Jump to content

Talk:Artificial womb

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Adriana(ely).

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lets make this encyclopedic

[edit]

Your input is required: --- Paragraph: Potential for controversy

Although the technology does not currently exist to raise an embryo from conception to full development outside of a human body, the possibility of such technology raises questions with respect to cloning and abortion. The elimination of the need for a living uterus would make cloning easier to carry out and yet harder for legal authorities to track. At the same time, the capacity to raise an unwanted fetus apart from the mother would allow the option of fetus adoption, but might raise concerns with respect to children born with no connection to a parent. Some pro-life groups argue that this would allow a father to have a choice in whether to carry a pregnancy to term. Some people would even argue that this would make it acceptable to ban abortion, since the fetus would be able to survive outside of the uterus from the first day, thereby avoiding any possible undue burden. Some currently pro-choice people may even find it acceptable to ban abortion if artificial uteri become available, since the woman would still be allowed to have the fetus removed from her body. They may believe that she has a right to privacy over her own body, but no right to determine the fate of the fetus once it is removed.

What`s needed, are sources which are of significance, no blogs or private pages but sources from major "news sites". Secondly no original research, no opinions and no speculations. Thanks.

But it is already getting better. So let us make it happen. Slicky

As with many other things it can be used for good or bad purposes. For example a knife can be a useful tool for cutting food, but could also be used to kill somebody. So what's necessary are good regulations which ensure that artificial uteri are only used for good purposes and not abused for i.e. cloning. Indeed this would make abortion a thing of the past since fetuses could survive and grow into babies outside of the uterus. If a woman wants to commit abortion that means she doesn't want a baby. So it could grow into a baby in a artificial uterus and then be adopted by a good family. Risks of pregnancy and childbirth will be avoidable and women won't need maternity leave when babies are grown in artificial uteri. It will also be much safer. Genetic errors, diseases, imperfections could be fixed and the best nutrients could be provided to ensure the most healthy babies. This is not possible with normal pregnancy. --Artanisen15:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Ectogenesis"

[edit]

sounds more like a process. Shouldn't the field be called "Ectogenics?" AtomSmith 00:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC) No the term is correct.Slicky[reply]

Artificial womb names

[edit]

{6th Feb 2005} Artificial womb refered to by various names:-

'Grow Tube'.
'Birth Pod'.
'Baby Vat'.
'"Mechanical Mother"'.
'Bio-tube'.
'Amniode'/'Amninode'

Logan's Run, Divine Invasion

[edit]

Logan's Run should be added to the Fictional artifical wombs section. I can't recall the scenes in the novel or the film, but the original screenplay that I've read (scene 121) uses the term meccano-breeders to describe the artificial wombs. Also, Philip K. Dick uses the term synthetic womb in his book, The Divine Invasion. --Viriditas | Talk 00:44, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Also Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkasian series has plot revoling around them. I think she calls them artificail uterus. I need to look it up. But in her books they are used on highly technical worlds as more convient than pregancy. Also as part a peace treaty the fetuses from raped POW'sare returned to the goverment on the offending side in artificial wombs. So the POW neither had to deal with the guilt of an abortion or an child that was forced on them. Jenn

They were called Uterine Replicators in that series of books. 159.153.129.39 (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction: an embarrassment that doesn't belong

[edit]

No more science fiction! Facts, not imaginary bullshit. Look at drill or chair or any other real technology, and ask: are there reams of fictional references? Wikipedia is such a mess, thousands of idiots outweighing any quality.

An artificial Uterus is still largely a science fiction subject.~~MrMe

Abortion

[edit]

At the same time, the capacity to raise an unwanted fetus seperate from the mother would eliminate many causes for abortion, but might raise concerns with respect to children born with no connection to a parent.

If you could provide some sources for this claim, I would appreciate it. The "causes for abortion" are many and complex, and your statement implies that most women carrying a fetus would choose to raise it in an artificial womb if they had the chance. This raises more problems than it appears to solve (who takes care of the baby when it comes to term) and appears to be a politcally-motivated statement with the underlying assumption that abortion is "wrong". I've changed the wording to the following:
At the same time, the capacity to raise an unwanted fetus seperate from the mother would allow the option of "fetus adoption", but might raise concerns with respect to children born with no connection to a parent. --Viriditas | Talk 01:09, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This is not just about the mother, with this technology a father could choose to keep the pregnancy alive long enough to deliver a baby. I have read a few articles online about this on pro-father websites. --Rakista 05:47, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Are any of those articles notable, reputable, or worthy of inclusion? As I wrote above, provide sources. --Viriditas | Talk 06:29, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It has been awhile I ran across the info when I was in debate class like 6 years ago. I will update when I find them --Rakista 23:40, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
To Viriditas- It made it sound like someone would want to keep the baby outside the woman, I'm not surprised, from your tone, that you would assume it must be the mother, but perhaps the mother might have nothing to do with it. As things stand today the decision is legally ONLY up to the mother, whether to kill or keep a baby that is not created by her alone. With this, the fathers might finally have a choice to keep their child without the mother playing the "her body, her choice" card to murder their child without his permission.

from Vfd

[edit]

On 21 Feb 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Artificial womb for a record of the discussion.

