backtop


Print 77 comment(s) - last by GuinnessKMF.. on Jun 6 at 1:40 PM


A Chinese teen went to extreme lengths, selling a kidney to pay for the expensive iPad 2 he lusted for.  (Source: The Oatmeal)

The hospital where the kidney was removed claimed it contracted the offices where the surgery was performed to a businessman whose identity they were unsure of. Thus the case has essentially hit a dead end.  (Source: Asia Insider)

In China, Apple gadgets are status symbols among teenagers.  (Source: Simon Blog)
You're buying it wrong?

A Chinese teen has made headlines due to the lengths he went to obtain Apple, Inc.'s (AAPL) latest and greatest gadget, the iPad 2 tablet.

I. "I Want The One With the Bigger GBs!"

"I wanted to buy an iPad 2, but I didn't have the money," recalls a 17-year old boy identified only by his surname, "Zheng".

But without a college degree, Zheng's prospects weren't looking great.  Average wages in major Chinese cities range from 1,000 to 5,000 RMB (CN¥).  Zheng would like fall on the low end, making between 1,000 and 1,500 RMB.  At the current going exchange rate of 500 RMB to $77.13 USD, it would take the young man several months to get the slick device.

So he made a shocking decision that brings to mind a legendary webcomic from the comic/satire blog The Oatmeal -- he decided to sell an organ for the Apple device.  He recalls, "When I surfed the internet I found an advert posted online by agent saying they were able to pay RMB20,000 to buy a kidney."

Sneaking out of his home, the youth traveled north to the city of Chenzhou in Hunan Province.  Visiting a local hospital, he had his kidney removed.  He was hospitalized for three days then discharged, with 22,000 RMB (appr. $3,394 USD) in hand.  He used the money to reportedly buy his iPad as well as a MacBook and iPhone.

He tried to conceal his new gains from his mother, but she grew suspicious when she saw the Apple gadgets.  Experiencing medical complications, the young man confessed what he did.  States his mother, identified as "Miss Liu", "When he came back, he had a laptop and a new Apple handset. I wanted to know how he had got so much money and he finally confessed that he had sold one of his kidneys."

Shocked Miss Liu took her son to the Chenzhou police to report that he was the victim of a crime.  But the agents whom Zheng had brokered the deal with had vanished, their cell phones dead.  And the hospital claimed it contracted out its urology department to a private businessman.  It denied knowledge of the businessman's identity or the surgeries he was performing.  It appears the case has now been closed, due to lack of evidence.

II. Case Brings to Light Illicit Organ Trade

The irony of the incident is rather great, given that Apple CEO Steven P. Jobs is himself an organ donor recipient, having received a replacement liver after experiencing complications from his battle with pancreatic cancer.

What makes the incident even more sad and ironic is that Zheng's organ is unlikely to go to one of his many countrymen that need it.  It is estimated that a million people in China need a transplant every year, but less than 10,000 receive organs.  

While some locals are able to purchase organs on the black market, many black market organs instead go to foreign "transplant tourists".  A report in the Japanese media last year claimed that foreigners were paying in excess of $80,000 USD for black market transplants in China.  At that price most Chinese simply cannot afford the potentially life-saving transplant (the yearly income of blue-collar workers in China is around $6,000 USD).

III. Apple Demand: A Double Edged Sword For China

Older citizens in China have seized upon the news story as example of how China has lost its communist ways to the "evils" of unregulated capitalism.  Writes one commenter on Hong Kong's Phoenix TV website, "This is a failure of education, the first purpose of which is to 'propagate morality'. This teenager's stupid behaviour is a manifestation of his radically materialistic values."

Another commenter chimes in, "To sell a kidney in order to buy consumer goods? What vanity! It is undeniable that modern Chinese teenagers' morality is declining. This is something we must all think about."

In China Apple devices are often more expensive then they are in the U.S.  The gadgets are increasingly coveted by youth as status symbols.  The high demand among teens for the devices has led to many other issues, including fights outside Beijing Apple stores during the recent launch of the iPad 2 and white iPhone 4.

