for ironic effect.
Mistletoe 2y ago
These comments are absolutely wild, and it makes me feel safe knowing dev types aren't in charge of human reproduction science and ethics.
ragebol 2y ago
I'm amazed it goes right so often in humans at all. During my wife's pregnancies, there is so much the check for, so much that could go wrong!
sandworm101 2y ago
There is a political aspect to this. Part of the abortion debate is the concept of viability. Some, not all but some, of those backing this research want to push back the date of viability to as early as possible as doing so will be ammunition in the personhood debate. So while some describe this as an attempt to keep premature babies alive, other see this as a fight to define viable personhood as early as possible in order to place further limits on abortion.
- sharlos201068 2y ago
  If a person can have a fetus removed from their body without invasive or dangerous surgery and still have it survive, I don't see too many ethical issues with limits on abortion where it's more than just a small clump of cells. The whole issue with restricting abortion is no one is entitled to the use of my body, even if they need it to live. However if they don't require another person's body and could instead survive outside the body, I think abortion becomes morally worse than allowing it to come to term in an artificial womb.
sim7c00 2y ago
not long after the pods worked, scientists found out we never needed to leave the bags in the first place... cuts to matrix scene of towers of human battery/pods

95 points by mailyk 2y ago

api 2y ago

One of the wilder long-term ideas I've had is this as a third alternative to abortion: give the baby up for adoption before they are born. Of course nobody would like it and nobody would want to pay for it. The pro-choice people don't think it's necessary and the anti-abortion people would react to it in a knee-jerk aesthetic way because it's weird and artificial. (I also don't think the anti-abortion people really care about what they say they care about, but that's another matter.)

throw49sjwo1 2y ago
Some countries effectively have exactly that: There are "baby boxes" on the public facing walls of hospitals where you can put a newborn (sometimes older children too) and walk away, no questions asked. The child is assigned a name and put into social care together with other people who have no parents or other guardians.
- klipt 2y ago
  > no questions asked So what happens if one parent drops off the baby without the other parent's consent (which is technically child abduction)?
  - throw49sjwo1 2y ago
    No idea, but this all happens within a larger social framework, I'm sure it's possible to reverse it.
- AStonesThrow 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Haven_Baby_Boxes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe_Haven_Baby_Boxes
mustyoshi 2y ago
Realistically, what will happen is once this technology becomes cheaper than a natural birth, you won't be able to have a natural pregnancy paid for by insurance. Probably through the form of "discounts" for having vasectomies or tubal litigation. We'll probably develop better extraction methods so having physical BC becomes less of a stigma because you'll still be able to get the gametes.
LtWorf 2y ago
In italy after birth you can just not recognise the kid as your own.
wingspar 2y ago
I presume you mean some new technology to transfer the fetus? As it is now, people ‘adopt’ babies before they’re born, all the time. Mother wants to give baby up for adoption. Couple is matched up with the mother and they help the mother during the pregnancy, physically, emotionally and financially. I’ve known several people involved in adoption.
- shepherdjerred 2y ago
  This is the plot of the excellent movie Juno https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(film)
ralfd 2y ago
I think you model Pro-Lifers incorrect. Do you know any dedicated catholics in real life? And yes, while it is a weird/artificial sci-fi tech, per definition unnatural, even people opposed seem to agree that the unborn child is innocent and did nothing wrong. Anyway, I see more cautious interest for artificial wombs by anti-abortion advocates than by pro-abortion advocates. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2579952/anti-abortion-advocates-see-promise-in-artificial-womb-technology/ https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2579952/anti-abortio... > “The term ‘artificial wombs’ is misleading about this technology,” Catholic policy expert Leah Libresco Sargeant told the Washington Examiner. “A [neonatial intensive care unit] incubator is already a kind of artificial womb, trying to provide some of the support the baby would have otherwise gotten from his or her mother. If we’re able to provide better support to extremely premature babies, I’m all for it.” While my feeling currently is that pro-phoicers see it as a “threat to abortion rights”, because it challenges the viability standard. That alone makes pro-lifers want to embrace it! See a typical discussion here among pro-lifers: https://www.reddit.com/r/prolife/comments/1886k8z/abortion_isnt_about_killing_anything_its_about/ https://www.reddit.com/r/prolife/comments/1886k8z/abortion_i... > Artificial wombs are the easiest way to test if someone actually views abortion as simply ending a pregnancy or ending a life. Most of the time, PC don’t want to admit they support the ending a life because it contradicts all their arguments that abortion is simply ending a pregnancy. > It’s the most pro-choice thing ever for us to give them a solution that should be a compromise between our viewpoints, and them to still whine about wanting to kill their babies instead.
- eggsome 2y ago
  I think api may have been alluding to the potential end state, where conception is performed in the lab.