Thx and problems

[edit]

Thx for the article. And there are a couple of things that are unclear and that i can't figure out how to copyedit:

  • 3rd paragraph: "be able to conceive to term" ?
  • 5th para: "develop full term outside the mother's womb, transferred after the initial 17 weeks of implantation": does this mean transfer to art. womb after 17 weeks in the mother?

Hope this helps, "alyosha" (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

limitless supplies of eggs could be grown

[edit]

1:15, 2 May 2006. Could the following information be added to the article? I think it's useful info and a big scientific achievement.

Human eggs which could grow into embryos have been created in a laboratory for the first time, scientists announced yesterday.

They were created by scraping stem cells off the surface of ovaries and exposing them to a chemical which stimulated growth.

The breakthrough suggests limitless supplies of eggs could be grown, solving the problem of the acute shortage of donor eggs for infertile women wanting IVF treatment.

More information can be found here: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/articles/18388656?source=Evening%20Standard

Transwomen?

[edit]

It seems to me that such a technology could allow some transwomen to not only have a female exterior, but also a female interior, and perhaps even to eliminate the need for artificial hormones, if artificial ovaries can be formed as well. Presumably, a stem cell could be cultured with just a slight genetic alteration, to cut out the Y chromosome and duplicate the X, and then a uterus could be grown Nik42 02:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Immune System

[edit]

"it would also not benefit from the protection of the mother's immune system" - Could this be worked around either by producing antibodies in a lab and injecting them into the system or performing a transfusion from the mother?

Sagron (talk) 14:04, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are these tanks really wombs?

[edit]

I moved this section here, because I think it needs confirmation of whether it actually is a womb with external nutrition into the embryonic sharks, or just mere tubes with nutritional fluid?Mikael Häggström (talk) 10:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, a research team in Australia has developed artificial wombs with the purpose of mass producing/breeding the endangered Grey Nurse Shark: [1]

Controversy

[edit]

Moved this out of the lead because there isn't really any controversy about them yet. --70.142.34.215 (talk) 05:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just wait until misandrists get ahold of it. Or Feminists who think they're being "replaced". Then there will be.24.126.251.42 (talk) 01:15, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Really? NPOV means nothing to you? 24.13.28.126 (talk) 01:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category: Artificial uterus in fiction

[edit]

I recently added artificial uterus as a category listing everything from this article; page deletioon is being debated currently. CensoredScribe (talk) 04:36, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

[edit]

I have removed the "artificial organ" category and re-added "hypothetical technology". The former is inappropriate because it is intended for articles about artificial replacements for a living host's damaged or missing organs or limbs, whereas this article is about an external device which replicates the function of an organ independently of a host. As for the latter category, it should remain until a reliable source can be found to document the existence of an actual, functioning artificial uterus, and until that information has been added to the article. DES (talk) 12:48, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Artificial uterus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Artificial uterus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Artificial uterus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Research and Development

[edit]

Hi all!

I'm new to adding significant contributions so please read through my section and double check for anything that may be off. I decided to add a research and development section to the page since most of it was going towards the hypothetical without really talking about any of the recent scientific developments or those of the past. Much more can be added to this section I'm sure so eel free to add anything I may have missed! I also did some minor grammar and spelling edits and changed some of the sentence structure in the sections that were already there for added clarity. Let me know if you have any questions!FridaSCardenas (talk) 17:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC) FSCardenas[reply]

Biobag listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Biobag. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 18:23, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Growing up

[edit]

Will there be any studies or research concerning the later life of the child born from an artificial uterus? In terms of how they would fit into society.Kvirgile (talk) 01:58, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We will probably see it first with de-extinct animals born from an artificial womb such as Steller's sea cow or northern white rhino. Edelgardvonhresvelg (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 November 2019

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move. (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 11:20, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Artificial uterus → Artificial womb – "Artificial womb" seems to be the name more commonly used in sources discussing ectogenesis, per WP:COMMONNAME. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:14, 16 November 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:16, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Artificial_womb&oldid=1258345963"