Much less debatable is the conclusion that the process is extraordinarily expensive, lengthy and in desperate need of improvement. Doing so, however, is a monumental task. Modern drug development requires unprecedented partnering these days between academia, which has the intellectual expertise and focus to imagine new therapeutic concoctions, and industry, which has the financial wherewithal and ability to help turn those ideas into beneficial health products. While supporters can point to success stories resulting from contemporary academic-industry collaborations, critics can equally cite negative consequences, conflicts of interest, for example, that have benefitted the few at the expense of many.”
Imagine a being capable of processing, remembering and sharing information — a being with potentialities proper to it and inhabiting a world of its own. Given this brief description, most of us will think of a human person, some will associate it with an animal, and virtually no one’s imagination will conjure up a plant.
The research findings of the team at the Blaustein Institute form yet another building block in the growing fields of plant intelligence studies and neurobotany that, at the very least, ought to prompt us to rethink our relation to plants. Is it morally permissible to submit to total instrumentalization living beings that, though they do not have a central nervous system, are capable of basic learning and communication? Should their swift response to stress leave us coldly indifferent, while animal suffering provokes intense feelings of pity and compassion?”
Most importantly, Mike Daisey wasn’t wrong that it is possible for Chinese authorities and Apple to substantially improve labor conditions — without making their products any more expensive or less competitive — and that American consumers can help make this happen. But he was wrong that embellishing his story would help, that bad behavior in service of a good cause ever does.”