Imagine human bodies grown without brains, without consciousness.

These are "bodyoids."

And today in MIT Technology Review, researchers from Stanford University are ready to talk about them.

What is a bodyoid?

It is a "proposal" for human bodies, made from stem cells, and grown in artificial wombs, "that lack sentience or the ability to feel pain."

Bodies to take organs from, or do research on.

Do human bodyoids exist? Not yet. But we may one day have the technology to make them. Pluripotent stem cells can mimic early embryo development. Artificial wombs are advancing. Gene editing can block brain growth. Science is coalescing around a technology set to make brainless bodies.

The bodyoids argument is put forward in MIT Technology Review by Stanford stem-cell specialist Hiromitsu Nakauchi, his trainee Carsten Charlesworth, and noted legal scholar and bioethicist Hank Greely.

I always thought this was a subject of science fiction. Yet here are real scientists proposing it.

On the ethics of bodyoids, the authors write:

"Thus far, we have held to a standard that requires us to treat all humans born alive as people, entitled to life and respect. Would bodyoids—created without pregnancy, parental hopes, or indeed parents—blur that line?"


Here's another ethical wrinkle.

A bodyoid, if made from stem cells, is a clone. A clone of the cell donor.

A youthful, brainless, copy of someone.



I’ve seen this movie, about four different versions of it.

Here's the full article:

Quote:Why do we hear about medical breakthroughs in mice, but rarely see them translate into cures for human disease? Why do so few drugs that enter clinical trials receive regulatory approval? And why is the waiting list for organ transplantation so long? These challenges stem in large part from a common root cause: a severe shortage of ethically sourced human bodies.

It may be disturbing to characterize human bodies in such commodifying terms, but the unavoidable reality is that human biological materials are an essential commodity in medicine, and persistent shortages of these materials create a major bottleneck to progress.

This imbalance between supply and demand is the underlying cause of the organ shortage crisis, with more than 100,000 patients currently waiting for a solid organ transplant in the US alone. It also forces us to rely heavily on animals in medical research, a practice that can’t replicate major aspects of human physiology and makes it necessary to inflict harm on sentient creatures. In addition, the safety and efficacy of any experimental drug must still be confirmed in clinical trials on living human bodies. These costly trials risk harm to patients, can take a decade or longer to complete, and make it through to approval less than 15% of the time.

There might be a way to get out of this moral and scientific deadlock. Recent advances in biotechnology now provide a pathway to producing living human bodies without the neural components that allow us to think, be aware, or feel pain. Many will find this possibility disturbing, but if researchers and policymakers can find a way to pull these technologies together, we may one day be able to create “spare” bodies, both human and nonhuman.

These could revolutionize medical research and drug development, greatly reducing the need for animal testing, rescuing many people from organ transplant lists, and allowing us to produce more effective drugs and treatments. All without crossing most people’s ethical lines.

Bringing technologies together

Although it may seem like science fiction, recent technological progress has pushed this concept into the realm of plausibility. Pluripotent stem cells, one of the earliest cell types to form during development, can give rise to every type of cell in the adult body. Recently, researchers have used these stem cells to create structures that seem to mimic the early development of actual human embryos. At the same time, artificial uterus technology is rapidly advancing, and other pathways may be opening to allow for the development of fetuses outside of the body.

Such technologies, together with established genetic techniques to inhibit brain development, make it possible to envision the creation of “bodyoids”—a potentially unlimited source of human bodies, developed entirely outside of a human body from stem cells, that lack sentience or the ability to feel pain.

There are still many technical roadblocks to achieving this vision, but we have reason to expect that bodyoids could radically transform biomedical research by addressing critical limitations in the current models of research, drug development, and medicine. Among many other benefits, they would offer an almost unlimited source of organs, tissues, and cells for use in transplantation.

It could even be possible to generate organs directly from a patient’s own cells, essentially cloning someone’s biological material to ensure that transplanted tissues are a perfect immunological match and thus eliminating the need for lifelong immunosuppression. Bodyoids developed from a patient’s cells could also allow for personalized screening of drugs, allowing physicians to directly assess the effect of different interventions in a biological model that accurately reflects a patient’s own personal genetics and physiology. We can even envision using animal bodyoids in agriculture, as a substitute for the use of sentient animal species.

