Designer Bodies

[wesmorris]

Pretty soon, it looks like it won't take much effort to keep fit.

Excercise in pill form is coming relatively soon.

In another 20 years, what then? How long before anyone can look any way they choose? Man it's an interesting new world.

How will we survive the religious backlash? If we don't all die, sooner or later custom bodies are a sure deal. Imagine the sexual implications, breeding implications... everything. The potential effects of this path are freakin mind boggling. Be who you choose to be... physically.

Old and busted: Plastic Surgeons.

New hotness: Your Pharmacist.

Freakin COOL. What a freakshow to come.

 

[hotsexyangelprincess]

of course fashions may change, and your designer body will have to be re-designed. :m:

 

[wesmorris]

Hell I wonder if you'll eventually be able to basically be head that can choose whatever form it wants. Cybernetics is gonna be weird.

 

[water]

Cybernetics is gonna be weird.

And who will be able to afford it?

 

[Dreamwalker]

Oh, I am sure that the prices won´t be that high, otherwise the corporations won´t make much money.
And people might save all the money they can just to get such a treatment. Just look at todays chirurgic body improvements, not really different.

 

[water]

And people might save all the money they can just to get such a treatment. Just look at todays chirurgic body improvements, not really different.

Okay. Then tell me *why* would people design their bodies like that? Give me one good reason.

 

[Dreamwalker]

What do I know, I do not understand this beauty trend anyway. Perhaps you should ask someone that puts great value in his/her beauty.

I can only look at this and shake my head...

But hey, I was watching Mtv recently and they have this strange show called "I want a famous face". And yes, it is about people that go through chirurgic surgery to get a face like Britney Spears or a but like Christina Arguilera´s. People who do such things will perhaps also do this...

 

[wesmorris]

what if you could augment your memory or processing speed? what if you could jump twice as high? then of course there's vanity and a whole slew of "bigger this, smaller that". remember no one could afford a computer in 1970.

 

[water]

what if you could augment your memory or processing speed? what if you could jump twice as high? then of course there's vanity and a whole slew of "bigger this, smaller that".

Why would I want to do that? Will it make me happier?

 

[water]

What do I know, I do not understand this beauty trend anyway. Perhaps you should ask someone that puts great value in his/her beauty.

I can only look at this and shake my head...

But hey, I was watching Mtv recently and they have this strange show called "I want a famous face". And yes, it is about people that go through chirurgic surgery to get a face like Britney Spears or a but like Christina Arguilera´s. People who do such things will perhaps also do this...

This is weird. On one hand, people go on and on about "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", and on the other hand, they are trying to standardize it. This tells me that the trend in modern society is insecurity, great insecurity.
So we want external fixes to avoid the agony of being self-reliant.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Pretty soon, it looks like it won't take much effort to keep fit.

:bugeye:

The story you linked to has nothing to do with fitness. The ability to “trick” the body into not converting calories into fat has got nothing to do with cardiovascular fitness, bone density and strength, muscle mass, muscle strength, tendon and ligament flexibility etc etc. I think your extrapolation of this typically over-stated mass media science story is rather suspect!

We may be able to limit the effects of evolution in some instances, but we will never be able to defeat evolution. There will never be a pill of any sort that will get around the fact that humans need to sensibly control their caloric intake (no more KFC!) and get their fat arses off the couch, get outside into the fresh air and get some exercise.

 

[wesmorris]

Why would I want to do that? Will it make me happier?

Hey it's not a sales pitch. Some people want that.

 

[water]

Hey it's not a sales pitch. Some people want that.

In this case I wonder: Why do they want that?


I know, you take the position that whatever someone wants, it is okay.
But what if these things are harming? For the people doing it, for the environment?

 

[wesmorris]

:bugeye:

The story you linked to has nothing to do with fitness. The ability to “trick” the body into not converting calories into fat has got nothing to do with cardiovascular fitness, bone density and strength, muscle mass, muscle strength, tendon and ligament flexibility etc etc. I think your extrapolation of this typically over-stated mass media science story is rather suspect!

How very paranoid. I'm no biologist, pardon. Please replace the word "fit" with "thin" in the quoted text.

We may be able to limit the effects of evolution in some instances, but we will never be able to defeat evolution. There will never be a pill of any sort that will get around the fact that humans need to sensibly control their caloric intake (no more KFC!) and get their fat arses off the couch, get outside into the fresh air and get some exercise.

That is presumptuous. You sound like a personal trainer. Have you heard of "Gene doping"? You have no idea if there will ever be a pill or treatment that will exactly replace exercise.

 

[wesmorris]

In this case I wonder: Why do they want that?

Is it your business why someone else wants what they do? Don't you think there would be as many different reasons as people who want it?