The international demand for Apple products has been a double-edged sword for China economically.  While it has created a large number of jobs at manufacturing facilities, Apple's demands of cheaper contracts than its rivals and higher quality have led factories to force tens of thousands of Chinese to slave away long hours in what some say amounts to "sweatshop" conditions.  A recent internal audit from Apple revealed numerous abuses of workers at Chinese plants that contribute to the company's gadgets.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Meh
By Motoman on 6/2/2011 12:32:04 PM , Rating: 5
Not surprising in the least. Sadly.

Wake me up when there's news about Apple consumers that isn't this regrettably predictable. Like...they start thinking about what they're doing and decline to purchase an Apple product.




RE: Meh
By ClownPuncher on 6/2/2011 12:52:48 PM , Rating: 5
If I lived in China, I would just get a knock off and keep my kidney...


RE: Meh
By Motoman on 6/2/2011 1:15:32 PM , Rating: 5
But a knockoff isn't a true replacement for an iThing. Chances are the knockoff will be of better quality and function correctly...and might even support Flash.


RE: Meh
By theapparition on 6/2/2011 2:44:57 PM , Rating: 3
Figured they'd be cheaper in China, since all iDevices are made there.


RE: Meh
By kmmatney on 6/2/2011 11:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't work that way - the prices are cheaper where they can sell more volume, so prices are always cheaper in the U.S. for this kind of stuff. We have it good with low prices here in the States.


RE: Meh
By Strunf on 6/6/2011 12:44:16 PM , Rating: 2
Nop the prices for Apple products are (regardless of the country where they are sold) based on the price people are ready to pay for it, if Americans would sell a kidney for a iThing Apple sure would fix it price around there, besides a person can still live with a single kidney and come back again for the next iThing... everyone wins, people are happy with their latest iThing, Apple is happy cause they make money, the black market guys are happy and the guy buying the kidney is also happy to get one... maybe it's the magic around Apple products that make all this possible!


RE: Meh
By Souka on 6/2/2011 2:52:31 PM , Rating: 3
he's had to save for a few months? Oh whah whah...

Stupid kid... should've turned tricks instead

I'm assuming he was probably under a lot of peer pressure and/or wanted to impress a girl.


RE: Meh
By Motoman on 6/2/2011 3:28:15 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
wanted to impress a girl.


Yup. Her name is Steve Jobs.


RE: Meh
By GulWestfale on 6/2/2011 7:15:24 PM , Rating: 2
would he have sold both kidneys to buy a tablet that supports flash?


RE: Meh
By nxjwfgwe on 6/3/11, Rating: -1
RE: Meh
By dapneym on 6/2/11, Rating: -1
RE: Meh
By Motoman on 6/2/2011 1:03:16 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
There are those of us who buy the products and haven't drunk the Kool-Aid, if you will.


No, no there aren't. You can try to convince yourself otherwise...but the fact of the matter is that the emperor has no clothes.


RE: Meh
By Donovan on 6/2/2011 3:43:05 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
the fact of the matter is that the emperor has no clothes

And no kidney.


RE: Meh
By Motoman on 6/2/2011 4:03:53 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, nicely done sir or madam as the case may be.


RE: Meh
By Ramstark on 6/2/2011 6:50:30 PM , Rating: 2
LOLOLOL +3 and +1 for the fastness and swiftness...


RE: Meh
By tim851 on 6/3/2011 9:51:51 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
No, no there aren't. You can try to convince yourself otherwise...but the fact of the matter is that the emperor has no clothes.


Anand seems quite fond of Apple. Are you claiming you know more of computers than he does?


RE: Meh
By Cerin218 on 6/2/2011 1:18:49 PM , Rating: 5
Naw, you're gullible. There are a multitude of devices that "Do what you want them to do." out there without dealing with Apple. They don't make good products, they make simple products. They usually start out selling you a gimped version of their products then come out with "advancements" in future products that should have actually been their initial products. Like the iPad and iPad 2. There weren't fascinating new technologies that they had to research and study before building iPad 2. They knew all the morons of the world would slobber for whatever they put out, buy it by the ton, then repeat again when they put out their latest version of the product six months or a year later. iPhone 5 is what the iPhone 1 should have been. Because things like Steve Jobs didn't see a future in 3g. Really? Seriously? Even better, they create products with KNOWN defects, like the antenna on the iPhone, and tell you simply "Don't hold it there". Apple doesn't make decent products, they scientifically know how to milk you of your money for mediocre products. No really why would I want an open platform MP3 player that I can plug into ANY computer and transfer files to and FROM the device when I can be locked into a limit of five computers and only transfer files TO the device?

