Today's signal is again looking at declining fertility - and our increasingly desperate? (or selfish/ eugenicist?) measures to increase the brith rates of "our" people.
1 in 6 people worldwide now can't make a baby even if (ahem) repeatedly trying to do so.
Medical ethics professionals are happily promoting "full body" gestational donations (that is, getting comatose people to carry babies for those who can't - or just won't because they want to stay pretty and thin).
South Korea is just outright admitting that it sees its citizens as human resources by new policy that allows parents to be exempt from military service (either way, sacrifice your body to the state, but at least you get to chose how it goes down).
Let's be honest : kinder adoption and immigration policy solves these problems at much lower overall human and economic cost - but there are profits to be made at the commercial level - and power games to play at the national(ist?) level that incentivise more, um, selfish "solutions" to our future social security pyramid schemes.
What are your thoughts?
Are you invested in fertility biotech? (Why not?)
Do you think nationalist threat/treat solutions to population pagodas are sensible or selfish strategies?
Is surrogacy as a service just another business idea, or a sacrilege - pricing that which is priceless?
Let me know your thoughts Flux Trends or below.
Read more:
1 in 6 worldwide now infertile : https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-11933331/Staggering-one-six-people-world-infertile-landmark-report-claims.html
Your body or your (baby’s) life : https://time.com/6265842/south-korea-birth-rate-military-service-exemption/
Grimm fairy tales - but real life (or why medical ethics thinks getting comatose people to breed for others is OK) : https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36401055/
Choose your reality : https://www.youtube.com/live/GgtUpdLO36I?feature=share&t=2490
Human resources or human beings?