Of course, exciting possibilities are not certainties. We do not know whether the embryo models recently created from stem cells could give rise to living people or, thus far, even to living mice. We do not know when, or whether, an effective technique will be found for successfully gestating human bodies entirely outside a person. We cannot be sure whether such bodyoids can survive without ever having developed brains or the parts of brains associated with consciousness, or whether they would still serve as accurate models for living people without those brain functions.

Even if it all works, it may not be practical or economical to “grow” bodyoids, possibly for many years, until they can be mature enough to be useful for our ends. Each of these questions will require substantial research and time. But we believe this idea is now plausible enough to justify discussing both the technical feasibility and the ethical implications.

Ethical considerations and societal implications

Bodyoids could address many ethical problems in modern medicine, offering ways to avoid unnecessary pain and suffering. For example, they could offer an ethical alternative to the way we currently use nonhuman animals for research and food, providing meat or other products with no animal suffering or awareness.

But when we come to human bodyoids, the issues become harder. Many will find the concept grotesque or appalling. And for good reason. We have an innate respect for human life in all its forms. We do not allow broad research on people who no longer have consciousness or, in some cases, never had it.

At the same time, we know much can be gained from studying the human body. We learn much from the bodies of the dead, which these days are used for teaching and research only with consent. In laboratories, we study cells and tissues that were taken, with consent, from the bodies of the dead and the living.

Recently we have even begun using for experiments the “animated cadavers” of people who have been declared legally dead, who have lost all brain function but whose other organs continue to function with mechanical assistance. Genetically modified pig kidneys have been connected to, or transplanted into, these legally dead but physiologically active cadavers to help researchers determine whether they would work in living people.

In all these cases, nothing was, legally, a living human being at the time it was used for research. Human bodyoids would also fall into that category. But there are still a number of issues worth considering. The first is consent: The cells used to make bodyoids would have to come from someone, and we’d have to make sure that this someone consented to this particular, likely controversial, use. But perhaps the deepest issue is that bodyoids might diminish the human status of real people who lack consciousness or sentience.

Thus far, we have held to a standard that requires us to treat all humans born alive as people, entitled to life and respect. Would bodyoids—created without pregnancy, parental hopes, or indeed parents—blur that line? Or would we consider a bodyoid a human being, entitled to the same respect? If so, why—just because it looks like us? A sufficiently detailed mannequin can meet that test. Because it looks like us and is alive? Because it is alive and has our DNA? These are questions that will require careful thought.

A call to action

Until recently, the idea of making something like a bodyoid would have been relegated to the realms of science fiction and philosophical speculation. But now it is at least plausible—and possibly revolutionary. It is time for it to be explored.

The potential benefits—for both human patients and sentient animal species—are great. Governments, companies, and private foundations should start thinking about bodyoids as a possible path for investment. There is no need to start with humans—we can begin exploring the feasibility of this approach with rodents or other research animals.

As we proceed, the ethical and social issues are at least as important as the scientific ones. Just because something can be done does not mean it should be done. Even if it looks possible, determining whether we should make bodyoids, nonhuman or human, will require considerable thought, discussion, and debate. Some of that will be by scientists, ethicists, and others with special interest or knowledge. But ultimately, the decisions will be made by societies and governments.

The time to start those discussions is now, when a scientific pathway seems clear enough for us to avoid pure speculation but before the world is presented with a troubling surprise. The announcement of the birth of Dolly the cloned sheep back in the 1990s launched a hysterical reaction, complete with speculation about armies of cloned warrior slaves. Good decisions require more preparation.

The path toward realizing the potential of bodyoids will not be without challenges; indeed, it may never be possible to get there, or even if it is possible, the path may never be taken. Caution is warranted, but so is bold vision; the opportunity is too important to ignore.

Carsten T. Charlesworth is a postdoctoral fellow at the Institute of Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine (ISCBRM) at Stanford University.