Again, they make simple products for simple people and milk them of tons of money doing it. I knew Apple was a joke in the 80's when you could only buy software and peripherals from Apple, at an inflated price of course. That's why the PC killed them. If it weren't for the iPod and iPhone zombies the company wouldn't even exist (not that I don't love to see all the people scavenging outlets and asking to borrow iPhone chargers at trade shows because the battery lasts 4 hours).

Anyone sufficiently technical can find better products for EVERY offering that Apple has. Simply buying their products is drinking the Kool-Aid, and yet you are proud of and defend your gullibility.


RE: Meh
By FranksAndBeans on 6/2/2011 1:40:24 PM , Rating: 4
Cerin, you've got to be careful with absolutes. What you classify as "simple" is sometimes all someone wants out of a device.

Look, I really don't like apple as a company. For years I shook my head at people buying overpriced desktops that performed worse. But there are some cases where an apple product is the best fit, and it is not being bought for branding.

I still don't own a an apple computer, but I do have two ipods. Previous to the ipods I had six or seven different "open source" type MP3 players and as I much as I hate to say it, the ipods are just a better overall product. Could they be better? Sure. But they are still the best overall player for me.

Point being that people taking a 100% hardline against all apple products are every bit as unreasonable as people taking a 100% hardline for apple products. PC/open source guys tend to greatly underestimate the amount of extra effort (workarounds, hacks, special instructions, etc.) it takes to dial a device in... because in general, they enjoy doing it and like ending up with a device that is tuned exactly how they want it. Not everybody wants that, and it doesn't make them dumb.

No need to get that worked up or insulting about it.


RE: Meh
By nafhan on 6/3/2011 10:13:44 AM , Rating: 2
I've owned a couple Sansa's (most recently, Clip+ I got for $12 on Woot a few years back) and for playing back MP3's it couldn't be any better, and drag and drop file transfer means they are easier to use than an iPod (don't even have to set up iTunes). Obviously, no apps or anything, but that doesn't really matter when I just use it to listen to music while I'm jogging or something.


RE: Meh
By ShadowVlican on 6/3/2011 10:40:16 AM , Rating: 1
I've owned an ipod shuffle and for playing back MP3's it couldn't be any better, and foobar+foo_dop file transfer means they are easy to use (don't even have to set up iTunes). Obviously, no apps or anything, but that doesn't really matter when I just use it to listen to music while I'm jogging or something.


RE: Meh
By nafhan on 6/3/2011 1:33:27 PM , Rating: 2
Probably cost more than $12...


RE: Meh
By justjc on 6/4/2011 7:11:57 PM , Rating: 2
Your iPod probably couldn't play WMA, secure WMA, Audible, Ogg Vorbis, FLAC or have its memory upgraded with a simple MicroSD like the newest Clip+


RE: Meh
By Cerin218 on 6/3/2011 2:53:40 PM , Rating: 2
My WebOS Pre just works. Simply. Beautifully. Powerfully. Period. And capacitive charging ROCKS!!
My Sansa is a drag and drop. Or I can sync with Media Player if I REALLY want to. And it costs WAY less than an iPod. Ipods are NOT an better overall product. When was the last time you changed your iPod battery? Why would I want to be locked into iTunes? So someone else can control my access to my music? Nothing I like better than reloading someone's crashed machine and finding out they have an iTunes library. Most of the time they can't even remember their password to reauthorize their account. Their products are over priced and have crappy technology. You are paying for an image and a brand name, not a great device. Even my rooted Android Nook Color beats the heack out of an iPad. Again, the gullible buy Apple, the rest of us are too smart to fall for the "cool" image.


RE: Meh
By Insomniator on 6/2/2011 3:29:37 PM , Rating: 2
What the hell are you talking about?

