Jason Staples

A peer-reviewed paper published last year in the journal Bioethics by two professors at Western Michigan University School of Medicine argues that it is "morally obligatory" to genetically engineer ticks to spread alpha-gal syndrome, a permanent condition that makes you violently allergic to red meat. The paper is called "Beneficial Bloodsucking." Their argument: if eating meat is morally wrong, then preventing the spread of a disease that forces people to stop eating meat is also morally wrong. Scientists should gene-edit lone star ticks to enhance their ability to carry alpha-gal syndrome and expand their range into urban environments to infect more people. They call this a "moral bioenhancer." They frame releasing genetically modified disease-carrying ticks as a "vaccination" that only "infringes" on your bodily autonomy rather than "violating" it. The distinction, apparently, is that a tick bit you instead of a government official holding you down. Alpha-gal syndrome is not mild. The CDC estimates up to 450,000 Americans are already affected. Cases have surged 100-fold in the last decade. Symptoms include anaphylaxis. There is no cure. Alpha-gal cases are exploding across the United States. The lone star tick's range is expanding far beyond its historical territory. And two academics at a medical school published a paper arguing this is a good thing that should be accelerated. At what point do we stop treating papers like this as fringe academic exercises and start asking whether anyone is already acting on them?

This dad at the Red Sox game went into full dad mode — managing it from both sides after little bro threw away the foul ball 😂 Big bro was sick 😭

You youngins didn’t know Larry Bird moved this nice 😮‍💨

Kobe Bryant: "Failure doesn't exist, it's a figment of your imagination" An interviewer asks: "Are you someone who loves to win or hates to lose?" Kobe responds: "I'm neither. I play to figure things out. I play to learn something. Because if you play with a fear of failure or you play with the will to win that supersedes fear, I think it's a weakness either way. If you play with fear of failing, you'll capitulate to that fear. If you play with the sense of 'I want to win, I want to win,' then you have the fear of what happens if you don't. But if you find common ground in the center, you're unfazed by either. That enables you to stay in the moment and not feel anything other than what's in front of you." The interviewer asks: "How did you become someone who doesn't seem afraid of failing?" Kobe responds: "What does failure mean? It doesn't exist. It's a figment of your imagination." He explains with an analogy: "Let's use happy endings. Everybody wants a happy ending, right? Snow White finds her prince and lives happily ever after. Well, I call BS on that because two months later, they had an argument and he's sleeping on the couch. The point is: the story continues. So if you fail on Monday, the only way it's a failure is if you decide to not progress from that. If I fail today, I'm going to learn something from that failure and try again on Tuesday. That's why failure doesn't exist." The interviewer asks: "If you finished your career without a championship, would you have looked at that as a failure?" Kobe: "No. I would look at it as being extremely disappointed, because I had a dream and goals I wanted to accomplish. If I didn't accomplish those goals, I'd have to ask myself why. Poor leadership? Failure to communicate with my teammates? Lack of preparation? Those would be reasons why I didn't win. So I'd have to analyze that. And as I evolved post-basketball into business, those same weaknesses would reveal themselves there too. If I don't learn from that, I'm going to struggle again." He concludes: "I can take those situations and learn from them and have them make me a better person later in life. But if I don't take that stuff and apply it someplace else, that's failing. The worst possible thing you can ever do is to stop. It's to not learn."