light and darkness. Free theme.
and 2011. It is not the future. It is the present, the topicality. Current science. What about stem cells derived from umbilical cord blood for treatment of rare diseases in children, the LHC, that of the orbiting telescope Kepler and the search for extrasolar planets similar to Earth, that of silicon nanotubes for hydrogen-powered transport , the genetic engineering that allows you to have paper or biomass without destroying the forests.
and 2011. Not the past. It is the present practice of hospitals where there is no test and analysis of the fetuses, which are necessary to determine the presence of significant failures, because the hospital is not equipped. And why is not equipped? Why not practice in the Hospital any abortion, even terapuetico, and then the Hospital comes after a detecnologizzante, so the ecorgafo is 20 years ago, and if you want to know more about the fetus, you should move at least 50-80 km . If not more. It is the present of "sightings" of bright toys mistaken for extraterrestrial intelligence. Is this a secular state where you can not die nor live according to their conscience or that of your family. This is where human intervention is traded on the plants, a priori, for genetic immorality, or where cars are more in oil (!). 
What is science? What science? Beyond the universal definitions and philosophical, we can not hope that in today's society, the science is clear. Too many economic sectors (and also political) depend on the science and its applications, as well as determine the scientific research. But, surely, something science gives man no matter what: choices. Usually, they are hard choices that no one would afforntare during his life, but that, ultimately, life drawing. Knowing what to expect, scientifically, it helps to decide, but that the final decision whether to undertake a road or not. The sincere scientific opportunities never says "so", rather always remember that "doing so" will increase or decrease the likelihood of having an effect. 
Yet, while the "normal" people is more reliable than usual for the impossible to the improbable (or likely, the real focus of scientific research in any field), end-users science, such as doctors, biologists, engineers, physicists, etc.. prefer to propose theorems are established in a confined environment (such as a hospital vaguely obscurantist, or any multinational energy), rather than presenting the range of scientific choices.
You story every day, but it's strange is immersed in one of these stories, and it is quite frustrating to see how evaluations counter to freedom of choice rather have a disruptive effect and convincing in the "ordinary" people. It is strange to be science communicators, open to any eventuality and possibility, and find themselves in front of a religious and legal constraints that have nothing to do with the intellectual evolution of man. It's strange but true. It happened. It happens. And, unfortunately, will continue to happen.
0 comments:
Post a Comment