I'm not a huge fan of Apple but nothing you mentioned there makes a lot of sense the way you worded it. How long did it take for another phone as good as the iPhone 1 to come out? At least a year if I recall correctly after countless embarrassing attempts from other competitors. Same exact deal with the Ipad and Ipod. In all cases Apple had the best product out light years ahead of anyone else.

Yeah, by the time the second-fourth generation devices have come out the field has leveled (Droid, Zoom etc). That is not a case for Apple slacking and screwing us over by holding back what they could have done. Iphone 5 is what the Iphone 1 should have been? What? They had retina screens and mobile dual cores in 2007? The Iphone 1 was giving people the first actual usable touch screen phone and a revolutionary OS at the time. ALL companies release updates every 6 months to their products. Hell some Android phones get left in the dust well before old Iphones do.

And BTW what smartphones these days do not have people running for chargers every 4 hours?

No doubt its a pain that everything is proprietary but the products are good. I'll probably never ever buy an apple product, but I don't judge people that bought a Macbook Air 6 months before anything like it came out.


RE: Meh
By senbassador on 6/2/2011 6:58:48 PM , Rating: 2
Its kind of a tourtis verses the hare thing, Apple being the hare that runs circles around everybody, and everybody else being the tourtis. I give Apple credit where its due, they know how to make a decent GUI / user interface, and they get it out before everyone else does. Their weakness is their stubborn (and sometimes arrogant) as a mule attitude about keeping their system closed. And by that I don't just mean the kind of stuff that only geeks like me care about, I am talking about things like not supporting USB that can connect to a Windows laptop, which is something that mom would care about. I would say that thats where they're shooting themselves in the foot. And off course we all know who won the tourtis vs hare race ;-)


RE: Meh
By ShadowVlican on 6/3/2011 10:37:57 AM , Rating: 2
well according the you, the hare is winning.


RE: Meh
By senbassador on 6/3/2011 4:03:06 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the hare (Apple) has currently sold more tablets than anyone else. So they are winning the tablet race (at least for now). They did get passed up in phone race by Android.

"well according the you, the hare is winning."

On the other hand, Charlie Sheen was winning not to long ago as well, and that didn't go too well. ;-)


RE: Meh
By Tony Swash on 6/4/2011 5:09:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, the hare (Apple) has currently sold more tablets than anyone else. So they are winning the tablet race (at least for now). They did get passed up in phone race by Android.


Did you notice that rather deliscously Apple is now worth as much as Microsoft and Intel combined :)

Apparently getting "passed up" turns out to quite a good strategy.


RE: Meh
By Cerin218 on 6/3/2011 3:10:23 PM , Rating: 2
Better MP3 players existed WAY before the iPod. They made the device simple. You didn't have to think to use it, just load iTunes.

Tablets existed WAY before the iPad. Nothing revolutionary there. I had tablets WAY before they actually became the new fad.

iPhone had a neat interface, but touchscreen phones existed WAY before they iPhone. They didn't revolutionize anything spectacular, what they did was effectively capture a target market. Simple people that wanted simple products and were willing to pay a premium for the convenience.


RE: Meh
By justjc on 6/4/2011 8:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
Apple was newer really light years ahead, they just delayed the competition enough to make you think so...

When the iPod came out there were alternatives already on the market, but nobody had though about making a slim device using flash memory. Apple develops the first iPod and at the same time they make sure they secure the rights to most of the flash memory being created by making deals with the factories. Result is that no one could make a similar capacity MP3 player at the same price.

When the iPhone came out there was already a couple of phones using touch interfaces, most noticeably the LG KE850 Prada that was the first with a capacitive touchscreen being used for most of the interaction. Functionally the two was even alike until the 3G arrived and made the application store available from the phone in 2008.
Sadly this device made sure that Apple kept the prices on flash memory high and at the same time they made sure capacitive touchscreens came to cost a lot more for the competition.

Before the iPad there were quite a lot of companies small and big that was planning to launch a tablet in 2010. As you might know very few was able to after Apple stepped up. After all when a company like Apple takes over around 60% of the worlds capacity to make touchscreens the prices for the remaining 40% will rise and the sales go to the big guys. This is also the reason no other high end tablet beats the iPad when it comes to pricing of the entry model.