Henry T. Greely is the Deane F. and Kate Edelman Johnson Professor of Law and director of the Center for Law and the Biosciences at Stanford University.

Hiromitsu Nakauchi is a professor of genetics and an ISCBRM faculty member at Stanford University and a distinguished university professor at the Institute of Science Tokyo.

Ethically sourced “spare” human bodies could revolutionize medicine

Quote:This startup wants to copy you into an embryo for organ harvesting

With plans to create realistic synthetic embryos, grown in jars, Renewal Bio is on a journey to the horizon of science and ethics.

In a search for novel forms of longevity medicine, a biotech company based in Israel says it intends to create embryo-stage versions of people in order to harvest tissues for use in transplant treatments.

The company, Renewal Bio, is pursuing recent advances in stem-cell technology and artificial wombs demonstrated by Jacob Hanna, a biologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot. Earlier this week, Hanna showed that starting with mouse stem cells, his lab could form highly realistic-looking mouse embryos and keep them growing in a mechanical womb for several days until they developed beating hearts, flowing blood, and cranial folds.

“It’s absolutely not necessary, so why would you do it?” says Nicolas Rivron, a stem-cell scientist at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology in Vienna. He argues that scientists should only create “the minimal embryonic structure necessary” to yield cells of interest.

I haven't been reading anything during a sit-down break in the bathroom for a long time now, until lately. I found an old book of totally politically incorrect ethnic jokes and have been reading that one while on the throne, and that seems appropriate. But back in the day, we had a magazine rack in the bathroom and we had some choice reading material for when we had some time to kill. Some of my favorite material from back in the day follows, just remember my list is from a whole family of influences, from Mom and Dad down to the youngest, not just my own.

Reader's Digest. Need I say more? The title says it all. The short condensed stories were just long enough to complete the mission and are on a variety of topics for everyone in the family. National Geographic was another family mag that was on the bathroom rack.

The daily newspaper, particularly the sports and comics sections. I wasn't a big sports fan, but everyone reads the sports section while doing their business. The comics section was always good even if it was from the previous Sunday.

Thinking of comics, The Freak Brothers and Mr Natural come to mind, good alternatives from my older brothers along with Easy Rider Magazine and the locally published newspaper from the head shop.

My younger brother is a drummer and couldn't take a dump without a recent copy of Modern Drummer magazine. I was into Guitar Player for one year, but I was more into different sports mags, mostly ones about fishing. I never had to have any particular publication to get the train out of the station. Of course, dirty magazines were out of the question and only to be found out in the garage, shed or in bedroom closets, plus none of that would facilitate a bowl movement anyway.

So, does anyone have anything to add?

Welcome to clown world 4.0 2025. 
(From Food and Wine Magazine, no less)

https://www.foodandwine.com/kfc-hismile-...n-11706210

KFC is introducing a fried chicken-flavored toothpaste, and (sigh) it apparently features flavors inspired by all of KFC’s 11 herbs and spices. The Texas-based chain announced the stunt this morning, calling it a “full-on flavor takeover” of your oral care routine.

Like biting into a hot, juicy piece of KFC Original Recipe Chicken, this toothpaste is irresistible, coating your teeth in flavor while leaving your mouth feeling fresh and clean,” the press release explains. 

This started as an April Fools’ joke, but we thought — why not make it real?” Hismile marketing manager Koban Jones said in a statement. “We love pushing boundaries, and what better way to do that than by bringing KFC’s legendary flavors into an everyday essential? This collab is bold, unexpected, and seriously fun.”

"Sigh" is right----how far we've fallen. 

This is hilarious as well as thought provoking. It's wild what some people can piece together. But, to be honest, I saw even deeper into these commercials and there is some deep subliminal messaging going on in these seemingly harmless commercials for kids.

Quote:Episode 1 - Into The Air Britain and France confront Germany in a contest that will be determined by a combination of individual bravery and sweeping advances in the mechanics of conflict.

