this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
1504 points (98.6% liked)

Science Memes

13522 readers
2443 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Schmuppes@lemmy.today 15 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Mengele vibes right there.

[–] unused_user_name@lemm.ee 11 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Well, the nazis did make a lot of scientific progress…

/s, just in case

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] frezik@midwest.social 36 points 4 days ago (15 children)

Ethics mean we don't know what the average human male erect penis size is.

No, really. The ethics of the studies say that a researcher can't be in the presence of a sexually aroused erect penis. Having the testee measure their own penis is prone to error. There are ways to induce an erection with an injection, so they use that.

Is the size of an induced erection the same as a sexually aroused erection? Probably in the same ballpark, but we don't really know.

Source: Dr Nicole Prause, neurologist specializing in sexuality, on Holly Randall's podcast.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 26 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

A quick trip on Google scholar turns up a lot of studies on the size of male erections.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/553598c1e4b0a7f854584291/t/55ee4a5ee4b025d99f73150e/1441679966732/Penis+Size+Study+-+Veale+et+al+2015+BJUI.pdf

It is acknowledged that some of the volunteers across different studies may have taken part in a study because they were more confident with their penis size than the general male population.

Ha, poisoned data tho

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] allo@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'd like to get in to genetic engineering. When I came across his story while researching crispr, I sympathized with him. He did the experiment in what to me is a moral way. Just going on memory it was like 'take 4 embryos, edit two, keep parents in the loop and ask which embryo they want'. Complain all you want, but he did no wrong; it's the public and system that then wronged him. So yeah, of nearly anyone, he is the one who most gets to say 'ethics ruining science'. It's ironic because there are tons and tons of unethical science activities done literally every day. But for those to be ignored and instead ethics police to hit him when he did all his stuff morally and resulted probably in two extrahealthy kids... Yeah I agree with him. I think everything should be done morally, but if he is going to be hit like that under the guise of 'ethics' then nah. 'ethics' needs to be replaced by morals and decency. Literally horrifically murdering people (war) is legal and accepted while him using science, AND CORRECTLY, to protect people from liferuining diseases got the treatment it did? nah. I hope he continues growing and doing more genetic engineering and this time doesn't share a single thing with the public. He should never give the people that treated him like that a single piece of data. There are ways to bypass the patent thickets if he isn't selling what he does, especially if he shares no info about it. I support him.

prepares for 200 downvotes

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 days ago

you have my upvote

and my axe

[–] notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world 26 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Holy shit, this guy managed to have 3 of the first 10 papers listed on google scholar about his shenanigans.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt.4337

[–] bennieandthez@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I think he does it ironically tbh, his posts are all over the place, from making fun of Europe for regulating everything to then saying that gene editing should be regulated by international laws to then saying ethics are holding back humanity, then just saying he loves austin texas, then stating that he will not develop bio weapons lmao.

Stanford cup and CPC flag, he does have a sense of humour tbh.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 27 points 4 days ago (10 children)

Not that I support it in any way of course, but he's not wrong. There's probably a lot of medical knowledge to be gained by seeing how the babies he experimented on develop in the future. It's just that the ends don't justify the means.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Wasn't he the guy who was trying to find a way for HIV-positive couples to have HIV-negative babies?

[–] Hirom@beehaw.org 12 points 3 days ago

Antiretroviral therapy for pregnant women already is a safe and effective way to avoid HIV transmission to the baby. It's part of standard treatment guidelines https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1701216324003748

So the guy has genetically engineered babies as a potentially risky and certainlycontroversial solution for a problem that already has a safe and non-controversia solution.

[–] psmgx@lemmy.world 22 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Do you want BioShock? Cuz this is how you get BioShock

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›