The above is just the parts I'm aware of, there is likely other areas where Apple have made it more expensive for the competition to use a certain technology, and then we haven't even begun talking about their patents, likely killing more than a couple of worthwhile products.

Truth is that Apple have cost us non Apple users a whole lot of money and innovation, by making deals that gives them control of certain technologies.

The only way to stop this abuse is to not buy Apple products


RE: Meh
By KoolAidMan1 on 6/2/2011 11:59:12 PM , Rating: 2
I've been building my own PCs for fourteen years now. I dare you to find me another notebook that has as good a balance of physical interface (keyboard/trackpad), display, battery life, performance, chassis, weight, software/hardware integration, and accessories (international adapters, etc).

Lenovos are all I would otherwise consider at this point, and the price difference there really isn't much at all. Believe it or not, there are consumers and professionals out there who buy Apple hardware and software for very legitimate reasons.

I can also go on and on about the issues the sub-standard Android platform has. The iPhone and iOS are better in all the ways that matter. I'm so glad Microsoft has a decent mobile OS with WP7, it is something that the irrational Apple-haters can get themselves into and they can stop deluding themselves into thinking that Android is a good platform.

- Typed on my self-assembled Windows 7 PC


RE: Meh
By robinthakur on 6/3/2011 11:09:33 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, and they say Apple buyers are smug...FYI, the iPhone4's battery life and the iPad's battery life, not to mention their entire range of laptops are industry leading. The iPhone 1 was completely revolutionary in its interface in 2007, you must have a short memory if you don't remember how hideous the OS's were on SE, Nokia and Motorola phones before Apple showed how it should be done.

They do make simple to use products which work as one would expect without constantly crashing and their support is really good. Why would you want anything otherwise, unless you enjoy configuring devices more than using them? It's not exactly surprising that people are happy to pay for convenience, it has always been this way. I just plug them into iTunes and the rest is pretty much seamless. However don't let the truth get in teh way of a good rant...you're clearly far cleverer than the rest of us.


RE: Meh
By KoolAidMan1 on 6/4/2011 7:03:50 AM , Rating: 1
I'm primarily a PC user, and based on forum and real-life interaction I'm positive that there are greater numbers of PC users who are way more smug and condescending than Mac users. Look here on DT on any given day, they lap that shit up. This quote from Garry who created Garry's Mod cracked me up: http://kotaku.com/5676077/meet-garry-the-guy-who-r...

quote:
Garry's Mod launched on the Mac last month. Mac users are creating stuff as well, though Garry isn't spotting any differences between Mac and Windows users' creativity. "If there's someone in the server on a Mac they're indistinguishable from PC players," he says. "Which is the way it's got to stay since PC gamers are assholes to Mac gamers for some reason."


RE: Meh
By voodoochile123 on 6/4/2011 10:50:02 PM , Rating: 2
For a tech site you sure do get some morons here. There is NO other device that does all the things I need from my iPhone, otherwise I would already have it. Grow up.


RE: Meh
By senbassador on 6/2/2011 6:45:48 PM , Rating: 1
Why did this comment get rated down. Thats actually a pretty well reasoned response.

btw - For the record, I have never in my life owned an Apple product, and don't intend to (at least not in the immediate future). Not because I hate Apple, I don't, I just don't think they suit my needs. For instance, when the iPhone 1 first came out, I didn't have the money to buy a smart phone when all I wanted was to make a phone call, and be able to play that stupid snake game. By the time I had the money and wanted something better, Androids stared coming out, and coincidentally, they're using "Java", something I am familiar with, and one of my hobbies is to write phone apps (none of which are all that great). That, and I like being able to connect my smart phone to my computer via a USB, so that was a deal breaker.

Apple does make pretty decent products, and I can understand why a lot of people want them. I don't get why we can't BOTH 1) make fun of idiots who would stand in line for 24 hours and pay $700 for a phone, AND 2) admire Apple for making a fairly decent product.