The story of the bitter struggle for air superiority over the trenches during WWl. A time when the aeroplane become a killing machine. This documentary follows the birth of the Royal Flying Corp, their evolution and their quest to control the skies during the conflict of the First World War. #FullFreeMovies #ScienceTechTv #SpaceDocumentary #WW1 #FirstWorldWar #GreatWar #AirWar #AviationHistory Welcome to Science Tech TV! Bringing you thought-provoking and immersive full-length documentaries on a diverse array of subjects and for free. is a science and technology channel that feeds curious minds and allows you to explore the world from a new perspective., we delve deep into the issues that matter. Our presenter-led and character-driven investigative series offer a unique perspective, shedding light on untold stories and uncovering hidden truths.

The beast is approaching.




Supercell near Broken Bow, Nebraska.




Supercell near near Broadus, Montana







Desert lightning







Alvord Desert, Oregon




Powerful swells on the Oregon Coast




Rolling clouds over mountains




Yosemite Falls

The real motives behind the threats, sanctions, and escalations go deeper than "nuclear fears."

Here’s what’s really happening from the perspective of a Syrian living in Germany.

Iran learned a brutal lesson from its neighbors:

Iraq: Invaded.

Libya: Dismantled.

North Korea: Untouched (thanks to nukes).

The message? No deterrence = vulnerability. So why is the U.S. really demanding that Iran abandon its nuclear program?

Iran’s tough choice:

Surrender? The regime collapses.
Fight? The economy crashes.

With Iran’s currency in free fall, war becomes more likely by the day.

Quote:NO THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT, AND SOME ADVICE, YOUR MAJESTY

March 28, 2025 / Joseph P. Farrell

Well, you may have heard that President Trump has been considering a favorable response from Britain's King Charles III to join the British Commonwealth of Nations as an "associate" member. See these articles shared by W.G. and V.T. (with our gratitude):

Trump weighs in on British Commonwealth offer

Trump says he would be happy for US to become ‘associate’ Commonwealth member

I debated very long and hard on how I would blog about this story, or even if it would be a typical blog. Part of me - and I admit, a big part of me - wanted to do so as an "open letter" to both men. I decided to nix that idea, because it would end up being a longer litany of complaints than the original Declaration of Independence, and would include such new miseries being inflicted on the American people like the "sovereign wealth fund" which will, we are "informed", consist of some crypto-"currency" "assets", and so on.

I had planned a long section on a newly revised and updated section following that marvellous passage "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security," which would include various new usurpations and abuses - crypto-currencies, FASAB 56 regulations, laws being passed without having ever been read by our "representatives", autopens being used by incompetent and senile avatar presidents, and so on, I decided that it would take far too much energy, and would not really answer the question of "what, exactly, is really going on here?"

So, just to be clear, the United Kingdumb - as one of this website's members from that country likes to call it - is a mess of its own, and a mess because of the globalooney policies pursued and favored by its ruling elite. Somewhere along the way, even His Majesty's predecessor and mother began to have misgivings about the project of destroying the country she ostensibly ruled by flooding it with "migrants", migrants who  had and would entertain no purpose of assimilation, for she "invited" the country's vice premier to tea and dinner at the Palace, during which she asked him if he could name three good things about the European Union.  In terms of the protocols of politics within that country, that was about as close to an open royal rebuke of the European Union as one could get. Otherwise, the royal family seems to be intent on running  away from using any of the reserved powers of the crown as fast as it can. In this country, we would call one such use a presidential pocket veto. In Britain, the monarch would simply refuse to sign a bill of parliament into law. Would such an action provoke a constitutional crisis there?

Absolutely. And it is needed. Imagine a monarch who stood with the people and against the globaloonies running  the various "Tory" and "Labour" governments, and you get the idea.

In a country where the current Labour government seems intent upon ignoring all the rights of its people and importing Americans whom it doesn't like to stand trial for statements made in contradiction to British law and policy, it may be time for the Crown to say, this far, and no farther. It would be fun to watch, and long overdue. (And here's a hint, Your Majesty: You might start by being more pro-active in the process of more carefully vetting, and selecting, bishops for your Church of unimpeachable orthodoxy, rather than the gaggle of idiots who have presided over its apostasy of the past few decades. But I digress...)

