“While body is not me or mine what is a wise response to those claiming various degrees of ownerships on body?” is the title of a now closed forum post. The closed post in full:
What are some kind, wholesome, skillful, wise and helpful responses and views to the following various claims of body ownership:
“The United States government claims 100% ownership over all your DNA and reproductive rights. This astonishing revelation has emerged from the fact that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office claims the power to assign ownership of your DNA to private companies and universities who apply for patents on your genes.
To date, more than 4,000 genes have been assigned ownership to corporations and universities by the U.S. patent office. Such an assignment of ownership proves that the government believes it owns 100% of all human genes — you cannot transfer ownership of something unless you first own it yourself.
To date, 20 percent of your genetic code is owned by someone else. About two-thirds of these patents belong to private companies, and one-third belong to universities. The company that owns the most patents is called Incyte, a drug company based in California which “owns” the patents on 2,000 human genes.” Via https://www.naturalnews.com/040400_gene_patents_genetic_slavery_human_DNA.html
And from 2012 via http://anh-usa.org/fda-new-claim-body-is-a-drug/ :
…[The] FDA says your own stem cells are drugs—and stem cell therapy is interstate commerce because it affects the bottom line of FDA-approved drugs in other states!
We wish this were a joke, but it’s the US Food and Drug Administration’s latest claim in its battle with a Colorado clinic over its Regenexx-C™ procedure, a non-surgical treatment for people suffering from moderate to severe joint or bone pain using adult stem cells.
The FDA asserts in a court document that it has the right to regulate the Centeno-Schultz Medical Clinic for two reasons:
1) Stem cells are drugs and therefore fall within their jurisdiction. (The clinic argues that stem cell therapy is the practice of medicine and is therefore not within the FDA’s jurisdiction!)
2) The clinic is engaging in interstate commerce and is therefore subject to FDA regulation because any part of the machine or procedure that originates outside Colorado becomes interstate commerce once it enters the state. Moreover, interstate commerce is substantially affected because individuals traveling to Colorado to have the Regenexx procedure would “depress the market for out-of-state drugs that are approved by FDA.”
[note: full articles linked here link to source documents]
Reasoning given for closing the post: governments can also put the human body in prison, or tax it, or kill it, or assign it a birth certificate and a nationality, and so on, but there is no Buddhist related question.
Fair enough. Yes, explaining the interrelationship of the potential violation of human rights mentioned above with Buddhist doctrine, thought, ethics, practice, worldview, etc, would likely help better fit into the decorum and proceedings at Buddhism Stack Exchange. At the same time could this post not being allowed public indicate a hot button, controversial topic?
How can we harmoniously — and in concord with all — convey, remedy, and resolve the reality of abuse potential from various forces claiming ownership on humanity?
The title and body of the second closed post:
Which (semi)secret societies influence Buddhism?
What are the names of the (semi)secret societies — any and/or all of them — that have influenced, are influencing (and, via common consent, may influence in the future) Buddhism?
and further comment:
To clarify, the key word here is “influence.” Not so much that there are secret Buddhists withholding secret Dhamma. Rather, we can see how some large public organizations are now very interested in the popularity of mindfulness which may result in a knock-on effect on “Buddhism.” Where attention goes, energy flows. So then, why wouldn’t those in power attempt to exert influence? Furthermore, wouldn’t those in power (outside of Buddhism) have less power if they were 100% transparent? As a reference please look to the vast amount of State secrets and the “security clearances” involved.
Summarizing some replies:
- Theosophical Society shaping Theravada and constructing the term “Early Buddhism”
- financing of some monastics to promote certain views
- incentive for those in power to not promote true enlightenment
- those in power steering the scientific community and public in directions in order to maintain power
This post was deemed “opinion-based” and closed.