RE: Meh
By yxalitis on 6/2/2011 10:00:11 PM , Rating: 2
Why has this been downrated, makes perfect sense to me...

Oh wait, this is DailyTech...that's right!

Silly me


RE: Meh
By cactusdog on 6/5/2011 1:24:35 PM , Rating: 2
This story sounds like Apple's stealth advertising at work again.

They have a long history of being behind these kind of BS "news" stories to promote their brand.

These kind of stories implant a subliminal message in people's brains that "Apple=high value" and "Apple=Status"


I find nothing wrong...
By SilthDraeth on 6/2/2011 12:47:06 PM , Rating: 2
With being able to sell one of your organs. If I could sell a kidney for 60k, I probably would.




By IvanAndreevich on 6/2/2011 12:48:29 PM , Rating: 5
Umm.. you need a better job or something.


By Wiggy Mcshades on 6/2/2011 12:54:51 PM , Rating: 4
the costs associated with missing one of your kidneys, over your life time, probably would add up to well over the 60k you made. Learn something useful that you also enjoy doing and try that route before you long to sell organs.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By JasonMick (blog) on 6/2/2011 12:58:30 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
With being able to sell one of your organs. If I could sell a kidney for 60k, I probably would.


That'd be a pretty bad decision. Given the expense to your health you'd probably lose far more than you gained.

Supposedly you only "need" one kidney, but that presuming a best case scenario. Lo and behold if you drink alcohol, ingest a toxin, eat too much calcium for a few months, etc. and injure your sole remaining kidney reducing its function.

It's normal for humans to sustain a small amount of kidney damage due to their diverse diet. That's part of why we have two kidneys. If we only needed one, evolution would have long ago selected one kidney individuals as it's energetically expensive to grow/sustain organs.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By BladeVenom on 6/2/11, Rating: -1
RE: I find nothing wrong...
By JasonMick (blog) on 6/2/2011 1:33:39 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Everything I've seen says that donating a kidney doesn't affect life expectancy.

There's a lack of conclusive research on the topic, based on my reading...
quote:
If something damages a kidney, it usually damages both of them, so having 2 doesn't mean you have a spare.

Exactly, but the kidney is a highly fractal organ, with multiple renal capsules.

Typically in physiological kidney conditions, like kidney stones, certain renal capsules/vasculature will be damaged, but the entire organ won't be destroyed.

My point is that maybe you only need one kidney best case scenario, but our body has two as it's designed for redundancy.

As our environment creates minor damage to both kidneys, we still have sufficient filtering, thanks to our body's natural overcapacity.

It's a smart design -- which is undone when you remove your "spare" kidney.

To save a loved one it's worth it absolutely, but to sell your organ for money is just stupid.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By AssBall on 6/2/2011 3:27:28 PM , Rating: 2
depends how poor you are and how much money you can make off it

But for 99% of the population, you are right. And this kid got ripped off big time.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By senbassador on 6/2/2011 7:13:56 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the reason why we have 2 kidneys (and two of a lot of organs) in the first place is the result of thousands of years of evolution, predating even primates. For whatever reason (and I am not a biologist), animals that had two kidneys were significantly more likely to pass on their genes than animals that had only one. And as far as I am concerned, if its good enough for my ancient ancestors, its good enough for me. As much as I can use an extra $60k, I think I'll pass.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By Balleroes on 6/4/2011 3:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
Well, the reason why we have 2 kidneys (and two of a lot of organs) in the first place is the result of thousands of years of evolution, predating even primates. For whatever reason (and I am not a biologist), animals that had two kidneys were significantly more likely to get an Ipad than animals that had only one. And as far as I am concerned, if its good enough for my ancient ancestors, its good enough for me. As much as I can use an extra lifetime, i think i will rather get an Ipad.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By Reclaimer77 on 6/3/2011 12:37:55 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
If we only needed one, evolution would have long ago selected one kidney individuals as it's energetically expensive to grow/sustain organs.


More people die from heart disease than kidney failure. I wonder when we'll evolve to have two of those...hmmmm.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By Ben6821 on 6/4/2011 4:35:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's part of why we have two kidneys. If we only needed one, evolution would have long ago selected one kidney individuals as it's energetically expensive to grow/sustain organs.