riehwvfbk 2y ago

The most impactful outcome of this would be the removal of another evolutionary pressure point. If fetuses don't have to be carried they can be grown to be larger. This means they can be left on life support to mature more before "birth", which would reduce postnatal risks. But perhaps more importantly, a newborn brain could be almost arbitrarily large. Come to think of it, childhood could be skipped altogether: simply leave the child dreaming in a vat and train their brain to know everything immediately after birth.

ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
What's the end goal of this? Why would we do this? Reducing postnatal risks sounds great but not sure about the stuff after.
- throw49sjwo1 2y ago
  Some people (me included) think that a huge population is desirable. This would allow humanity to create entire new societies.
- pvaldes 2y ago
  Is the unique realistic way to conquer space.
CalRobert 2y ago
Perhaps you could skip the birth and spend an entire life happily suspended in the vat imagining a wondrous life unconstrained by physical limits. Perhaps you are.
- baxtr 2y ago
  And while you do someone is using your body as power plant?!
  - ct0 2y ago
    great idea for a movie tbh, maybe a series

teddyh 2y ago

This concept was the subject of the last episode of the 1988 TV show Max Headroom, “Baby Grobags”.

blipvert 2y ago
Underrated comment.
voganmother42 2y ago
Uterine replicators were a very cool aspect of the Vorkosigan Saga by the very talented Lois McMaster Bujold. It was extra interesting to see how the technology was adopted by different cultures and what a massive impact it had.
- stevenwoo 2y ago
  She touched on a lot of still topical issues in fertility and genetics. That twins/jane Austen mashup book was so entertaining, too. Axolotl tanks in Dune might be the darkest version of this by book five.
Smoosh 2y ago
Bottle of mine, it's you I've always wanted! Bottle of mine, why was I ever decanted? Skies are blue inside of you The weather's always fine; For There ain't no Bottle in all the world Like that dear little Bottle of mine.

WA 2y ago

We just recently discovered, that during childbrith, vaginal microbiota is transferred to the child and this transfer is quite beneficial for the development of the immune system of the child. It's called vaginal microbiota transfer (VMT). It's so beneficial that babies being born via c-section are now artificially covered in their mother's vaginal microbiota. Now imagine the thousands of factors that happen during pregnancy that probably influence the neurodevelopment of a human and which artifical womb doesn't take into account. Simple things such as: hearing and feeling the heartbeat of the mother, feeling the environment, heat, cold, being carried through life and so on.

chromanoid 2y ago
I totally agree. Even "mere" breast feeding is still full of mysteries that developed during the millions of years of mammal evolution.
- jes5199 2y ago
  sure, but take a survey of any group of five year olds - can you tell which ones were born by c-section? which ones were breastfed?
  - micromacrofoot 2y ago
    yes but you can measure various effects on the macro scale, which is why we think breast feeding is a little more beneficial than formula
    - schwartzworld 2y ago
      It’s problematic in some ways. Many new mothers torture themselves unnecessarily about nursing vs formula because they want the best for their baby. The benefits of nursing are real, and if you can do it, great. But if you don’t have the time, biology or even just inclination to breastfeed, your baby will be fine. There’s no evidence that says formula is detrimental, especially compared to not eating enough at all.

eulgro 2y ago

[flagged]

godsinhisheaven 2y ago
I would encourage you to change your mind! The vast, vast majority of humanity would consider you a moral monster for believing such a thing. Many awful, awful things "used to be normal", and many things we take for granted today, future societies will (hopefully) see as awful as well! Why should we care about fetuses? Instead of the standard argument, I will appeal to "The Human Experience". I think we should care because at one point, you were a 20 week old fetus, with a mother who loved you. And you were knit in the womb in the Image of God, and when you were born your parents had dreams and hopes for you that you are likely living out now. And hopefully one day you will have children of your own, to love and care for, and you will try to give them everything you didn't have and fail to do so, but when your kids grow up, they will know that you have tried. That is why we should care, not for child mortality rates or cultural customs or anything, but because you are part of an unbroken chain of shattered dreams and undying hopes. edit: (fixed some typos) And eulgro? I hope you read this. I promise you from the bottom of my heart, you are loved.
- _dain_ 2y ago
  kudos, this is a much kinder reply than I was going to write.
- faggotbreath 2y ago
  [dead]
ARandomerDude 2y ago
> And to go further: I don't recall anything from before I was 2 years old. What difference would it have made… You’re putting forward the idea that your personal memory is the thing that makes you valuable. Why should we think that’s true? Memory is frail, too. How much do you have to be able to remember before your life is worth protecting? Besides, one day you won’t remember anything anyway. Is it OK to jump forward just a bit and have you killed today? You won’t remember it.

ilaksh 2y ago

Artificial wombs are fascinating and I hope they eventually become a viable alternative for mothers. But I see them as being perhaps a somewhat more distant future possibility to fully replace a real womb due to the all of challenges. When I think about the long term future of humanity and human development, I can't help but assume that things like artificial intelligence and simulation will have a significant role. In other words, trans-human and post-humanism. Many techno-optimists like myself already anticipate superhuman artificial intelligence in less than 10 years. We might eventually (some decades further down the road) arrive at the point where it is easier to produce a "son" or "daughter" with the exact qualities we desire by 3d printing and model/knowledge configuration.

foobarian 2y ago
> I hope they eventually become a viable alternative for mothers. Sadly it seems that modern liberal societies that don’t enslave their women seem to not achieve sufficient fertility rates to avoid going extinct. Artificial wombs would be a huge advance toward fixing that problem.
- grugagag 2y ago
  And while at it give them artificially simulated parents as well?
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    Well in "Brave New World", they replaced parents with institutions where children grew up and were raised by the (basically) teachers. Similar to how schoolchildren are handled today, with one teacher leading a class of 15-30 kids. Looking at the average state of parenting in the US today, it seems like a potentially huge improvement.
    - hakfoo 2y ago
      I always figured a kibbutz-style scheme might be something to encourage. Let's try to make spaces where families raising children can live together and cooperate. From a sheer economic standpoint, sharing the breadwinning and parenting duties might allow the children to get more hours of hands-on parent time. There might be economies of scale in sharing and handing down equipment, clothing, toys, or even provisioning services (if you have 10 families loving together, maybe at that point keeping a pediatrician or tutors on retainer might work?) There might also be benefits in a more diverse set of ideas in the shared house-- when the kid reaches an age where they develop more complex interests and questions, more "parents" means a better chance they have someone with the appropriate knowledge or skills to help their development.

mjfl 2y ago

The day the first human is born in an artificial womb is the day we cease to be humans, and become something else.

kibwen 2y ago
Premature infants already might only spend half the normal gestation time in the womb. This ship sailed long ago.
- mjfl 2y ago
  completely different.
  - blueflow 2y ago
    To you. From the "we cease to be humans" phrase i would assume that you have some more extra ideas on what is a "proper" human and what isn't.
    - mjfl 2y ago
      Suddenly babies can be born without parents to advocate for and protect them, opening them up to exploitation. Persons can be born en mass, in factories, genetically engineered, as in Brave New World. Men and women no longer have families as anchoring purposes with some sort of corporate overlord as 'parent'. That's not a human life. I think this should be obvious to people and obvious why premature care is not the same thing.
      - sharlos201068 2y ago
        That already can and does happen. Orphans are still human, even if they never had parents or family to care for them. Humanity is something you are, not how you were made, or the circumstances of your birth.
        deleted 2y ago

robertclaus 2y ago

This is cool!

arrobbiato 2y ago

This is just as promising as cell-cultured meat, and for the same reasons.

peterbonney 2y ago

> Complicating this further is the fact that outcomes differ significantly across the U.S., with some leading hospitals able to keep twice as many 22-week-old babies alive as the national average, and occasionally able to keep babies born as early as 21 weeks alive. The hard truth that many don’t want to face about prematurity is that the odds of survival at 24 or even 23 weeks are actually quite high, IF the baby is lucky enough to be born in the right facility. The odds at 22 weeks and even 21 weeks are not a lock but actually much better than you’d think. We don’t actually need new science to radically improve prematurity outcomes. We just need to invest money in equipping and training more NICUs. My son was born at 26 weeks, luckily in New York City where the standard of care is excellent (level 3 on a scale of 1-4) at even the second-tier NICUs, and where the highest possible standard of care is never more than a short ambulance ride away. To put it bluntly: in NYC, a 26-weeker is 90% likely to survive to term. In some areas of the country a 26-weeker is 90% likely to die. The averages cited here flatten out this reality and make the problem seem more scientific and less social than it actually is.

shiroiushi 2y ago
>To put it bluntly: in NYC, a 26-weeker is 90% likely to survive to term. In some areas of the country a 26-weeker is 90% likely to die This is probably because of a shortage of highly competent medical personnel, especially in rural areas where no top medical school graduate in her right mind would want to work, just like they probably wouldn't want to live and work in someplace like Iran. I don't really see any way to fix this. Getting excellent medical care means having excellent medical professionals living and working in proximity to you, and since they're humans with free choice, they tend to move to places that are nice for them to live in, which not surprisingly usually doesn't include economic backwaters.
- oofabz 2y ago
  A lot of people, including myself, prefer living in rural areas. They have more natural beauty, more solitude, tighter knit communities, cultures that prioritize family. Not everyone shares your own personal preferences. It is true that there are fewer economic opportunities in the country. Cities are a labor market, after all. But there are hospitals everywhere, so if you work in medicine, you have the opportunity to work in the country and still earn good pay.

xvilka 2y ago

Maybe genetically modifying some organism to have multiple sack-like wombs would be more promising and energy/nutrient-efficient approach. Something like a tree with many such wombs, that are able to grow mammals (why limit ourselves only to particular species? Likely it's possible to make a "generic" solution). Though it's harder from the technological point of view since our biotechnology and genetics is not there yet. What worries me though, we still don't know so much about the intricacies of the baby development and birth process itself. For example, there is ongoing scientific discussion of (possible) negative consequences of C-section vs natural childbirth. And seeding human microbiome during that process. And many other aspects. To fully achieve artificial wombs all those unknown spots in medicine should be researched well and in depth.

Terr_ 2y ago
> why limit ourselves only to particular species? Likely it's possible to make a "generic" solution I dunno, at least for primates and mice, pregnancy is a carefully balanced fight between rejection by the mother and cancerous parasitism by the embryo [0], complete with mind control drugs. [0] https://aeon.co/essays/why-pregnancy-is-a-biological-war-between-mother-and-baby https://aeon.co/essays/why-pregnancy-is-a-biological-war-bet...
russdill 2y ago
I realize many take your comment as naive, but it may be that such a process won't be possible with non-biological solutions (ECMO, dialysis, etc) but will need to wait for fully bio-engineered solutions.

_def 2y ago

> Despite this enthusiasm, however, a number of technological challenges remain before scientists can test such wombs on human babies. Philosophical and ethical challenges aside

kibwen 2y ago
It's possible to have a non-functioning womb while still having functioning ovaries. I don't see any philosophical or ethical problems with artificial wombs as an alternative to surrogacy.
Terr_ 2y ago
It seems to me most of the big ethical challenges would involve acts which would already be atrocity-proximate even involving regular wombs. Weird experiments, clone armies, etc. The common case seem much more straightforward, such as laws to prevent a hospital/creche from early-terminating a 9-month lease on Uterine Replicator #123 for non-payment, different fields on "birth certificate", some case-law around, er, "miscarriage" events, etc.
BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
They’d be ethically valid to use on babies born too early to survive.

kazinator 2y ago

> Despite these hurdles, it might not be very long before the first human baby is birthed from a bag. If that baby is Japanese, they can literally refer to their mom as ofukuro, for ironic effect.

Mistletoe 2y ago

These comments are absolutely wild, and it makes me feel safe knowing dev types aren't in charge of human reproduction science and ethics.

ragebol 2y ago

I'm amazed it goes right so often in humans at all. During my wife's pregnancies, there is so much the check for, so much that could go wrong!

sandworm101 2y ago

There is a political aspect to this. Part of the abortion debate is the concept of viability. Some, not all but some, of those backing this research want to push back the date of viability to as early as possible as doing so will be ammunition in the personhood debate. So while some describe this as an attempt to keep premature babies alive, other see this as a fight to define viable personhood as early as possible in order to place further limits on abortion.

sharlos201068 2y ago
If a person can have a fetus removed from their body without invasive or dangerous surgery and still have it survive, I don't see too many ethical issues with limits on abortion where it's more than just a small clump of cells. The whole issue with restricting abortion is no one is entitled to the use of my body, even if they need it to live. However if they don't require another person's body and could instead survive outside the body, I think abortion becomes morally worse than allowing it to come to term in an artificial womb.

sim7c00 2y ago

not long after the pods worked, scientists found out we never needed to leave the bags in the first place... cuts to matrix scene of towers of human battery/pods