I am saying, to Mr. Trump, "No thank you, Mr. President."  We fought a WAR to be free of that system, once and for all. I do not wish to see this country used as an agent of influence to pull the mother country's fat out of the globalooney fire that past decades of Labour-Tory misgovernance have put it  - and its commonwealth - into.

The beginning of the decline, the beginning of the Euro-nonsense and globaloney, began with the ouster of Mrs. Thatcher, and has continued apace since then with the governments of Mr. Major, and continuing further with the governments of Mssrs.  Blair and Cameron and Johnson  and those of Mmes. Truss and May. I do not want any association or status for this  country in the Commonwealth because, Mr. President, as your own Vice-President has made clear, Europe - and Great Britain - have utterly abandoned many of the principles for which this country fought during its revolution, among them the right of free speech: why would we wish any association with a country whose current premier wants to extradite Americans expressing their opinions to Britain to try them under British law for violations of that government's policy, as has been called for by elements within its own government-controlled press, and elements of its political class!?!?

This goes way beyond the principles for which we not only fought the Revolution, but the War of 1812. Can we honestly say that the administrations of Jefferson or Madison would have countenanced such an "associate membership" in a commonwealth headed by a government that did this or even contemplated doing this to American citizens? Mr. President, we have little in common with, and nothing - nothing whatsoever - to gain or learn from Mr. Starmer's festering pustule of a "government", and should not associate in any way with it.  You cannot drain a swamp at home while lining up for the crypto-currency scam at home and signing on to the oldest and most practised exemplar of globalism and imperialism abroad.

Do not misunderstand me. I have deep and abiding sympathy for the English, Welsh, Scottish, and Irish people of Great Britain. I do. I love the country and its traditional manifestation. I do not, however, regard the current manifestations of those institutions and traditions - beginning with its church - as anything other than a betrayal of them, as a kind of cultural treason. We cannot afford to join those trends there, while trying to combat them here.

Perhaps King Charles is seeking a way to arrest those developments in his country and within the commonwealth over which he reigns. I do not know. I am not privy to his inmost thoughts and councils.  I do know that the reserved powers of the crown are, contrary to the popular imagination, still considerable, though they have not been used in quite some time. Perhaps it is time to start again.

But in the meantime, as for joining this Commonwealth and its current leaders, absolutely, unqualifiedly, NO!  If anything, what we should be doing is rethinking our whole relationship with NATO, the European Union, and the whole "special relationship" with Britain along the lines of George Washington's advice: stay out of all of it.

See you on the slip side...

Good afternoon, Rogue-Nation!

I’ve recently started growing my own food. My journey began with some flower seeds for the yard, and I’ve had great success with growing flowers. Since I’d never attempted growing anything from seed before, I bought a small setup and began planting seeds in soil. As the flowers sprouted and thrived in the yard, I decided to expand and try growing some of my own produce.

I started with cucumber and bell pepper seeds. The cucumber plant is doing great—it sprouted yesterday and already looks like a strong, healthy plant. The bell peppers, however, are still in the early stages with only small sprouts visible.

I also purchased a tomato plant. I placed it in a larger container and decided to experiment with a raised garden, mainly because of the rabbits and other wildlife around here.

The tomato plant, which I named "Ludell" after my grandmother (who grew the best tomatoes), seemed to thrive in its first week. However, I noticed some yellowing of the lower leaves. I suspect I may have overwatered it. Additionally, I realized I hadn’t added enough fertilizer when I repotted it. After adding a little fertilizer, Ludell bounced back for a day or two. However, today the leaves have brown edges and yellow spots.

I’ve done some research online and found many suggestions, including using soil test kits. However, I’d prefer to learn through the experience and wisdom of others who have more hands-on knowledge.

If any of you seasoned gardeners can offer advice on how to care for a tomato plant like Ludell, I would greatly appreciate it. My hope is to grow some tomatoes that would make my granny proud.

Thank you in advance for your help!