NOT PARODY: ‘Beneficial Bloodsucking’: Bioethicists Want Ticks to Infect People to Stop Them from Ea

[rangerrebew]

NOT PARODY: ‘Beneficial Bloodsucking’: Bioethicists Want Ticks to Infect People to Stop Them from Eating Meat – ‘We argue that if eating meat is morally impermissible, then efforts to prevent the spread of tickborne [allergy] are also morally impermissible’ – Published in the Journal Bioethics
By Admin
July 31, 2025
9:42 pm

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/bioethicists-want-ticks-to-infect-people-to-stop-them-from-eating-meat/

By Wesley J. Smith

Excerpt: This is not a parody. Two bioethicists have argued in the prestigious professional journal Bioethics that we should breed ticks to cause more infections of a condition that causes an allergy to red meat. Seriously.

Why would anyone want ticks to become more dangerous? Meat-eating is wrong, and so anything (apparently) that causes fewer of us to eat meat is “beneficent“:

1. Eating meat is morally wrong.
2. If (1), then eating meat makes people morally worse and makes the world a worse place.
3. So, people would be morally better and the world would be a less bad place if people didn’t eat meat.
4. If an act makes people morally better and makes the world a less bad place than it would otherwise be, then that act is morally obligatory. [Corollary of consequentialism]

5. Promoting tickborne AGS [a tickborne syndrome that causes a meat allergy] makes people morally better and makes the world a less bad place.
6. So, promoting tickborne AGS is morally obligatory.

https://www.climatedepot.com/2025/07/31/not-parody-beneficial-bloodsucking-bioethicists-want-ticks-to-infect-people-to-stop-them-from-eating-meat-we-argue-that-if-eating-meat-is-morally-impermissible-then-efforts-to-prevent-the-s/

[rangerrebew]

PLUS, when they die you can save them and eventually have a nice tick stew.

[mountaineer]

The unsaid message: let's kill all humans (except ourselves, of course - we're special) to save the cows.

[Free Vulcan]

We argue that if eating meat is morally impermissible

You are welcome to preach that sermon in the worship center of your choice, we have Separation of Church and State here.

[LMAO]

So how would they guarantee that these ticks would  not carry a variety of diseases that ticks already carry and can pass on to humans?

Or do they even care about that?

[Smokin Joe]

Being a person who severely restricts his intake of carbohydrates, this is a death threat to me.


How is that Moral?

Can I respond to prevent such and have it considered self-defense?

(just asking...)

[rangerrebew]

Academics Say It’s Morally Obligatory To Bioengineer Ticks To Stop You Eating Meat
By Admin
August 5, 2025
7:52 am
https://wmbriggs.substack.com/p/academics-say-its-morally-obligatory

By WILLIAM M BRIGGS

Excerpt: Our paper is “Beneficial Bloodsucking” from Messers Parker Crutchfield and Blake Hereth, in the august pages of Bioethics.

Their Abstract (with my emphasis):

The bite of the lone star tick spreads alpha-gal syndrome (AGS), a condition whose only effect is the creation of a severe but nonfatal red meat allergy. Public health departments warn against lone star ticks and AGS, and scientists are working to develop an inoculation to AGS. Herein, we argue that if eating meat is morally impermissible, then efforts to prevent the spread of tickborne AGS are also morally impermissible. After explaining the symptoms of AGS and how they are transmitted via ticks, we argue that tickborne AGS is a moral bioenhancer if and when it motivates people to stop eating meat...It is presently feasible to genetically edit the disease-carrying capacity of ticks. If this practice can be applied to ticks carrying AGS, then promoting the proliferation of tickborne AGS is morally obligatory.

You will say, if you are in a jocular mood, that this is an example of stupid men making stupid errors. It isn’t, though. After all, they use most of their words correctly and are employed at a well known university teaching your kids that eating meat is bad. For which you pay them a lot of money.

This is equally obviously not intelligent men making intelligent mistakes. This paper will be forgotten almost by the time it takes you to read this article.

https://www.climatedepot.com/2025/08/05/academics-say-its-morally-obligatory-to-bioengineer-ticks-to-stop-you-eating-meat/

[Mod2]

topics merged

[rangerrebew]

Yum, yum!

Roast Leg O Tick.

Tick filets.

Tick chops.

Luna ticks!

[andy58-in-nh]

Bioethicists Want Ticks to Infect People...

Q: What sort of interpretation of "ethics" might justify using state power to forcibly infect people with a dangerous disease?

A: One based on the assumption that human beings, left to their own choices (i.e.: living in a state of freedom) are a danger to the planet and to each other, and must therefore be controlled.

This assumption is in fact a common thread through collectivist ideologies such as socialism and Marxist communism.

The historical results of governance based on these ideologies ought to speak for themselves, or rather would, were they not routinely denied by academics and political actors who wish to repeat them.
 

[Bigun]

Bioethicists Want Ticks to Infect People...

Q: What sort of interpretation of "ethics" might justify using state power to forcibly infect people with a dangerous disease?

A: One based on the assumption that human beings, left to their own choices (i.e.: living in a state of freedom) are a danger to the planet and to each other, and must therefore be controlled.

This assumption is in fact a common thread through collectivist ideologies such as socialism and Marxist communism.

The historical results of governance based on these ideologies ought to speak for themselves, or rather would, were they not routinely denied by academics and political actors who wish to repeat them.
 

  

[mountaineer]

If they're lucky, we'll all get Lyme disease and drop dead. That's one way to stop people from eating meat - or anything else.