UK finds new fuel source to undercut Russian stranglehold on Europe

[Arwon]

Right. So they incinerate medical waste, and then they also have some sort of cogeneration attached to their incinerator to use the heat?

Are people objecting to the incineration of aborted fetuses as a disposal method, or to the use of this incinerator's heat in cogeneration? The latter shouldn't matter, because the alternative would be maintaining a separate incinerator that's specifically not useful.

 

[Kyriakos]

Yes. Killing live animals is worse.

Now, don't get me wrong, I do eat meat and I do not find it ethically impermissable, though I have accepted the collary that if I find the purposeful killing of animals to be justified, I should have no problem with ending the lives of fetuses that may grow into humans.

I don't agree. I cannot kill an animal either, but a human or even parts related to a human (as a fetus) should never be used for any sort of fuel/energy. Yeah, the animals being killed is brutal, but at least they do not have a collective knowledge that this is what they are also used for. Not really the same as humans. The use of fetus/other human remains as fuel is a quite extraordinarily nasty development in my view.

 

[Tee Kay]

If a body is supposed to be cremated anyway why would it matter if the heat from that cremation is used for power?

 

[Pegasus_77]

This sounds horrible. While the UK has the reputation for being conservative, why does it allow this subhuman act ?are British people in such a bad need for free heat ?

 

[Kyriakos]

If a body is supposed to be cremated anyway why would it matter if the heat from that cremation is used for power?

The jewish people were to be cremated in the death camps. The nazis reasoned that they might as well save their clothes, or even golden teeth, so that they will be put to good use.

in other words: humans or parts of them are not some material to recycle or use for your cost-savings. To allow this sort of thing will obviously not have any positive effect on human value.

 

[Tahuti]

The jewish people were to be cremated in the death camps. The nazis reasoned that they might as well save their clothes, or even golden teeth, so that they will be put to good use.

in other words: humans or parts of them are not some material to recycle or use for your cost-savings. To allow this sort of thing will obviously not have any positive effect on human value.

Yeah, planned genocide is totally comparable to deaths of biological tissue due to medical circumstances.

 

[TheBladeRoden]

Whenever someone spells it "foetal", it sounds like Jerry Lewis saying it in my head

 

[Kyriakos]

Yeah, planned genocide is totally comparable to deaths of biological tissue due to medical circumstances.

What about deliberately missing the point?

Humans or their body parts are not to be used as fuel, cause using them in that way will render human value even more of a figment of our imagination. Humans are not an energy source for other humans, and nor are their remains, and nor are aborted fetuses a cool source of energy. Personally i find this use of the remains to be utterly disgusting, and i am pretty sure a hospital that does abortions surely has a facility for cremation of the remains that is not linked to energy creation as well (cause i doubt many people would agree to that use of the aborted fetuses).

 

[Yeekim]

An aborted fetus or miscarriage isn't a "baby" except to the usual suspects.

But that said, someone should have the right to bury or cremate the remains if they so desire. After all, it's their money.

Well, look at that. It appears they already do. It's much ado about nothing, yet again.

I support extending this practice to include all human remains.

Seconded on both counts.
Also, the ashes could be used as fertilizer.
Or this: http://bigthink.com/design-for-good/this-awesome-urn-will-turn-you-into-a-tree-after-you-die

 

[Kyriakos]

Why wait till they are clinically dead? We could work on linking computers or other cool and useful stuff as high-tech leeches to patients on their way out, or even death-row prisoners. I mean they will die anyway, so why allow them any type of existence when fuel can be had?

First
Then

 

[LegionSteve]

I support extending this practice to include all human remains.

It is every citizen's final duty to go into the tanks incinerator.

 

[El_Machinae]

This is not really all that 'alternative' as an energy source. It takes more fossil fuel calories to grow that fetus than you'll ever get out of burning the tissue. It would be superior to just not get pregnant in the first place!

 

[Kyriakos]

This is not really all that 'alternative' as an energy source. It takes more fossil fuel calories to grow that fetus than you'll ever get out of burning the tissue. It would be superior to just not get pregnant in the first place!

Yeah, but the hospitals are being paid already to do the operation. No one allowed them to gain fuel/energy or money out of the aborted fetus or other human parts.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yeah, um, we've been incinerating medical waste for decades.

 

[DinoDoc]

Yeah, um, we've been incinerating medical waste for decades.

Correct. This however is a new practice that was unapproved and according to the people involved should never have happened. It is however instructive to see stark evidence of the truism that no matter how abhorrent the act someone on the internet will defend it.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Aborted fetuses have only recently been classified as biohazardous medical waste? You're a little quick to make claims without any citations or expertise to back them up.

I also find it telling that nobody responded to Arwon's points.

 

[DinoDoc]

Aborted fetuses have only recently been classified as biohazardous medical waste? You're a little quick to make claims without any citations or expertise to back them up.

“This practice is totally unacceptable,” said Dr Poulter.

“While the vast majority of hospitals are acting in the appropriate way, that must be the case for all hospitals and the Human Tissue Authority has now been asked to ensure that it acts on this issue without delay.”

Sir Bruce Keogh, NHS Medical Director, has written to all NHS trusts to tell them the practice must stop.

The Chief Medical Officer, Dame Sally Davies, has also written to the Human Tissue Authority to ask them make sure that guidance is clear.

And the Care Quality Commission said it would investigate the programme's findings.

Prof Sir Mike Richards, Chief Inspector of Hospitals, said: “I am disappointed trusts may not be informing or consulting women and their families.

“This breaches our standard on respecting and involving people who use services and I’m keen for Dispatches to share their evidence with us.

“We scrutinise information of concern and can inspect unannounced, if required.”

From the OP.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

That says nothing about how long the practice has been done.

Also, I find it telling that nobody's responded to Arwon's points yet.

 

[El_Machinae]

Correct. This however is a new practice that was unapproved and according to the people involved should never have happened. It is however instructive to see stark evidence of the truism that no matter how abhorrent the act someone on the internet will defend it.

What do you think should be done with fetal tissue, and more broadly, biomedical waste?

I didn't defend it, I said it wasn't energy efficient!

 

[DinoDoc]

That says nothing about how long the practice has been done.

Well it's apparently "totally unacceptable" and "the vast majority of hospitals" don't do it. You tell me how widespread and entrenched I should assume the practice is.