I see statements like this quite a bit regarding evolution and I don't believe it reflects a proper understanding of the theory. As background, note that permanent genetic changes do NOT happen in response to the environment. They happen at random (i.e. mutations). The environment "selects" among existing organisms, but it has no direct role in creating new organisms.

Now if two kidneys provided a tangible advantage within the context of the environmental conditions of the time, we could argue humans with two kidneys had an advantage at that time , but this statement does not go as far as you think.

I am having difficulty stating the problem clearly, so I will give you an example. Suppose all humans are blind and have one kidney. Suppose a new generation simultaneously developed sight and two kidneys (this is unlikely but possible, even typical). Suppose the second kidney was not needed, and was even harmful because of the energy expense. Two kidneys would persist anyway because that generation also developed sight, which far outweighed the cost of another kidney.

We may see other considerations arise. For example, the same organ may be helpful in some circumstances, and harmful in others, and it need not be true that evolution would force the right number of kidneys at the right time. Conditions may change quickly and evolution may not keep up. The idea that evolution must occur as an incremental series of small improvements is a myth.

The evolution-based argument is not as strong as you think. The following conditions would have to be true:
1) Two kidneys arose within an environment where they were beneficial.
2) The above environment is similar to our current environment (e.g. climate, diet, food availability, medical care, etc...)
3) When two kidneys arose, they were a dominant factor in survival (as compared with other factors such as physical ability, location, intelligence, etc..). This is necessary to prove that evolution "selected" two kidneys because they were beneficial.
4) We assume that if two kidneys had not been beneficial, evolution would have eventually selected just one kidney even if it took a long time. This requires that a single kidney mutation occur at a time when it provided a compelling advantage over two kidneys, and that the single kidney mutation didn't arise simultaneously with major handicaps, forcing this generation to die out.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea.... Bottom line, it need not be true that two kidneys are better than one because we happen to have two right now.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By sprockkets on 6/2/2011 1:26:33 PM , Rating: 2
You know you can sell your organs now and get money for it while you are still alive, and they only take them when you die say in an accident.

Course I have a family that might need it more than the person on the street.

Whatever you do, just make sure Steven P Jobs can't get any of them if he needs a new liver or something...


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By kmmatney on 6/2/2011 11:42:46 PM , Rating: 2
While I don't agree with selling your organs, I do think there should be some compensation for donated organs. For example, the hospital and doctors make tens of thousands of dollars from donated organs (transplat operations), but the family of someone who donates gets nothing. I realize that getting paid for donated organs can lead to bad things - however at the very least your should get funeral costs payed for if organs our donated on your death.


RE: I find nothing wrong...
By Omega215D on 6/3/2011 9:11:52 AM , Rating: 2
You got an organ going there no wonder the sound has so much body...


The nice thing about being human...
By GuinnessKMF on 6/2/2011 1:53:25 PM , Rating: 5
When asked what he would do when the iPad 3 came out, he responded "I have another kidney".




By PrinceGaz on 6/3/2011 9:41:22 AM , Rating: 2
+1


RE: The nice thing about being human...
By chick0n on 6/5/2011 12:54:22 AM , Rating: 2
you can't live without both kidneys

but have NO FEAR ! he can still sellf 1/2 his lungs, 1/2 of his liver. good enough till iPad4 ! OOOOSH !


By GuinnessKMF on 6/6/2011 1:40:05 PM , Rating: 2
Correction, you can live without kidneys, you can't live without the iPad 3 and its integrated toxin filtering system, iDetox.


Kidney is Permanent
By GTVic on 6/2/2011 1:43:01 PM , Rating: 3
What happens when his iPad gets stolen? He should have paid for an insurance policy to make sure his kidney wasn't wasted.




RE: Kidney is Permanent
By JasonMick (blog) on 6/2/2011 3:01:02 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
What happens when his iPad gets stolen? He should have paid for an insurance policy to make sure his kidney wasn't wasted.

To play devil's advocate:
What happens when your kidney is stolen? *paranoid glances at nearby strangers*


RE: Kidney is Permanent
By Omega215D on 6/3/2011 9:13:07 AM , Rating: 2
Soylent iPad is made of people?