I know, you take the position that whatever someone wants, it is okay.

I don't condone that someone wants what they do, I simply realize it's none of my business. I may encourage them to alter their want if it seems to me that the greater good is served by doing so.

But what if these things are harming?

Then people probably wouldn't want it. Depends on the overall benefits/cost analysis for the individual.

For the people doing it, for the environment?

What if it isn't? What is harm? Everytime you excercise you are deliberately harming yourself in order to get stronger.

 

[water]

Is it your business why someone else wants what they do? Don't you think there would be as many different reasons as people who want it?

True.
But I do hate people for what they want sometimes.

I don't condone that someone wants what they do, I simply realize it's none of my business. I may encourage them to alter their want if it seems to me that the greater good is served by doing so.

Like carrying guns and killing people.

Then people probably wouldn't want it.

Smoking is bad. Drinking and driving is bad. People get killed. But it's okay.

Depends on the overall benefits/cost analysis for the individual.

Oh yes. This is why, for example, aids education is soooooo effective.
And nobody dies of lung cancer or cardiac failure, because people are so aware of the overall benefits/cost analysis for them.

What if it isn't? What is harm? Everytime you excercise you are deliberately harming yourself in order to get stronger.

1. Side effects of the drug.
2. Few could afford it, and the socio-economical differences would be even greater.

 

[Blue_UK]

I'm suprised no one has mentioned Deus Ex yet.

A weight control drug would probably be extortionatly priced until there is competition in the market - then it might be accessable.

As far as I see it, modifying your body - be it tattoos, piercing, weightloss or nanotech (forgive me!) - is just the same as buying stylish clothes etc.

 

[wesmorris]

True.
But I do hate people for what they want sometimes.

Okay.

Like carrying guns and killing people.

Sometimes that's good thing, especially if the people getting killed are wanting to kill you.

Smoking is bad. Drinking and driving is bad. People get killed. But it's okay.

LOL. So you think smoking should be illegal? Drinking should be illegal too? People get killed regardless of what obsessive measures you take to stop it.

Oh yes. This is why, for example, aids education is soooooo effective

.

LOL. People make their choice. Obviously the cost/benefit analysis for them says take the risk. The urge to spread their seed outweighs the urge to "play it safe" as they see it. If it didn't, they wouldn't.

And nobody dies of lung cancer or cardiac failure, because people are so aware of the overall benefits/cost analysis for them.

It's a risk assessment. Some people make it through unscathed, some don't. Sounds to me like you think that because it might be dangerous, no one should take the risk. That's fine, but obviously other people think otherwise. The reason I think preservation of choice is so important, is because in order for the species to improve, in order for the people to learn... they must be allowed to make mistakes. Then they must be held accountable for their decisions (with as much compassion as possible, considering that it could have been you making stupid choices).

1. Side effects of the drug.

What about them? What if there are none? What if there are some, but not too many?

2. Few could afford it, and the socio-economical differences would be even greater.

How do you know? It's too hard to say how affordable it will be. You might be right about socio-economic differences. It's hard to say. I think that's actually part of the backlash thing. What if I can take stuff and outperform you 10 to 1?

On a completely unrelated note, I read something earlier that said in the US at least 244 "1 in a million" miracles are likely to happen every day.

 

[ElectricFetus]

I want one of the bodies of that cybernetic chick from “ghost in the shell”, really bad!
http://sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3034&stc=1

 

[water]

Wes,

LOL. So you think smoking should be illegal? Drinking should be illegal too? People get killed regardless of what obsessive measures you take to stop it.

I'm not saying it should be illegal.

It's a risk assessment. Some people make it through unscathed, some don't. Sounds to me like you think that because it might be dangerous, no one should take the risk. That's fine, but obviously other people think otherwise. The reason I think preservation of choice is so important, is because in order for the species to improve, in order for the people to learn... they must be allowed to make mistakes.

See, that's the thing with the human race: We don't really learn, do we?
What science does is fixing the upper deck while the ship is sinking.

Then they must be held accountable for their decisions (with as much compassion as possible, considering that it could have been you making stupid choices).

Oh yes, held accountable. This is why one can kill, plead temporal insanity, and get out in no time.

1. Side effects of the drug.

What about them? What if there are none? What if there are some, but not too many?

Yes. We make one thing, and then take another to fix the effects of the first one.

I am saying that people are simply lazy and whimsical, and they are using science to feed their whims. This is not improvement.

What if I can take stuff and outperform you 10 to 1?

Oh, sure, do. So it will take even fewer people to do all the work there is to do on Earth, and there will be even more unemployed, and even more crime and poverty and misery, yes.
I think you think too narrowly, too much in short terms.