Comment on "Does Hitler have a right to privacy?" and other big questions in research ethics.

BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

The results, which are now under peer review, are indeed fascinating.

It is the first time Hitler’s DNA has been identified, and over the course of four years, scientists were able to sequence it to see the genetic makeup of one of the world’s most horrific tyrants.

What is certain, experts say, is that Hitler did not have Jewish ancestry - a rumour that had been circulating since the 1920s.

Another key finding is that he had Kallmann syndrome, a genetic disorder that, among other things, can affect puberty and the development of sexual organs. In particular, it can lead to a micropenis and undescended testes - which, if you know the British war-time song, had been another rumour flying around about Hitler.

Kallmann syndrome can also affect the libido, which is particularly interesting, said historian and Potsdam University lecturer Dr Alex Kay, who is featured in the documentary.

“It tells us a lot about his private life - or more accurately, that he didn’t have a private life,” he explains.

Hi, yes, question from the back of the room here: why is Hitler’s right to privacy the main controversy and not the fact that this work in no way shape or form represents an advancement in scientific knowledge? What’s “fascinating” about findings that he “might have” had a micropenis or the possibilities that entails for his sex life? Why is this how supposedly intelligent people are choosing to spend their time?

source
Sort:hotnewtop