Clearly
By icanhascpu on 6/2/2011 4:40:51 PM , Rating: 2
Clearly this is Apples fault. Anyone who says other wise is delusional.

Am I doing it right?




RE: Clearly
By KoolAidMan1 on 6/3/2011 12:01:26 AM , Rating: 2
Steve Jobs took the kid's kidney with his own bare hands.

There, that's better, DT upvote for sure.


Yeah....
By themaster08 on 6/2/2011 3:02:31 PM , Rating: 3
Typical Apple customer.




By Divide Overflow on 6/3/2011 1:07:07 AM , Rating: 3
A fool and his kidney are soon parted.




Why is this an issue?
By TechIsGr8 on 6/2/2011 1:22:54 PM , Rating: 2
Free market at work, nothing to see here, move along.




If you were a klingon
By NovoRei on 6/2/2011 3:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
If you were a klingon you would be rich in China.

Of course, not a warrior anymore as any injure would be fatal.




err
By brian0555 on 6/2/2011 5:22:16 PM , Rating: 2
Buying a piece of tech that'll most likely be garbage in a few years...




What an iDiot and iGnorant tool!
By ie5x on 6/3/2011 2:52:47 AM , Rating: 2
Sadly, that's not the last of them...




Sour Soylent Green Apples
By Shadowmaster625 on 6/3/2011 8:57:04 AM , Rating: 2
Made from the souls of poor people (eloi) to serve the needs of the mighty yuppy consumers (morlochs). A few more decades of this stuff and we really are going to see two completely different species emerge:

1. The fat dumb lazy stupid overfed bribed-by-corrupt-system American too unhealthy to even walk and has to be carried around on a Wall-E Cart. ( tinyurl ycbjclf )

2. The billions of poor around the world who are exploited to produce all the worlds goods, most of which are blindly consumed by the aforementioned fat lazy and stupid.




I wonder if...
By Beavermatic on 6/3/2011 12:24:07 PM , Rating: 2
...he will trade Steve Jobs a pancreas when the Ipad 3's come out?




That's why god gave him two
By havoti97 on 6/3/2011 1:22:22 PM , Rating: 2
He traded a kidney made in China for an iPad made in China.




Come on Charlie!
By geekygirl on 6/3/2011 2:43:49 PM , Rating: 2
Let's go to Candy Mountain Charlie!




Nick the techo brick
By Unknownartist on 6/3/2011 3:04:40 PM , Rating: 2
Theft seems an easier venture than pissing every hour for the rest of your life...




Sad
By marraco on 6/4/2011 12:49:05 PM , Rating: 2
Poor boy. His gadgets will break apart not so long in the future.

Worse. A mac is probably the worst computer to learn about computers. He will not get much in return for his "investment".

Nature did not gave us 2 kidneys just for no reason. Although we can survive with one, we need both.




At This Rate..
By METALMORPHASIS on 6/5/2011 12:54:25 AM , Rating: 2
Pretty soon we will be selling our organs for food, just to eat!
And what about a car or gas for it!




wages
By RivuxGamma on 6/5/2011 12:47:22 PM , Rating: 2
So, are those weekly, bi-weekly, monthly or what?




In other news...
By wordsworm on 6/6/2011 7:28:23 AM , Rating: 2
Steve Jobs' new kidney has improved his health considerably.

/joke




Unfortunately...
By bplewis24 on 6/2/2011 1:04:57 PM , Rating: 1
His kidney had a better chance of supporting flash sites than his new iPad2 does :(




By chick0n on 6/5/2011 12:35:34 AM , Rating: 1
I think this kid needs to die.

First thing first is that , he sold his kidney for a fucking electronic device that he doesn't need. People are so pathetic these days that they lack self-confidence so much that they "thought" some "iDevice" would help them in some way.

but that's not all, the biggest reason I think he needs to die is that ---------- in China's Black Market, a healthy kidney can sell for at LEAST 200K RMB, usually goes around 300K and he sold it for 20K. Talk about fuxking retard ?

hmm yeah, he needs to die, he is such a waste of time.




"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki