It know it is not an easy topic but this is something we have to face sooner or later. So, I'll share it for one…
---
* A chimera is an organism with DNA from another regardless if it's the same or different species. There are natural and lab/artificial chimeras even in humans. There were recorded cases of natural human chimera, and in one it caused issues for a mother who was trying to claim a medical benefit for her child (their DNA aren't matching, until someone familiar forwarded it to a scientist).
A chimera is not the same as what's depicted in fiction. What fiction calls a chimera is actually called a hybrid.
* Embryo fusion happens naturally and lab/artificially. It is two (or more) embryos that merged and became one being. Yes, it can happen with humans too, and is not uncommon in fraternal pregnancy. Sometimes, the fraternal twins merge and become a single embryo.
Like in natural human chimera, it can sometimes cause issues because the person have traits of both embryos. For example, one part is darker and the other lighter. Or one eye looks Western but the other is Asian. One trait came from the other embryo.
They do embryo fusion in labs too. Yes, human embryo fusion. But they don't let it grow, or at least no one admitted of doing so.
* Embryo twinning is splitting an embryo into two to produce identical twins. There's natural and lab/artificial. The first artificial human embryo twinning was in the 90s, in Australia.
* Frozen embryo is nothing new, obviously, it's standard in IVF clinics. Recently, a baby was born that was frozen as an embryo since the 90s (IIRC the decade).
So, yeah, welcome to the real world. You can read peer-reviewed papers about these technologies.
And human cloning (not human embryo twinning, which is confused as "cloning") is the only one outlawed by the entire world.
It know it is not an easy topic but this is something we have to face sooner or later. So, I'll share it for one final time.
1. We've had rDNA (Recombinant DNA) since the 70s 2. IVF since the 80s 3. Lab/artificial embryo twinning (produces identical twins) since the 90s 4. We completed the human genome map since the early 00s 5. We've been doing lab/artificial human chimeras since who knows when 6. We've been doing lab/artificial embryo fusion for a long time already as well
Who knows what other technologies we have since bioengineering started in the 60s. It's 2025 already, with all these technologies and knowledge, do anyone still seriously think this is nothing but a stuff of fiction?
We've been able to clone human embryo (not embryo twinning) since the 90s! This was simply blocked by many governments so no one is publicly admitting they're doing human cloning!
That's the reality of the world and era we're living in.
this was so far-fetched 😂but I still found it fun to watch if I ignored logic. the action scenes were decent
Not really far-fetched, we already have the technologies needed, and humanity has been doing baby farms, and buying/selling people since B.C.E.
1. rDNA (Recombinant DNA) has been around since the 70s - completely legal
2. IVF has been done since the 80s - also legal
3. Human embryo twinning has been done since the 90s - also legal. Embryo twinning is splitting an embryo to produce an identical twin. The first successful human embryo twinning was in Australia in the 90s. (P.s. Natural embryo twinning is, well, natural, that's how identical twins are made. Lab/artificial embryo twinning is what we did in the 90s.)
4. Surrogacy is legal in many countries, others are neutral, while some it's illegal (It's illegal here in the Philippines even for medical reasons, so mothers go to other countries to do it.)
5. Human embryo freezing has been around since the 80s and perfected in the 90s. Just recently, a baby was born who was originally conceived in the late 90s (IIRC the decade). The baby was frozen as an embryo for decades.
And we haven't even touched the newer technologies in the 00s, 10s, and 20s.
Bioengineering began in the 60s, IIRC the date. We completed the full human DNA map in the early 2000s. We've created vaccines and modified human embryo DNA to "fix" DNA anomalies.
This story is simply the worst-case scenario. A what-if.
What if we combine human desire for revenge and perfection with all these technologies and it there is a person who revived the old practice of baby farms and buying/selling? And what if this person treats these babies as nothing but products? And what if the parents desperate for a perfect child are in to it? What if?
For all we know, it is actually happening already. We have been perfecting all these technologies for decades, I sersiously doubt there are no black labs (government-sanctioned) and underground labs (unregistered) already producing human babies for whatever purpose:
- easy access to human subjects for vaccine tests - soldiers - next evolution of humanity - disposable agents and assassins - or simply to give desperate couples a child of their own based on their own DNA
We can even do real human cloning since the late 90s! Governments simply made it illegal so no one is doing it. But embryo twinning is not illegal. Who's to say couples who go through IVF are not secretly being duped? For every IVF request, they secretly do embryo twinning? The only illegal thing there is doing it secretly, and without permission, but embryo twinning is perfectly legal.
You can do your research about it. But I strongly suggest reading peer-reviewed papers because that's where you'll actually realize how far we have achieved already.
This drama started out so promising, now it's just disappointing. Instead of showing the growth and ingenuity…
I've been thinking about that fince last week.
The only reason I can come up with is the writer and director opted for the rare probability that "since the kids were traumatised, lack social exposure and formal education, they must still be 10-year olds in mind and emotion".
What makes this show great is the fact that it challenges the preconcieved notions, biases, and long-held traditions and interpretations by people about the technologies involved and the logic and/or reasoning behing why people choose it.
For example, a couple who wants a child but they can't. Adoption is an option, yes, but they want something from their own DNA that only technologies such as depicted in this show can provide (mind you, many of which already exists for decades).
But let's push the boundaries further.
1. There's a frozen master embryo that they use for couples. 2. They duplicate that embryo either by cloning or embryo twinning (the latter produces an identical twin). 3. But before that embryo "copy" is placed in a womb, it undergoes rDNA (Recombinant DNA) bioengineering. 4. That "copy" grows, they study it, and then incorporate the good stuff into the master embryo. 5. Repeat the process from Step №2.
Now what are you going to do? 1. As a parent 2. As a scientist 3. As a politician 4. As a stranger 5. As one of the copies
Most especially №5, "What would you do as one of the copies?" - Sanction killing - Sanction imprisonment in laboratories - Let your copies live knowing the legal system will definitely arrest everyone anyway, and society will discriminate against you all
Think about it, you are all copies. No one is an original. The "original" or "master embryo" is a frozen embryo in a lab that was already heavily bioengineered based on the results from copies, one of whic is __you__.
So, they finally revealed the villain's background. We can summarise it to:
1. Irresponsible parents 2. Bullying 3. Discrimination 4. Environment 5. Lack of moral guidance
So, she became the villain she is today. She has a deep deep deep bitterness against the world. Instead of killing herself, she chose to create what is impossible. Unfortunately, imperfect beings can never create nor achieve true perfection—that's the fundamental truth of all realities.
Combine that with her deep bitterness and insatiable thirst to control people, she will continue to tarnish the technologies and kill hundreds, if not thousands, of people.
It truly justifies AH1's conclusion: kill her, period.
Holy sh*t! That's the craziest, most twisted, writing I've ever seen!
I've read a thousand books. I've watched a thousand movies. I've seen more than half a thousand TV series and anime. I've read almost half a thousand comics (manga, webtoon, etc.).
yeah munchausen by proxy is old hat in medical dramas (I've seen crime shows and first responder shows do it as…
Yep. It's really not a good idea to watch two shows with similar themes. 😅 The more similar they are, the easier to mix them. 😅 Not to mention, similar styles, similar face shape, and even shared actors. 🤯
1) this is modern times and she is older, I can understand clueless teenager but an older woman in modern days…
Oh, so them agreeing not to have a child is "not in the drama"? Sorry, I thought it was, I guess you're right.
> this is modern times and she is older, I can understand clueless teenager but an older woman in modern days should be aware of different birth control modalities
Is it also in the drama how "an older woman in modern days should be aware of different birth control modalites"?
I don't remember watching any of that so far, not even implied or hinted. Again, I'm sorry. I might have missed it.
I also think the same. How come she is pregnant with her second husband । He did not want a child in the first…
1. Are people not allowed to change their minds?
2. She possibly saw something that made her decide, and he agreed, it's best for them to have no child. In her new situation and husband, those reasons don't exist.
3. If they had a pre-nuptial agreement, which is legally binding, then it grants her every right to abort the embryo with or without his knowledge and/or consent because the pre-nuptial agreement was agreed by both parties and thus it automatically grants his approval.
It probably had something like, "Mr. ___ and Ms. ___ both agreed to not have any children, natural or adopted. If the event of a pregnancy, both parties agreed Ms. ___ is granted the option of abortion at any time during the first four months of pregnancy, otherwise, the child will be put in an adoption agency of their choosing."
We don't know how much protection Korean law bestows upon a child still in the mother's womb. You can practically put anything in a pre-nuptial agreement as long as it is not against any laws at the time it was drafted and signed by both parties. And if both signed, it is legally binding and automatically grants agreement where needed, clarified or not. That's how contracts work and a pre-nuptial agreement is a contract made by, agreed upon, and signed by soon-to-be-wed couples that they must follow or can use if needed.
Since this is a law drama, assume they had a pre-nuptial agreement. He is, after all, supposedly the best litigation lawyer. He should be aware not to enter into marriage without a pre-nuptial agreement.
The ex-wife is not nice: she didn't want a baby with him, but now she is pregnant with his friend. I assume she…
1.Are people not allowed to change their minds?
2. She probably thought it's better for them to not have a child. But her new situation and new husband, she didn't see reasons not to have a child. Is it evil?
3. Having a child or not has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with love. Not even the Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians, Egyptians, Norse, think that way. The ancients themselves understood this.
That line of thinking is very offensive. Try to say that to your friends and relatives who chose not to have a child, not even adopt, and see how your relationship with them change.
So the ex Wife got together with a friend of theirs, out of all the men in the world, it was him.. It seems the…
> out of all the men in the world, it was him
You do know that when people are depressed, emotionally in pain, hurt, they can easily fall for the person who they're opening up with?
Here in the Philippines we even call that lucky/unlucky guy or girl, "rebound". Some lucky ones get married later but usually not.
Yes, it can take 2 years or more.
In fact, I'll probably go on and say, it took them 2 years because their mutual friend made sure to keep their relationship platonic. He doesn't want to be a rebound and make it awkward for them later.
It took her that long to actually sort herself and move on. When the bestie finally saw she's ready, 2 years already passed.
Does it happen it real life? A lot. It just is not a money-grabbing story. Not everyone is an *ss. Besides, being a rebound? The rebound is the one who'll get hurt the most. For the other person, it usually simply feels like turning a switch off or waking from a dream. I know because despite knowing this, I risked everything, in the end I lost everything.
> Bro code got broken
Nothing was broken other than someone's ego and controlling nature.
This childish "bro code" is just a macho name for "bullying everyone to get in line".
ALL IS FAIR IN LOVE AND WAR. Not some childish "bro code".
Absolutely no one can dictate who people can love and marry. You can say your reasons but at the end of the day, they have all the rights to love and marry who they want.
Whatever is your personal opinion or view in "your best friend or relative or sibling marrying your ex-wife or ex-husband", that is your own personal opinion and view, you can not force other people to subscribe to it. Otherwise, you're bullying and controlling.
And in a law drama like this? Saying, "she's my ex and you're my best friend" is him forgetting the law.
Oh. And "bro code" is not under morality either. Morality is different from ethical. If you're going to insist on "bro code", it falls under ethical. Even then it is highly questionable. The United Nations Convention on Human Rights values individuality and freedom. This "bro code" goes against that. It's dicatorship. It's bullying. It's nothing but control disguised as some unwritten macho rule.
TBF even if it was after 50 years, some would still feel betrayed if their close friend got together with their…
LOL. That "bro code" is just another way of saying "I rule over you".
I've been in one.such situation.
A member of our tight-knit organization was whining about how he was the first to woo a girl, and I should've waited until it was my turn.
Was he correct with his "bro code"? No.
All is fair in love and war.
In our case, if you need other guys to fall in line and wait for you to stop before they can woo the same girl, it means you are weak and have nothing to offer. If you think you're a better person, then there's nothing to be afraid of even if there are a million guys going after her.
I can't remember if I confrontend him about it because the rumours where going around about how I broke some childish "bro code". But it didn't affect me. She chose me too. 🤣
All is fair in love and war.
No, there is nothing fair about "bro code". It's a form of bullying labelled to make it sound like "macho". And if you break it, it gives the supposed "victim" justification to take their revenge however they want because "bro code".
P.s. I'm reacting to "bro code", I'm not saying you believe in it. 🖖🏽
1 
* A chimera is an organism with DNA from another regardless if it's the same or different species. There are natural and lab/artificial chimeras even in humans. There were recorded cases of natural human chimera, and in one it caused issues for a mother who was trying to claim a medical benefit for her child (their DNA aren't matching, until someone familiar forwarded it to a scientist).
A chimera is not the same as what's depicted in fiction. What fiction calls a chimera is actually called a hybrid.
* Embryo fusion happens naturally and lab/artificially. It is two (or more) embryos that merged and became one being. Yes, it can happen with humans too, and is not uncommon in fraternal pregnancy. Sometimes, the fraternal twins merge and become a single embryo.
Like in natural human chimera, it can sometimes cause issues because the person have traits of both embryos. For example, one part is darker and the other lighter. Or one eye looks Western but the other is Asian. One trait came from the other embryo.
They do embryo fusion in labs too. Yes, human embryo fusion. But they don't let it grow, or at least no one admitted of doing so.
* Embryo twinning is splitting an embryo into two to produce identical twins. There's natural and lab/artificial. The first artificial human embryo twinning was in the 90s, in Australia.
* Frozen embryo is nothing new, obviously, it's standard in IVF clinics. Recently, a baby was born that was frozen as an embryo since the 90s (IIRC the decade).
So, yeah, welcome to the real world. You can read peer-reviewed papers about these technologies.
And human cloning (not human embryo twinning, which is confused as "cloning") is the only one outlawed by the entire world.
1. We've had rDNA (Recombinant DNA) since the 70s
2. IVF since the 80s
3. Lab/artificial embryo twinning (produces identical twins) since the 90s
4. We completed the human genome map since the early 00s
5. We've been doing lab/artificial human chimeras since who knows when
6. We've been doing lab/artificial embryo fusion for a long time already as well
Who knows what other technologies we have since bioengineering started in the 60s. It's 2025 already, with all these technologies and knowledge, do anyone still seriously think this is nothing but a stuff of fiction?
We've been able to clone human embryo (not embryo twinning) since the 90s! This was simply blocked by many governments so no one is publicly admitting they're doing human cloning!
That's the reality of the world and era we're living in.
1. rDNA (Recombinant DNA) has been around since the 70s - completely legal
2. IVF has been done since the 80s - also legal
3. Human embryo twinning has been done since the 90s - also legal. Embryo twinning is splitting an embryo to produce an identical twin. The first successful human embryo twinning was in Australia in the 90s. (P.s. Natural embryo twinning is, well, natural, that's how identical twins are made. Lab/artificial embryo twinning is what we did in the 90s.)
4. Surrogacy is legal in many countries, others are neutral, while some it's illegal (It's illegal here in the Philippines even for medical reasons, so mothers go to other countries to do it.)
5. Human embryo freezing has been around since the 80s and perfected in the 90s. Just recently, a baby was born who was originally conceived in the late 90s (IIRC the decade). The baby was frozen as an embryo for decades.
And we haven't even touched the newer technologies in the 00s, 10s, and 20s.
Bioengineering began in the 60s, IIRC the date. We completed the full human DNA map in the early 2000s. We've created vaccines and modified human embryo DNA to "fix" DNA anomalies.
This story is simply the worst-case scenario. A what-if.
What if we combine human desire for revenge and perfection with all these technologies and it there is a person who revived the old practice of baby farms and buying/selling? And what if this person treats these babies as nothing but products? And what if the parents desperate for a perfect child are in to it? What if?
For all we know, it is actually happening already. We have been perfecting all these technologies for decades, I sersiously doubt there are no black labs (government-sanctioned) and underground labs (unregistered) already producing human babies for whatever purpose:
- easy access to human subjects for vaccine tests
- soldiers
- next evolution of humanity
- disposable agents and assassins
- or simply to give desperate couples a child of their own based on their own DNA
We can even do real human cloning since the late 90s! Governments simply made it illegal so no one is doing it. But embryo twinning is not illegal. Who's to say couples who go through IVF are not secretly being duped? For every IVF request, they secretly do embryo twinning? The only illegal thing there is doing it secretly, and without permission, but embryo twinning is perfectly legal.
You can do your research about it. But I strongly suggest reading peer-reviewed papers because that's where you'll actually realize how far we have achieved already.
🖖🏽
That's how it is for us. But for people who had such an experience? For them it's justified.
So, that brings us to the question: Whose standards should we follow? Who defines what is moral and immoral? The law? Religion? To each their own?
/philosophy
😉
The only reason I can come up with is the writer and director opted for the rare probability that "since the kids were traumatised, lack social exposure and formal education, they must still be 10-year olds in mind and emotion".
For example, a couple who wants a child but they can't. Adoption is an option, yes, but they want something from their own DNA that only technologies such as depicted in this show can provide (mind you, many of which already exists for decades).
But let's push the boundaries further.
1. There's a frozen master embryo that they use for couples.
2. They duplicate that embryo either by cloning or embryo twinning (the latter produces an identical twin).
3. But before that embryo "copy" is placed in a womb, it undergoes rDNA (Recombinant DNA) bioengineering.
4. That "copy" grows, they study it, and then incorporate the good stuff into the master embryo.
5. Repeat the process from Step №2.
Now what are you going to do?
1. As a parent
2. As a scientist
3. As a politician
4. As a stranger
5. As one of the copies
Most especially №5, "What would you do as one of the copies?"
- Sanction killing
- Sanction imprisonment in laboratories
- Let your copies live knowing the legal system will definitely arrest everyone anyway, and society will discriminate against you all
Think about it, you are all copies. No one is an original. The "original" or "master embryo" is a frozen embryo in a lab that was already heavily bioengineered based on the results from copies, one of whic is __you__.
How would you feel? How would you think?
1. Irresponsible parents
2. Bullying
3. Discrimination
4. Environment
5. Lack of moral guidance
Unless we do …
1. Irresponsible parents
2. Bullying
3. Discrimination
4. Environment
5. Lack of moral guidance
So, she became the villain she is today. She has a deep deep deep bitterness against the world. Instead of killing herself, she chose to create what is impossible. Unfortunately, imperfect beings can never create nor achieve true perfection—that's the fundamental truth of all realities.
Combine that with her deep bitterness and insatiable thirst to control people, she will continue to tarnish the technologies and kill hundreds, if not thousands, of people.
It truly justifies AH1's conclusion: kill her, period.
Holy sh*t! That's the craziest, most twisted, writing I've ever seen!
I've read a thousand books. I've watched a thousand movies. I've seen more than half a thousand TV series and anime. I've read almost half a thousand comics (manga, webtoon, etc.).
I thought I've seen it all until The Defects E07!
> this is modern times and she is older, I can understand clueless teenager but an older woman in modern days should be aware of different birth control modalities
Is it also in the drama how "an older woman in modern days should be aware of different birth control modalites"?
I don't remember watching any of that so far, not even implied or hinted. Again, I'm sorry. I might have missed it.
Can you be so polite as to point it out for me?
Great eye! Thank you for pointing it out. 🙇🏽
2. She possibly saw something that made her decide, and he agreed, it's best for them to have no child. In her new situation and husband, those reasons don't exist.
3. If they had a pre-nuptial agreement, which is legally binding, then it grants her every right to abort the embryo with or without his knowledge and/or consent because the pre-nuptial agreement was agreed by both parties and thus it automatically grants his approval.
It probably had something like, "Mr. ___ and Ms. ___ both agreed to not have any children, natural or adopted. If the event of a pregnancy, both parties agreed Ms. ___ is granted the option of abortion at any time during the first four months of pregnancy, otherwise, the child will be put in an adoption agency of their choosing."
We don't know how much protection Korean law bestows upon a child still in the mother's womb. You can practically put anything in a pre-nuptial agreement as long as it is not against any laws at the time it was drafted and signed by both parties. And if both signed, it is legally binding and automatically grants agreement where needed, clarified or not. That's how contracts work and a pre-nuptial agreement is a contract made by, agreed upon, and signed by soon-to-be-wed couples that they must follow or can use if needed.
Since this is a law drama, assume they had a pre-nuptial agreement. He is, after all, supposedly the best litigation lawyer. He should be aware not to enter into marriage without a pre-nuptial agreement.
2. She probably thought it's better for them to not have a child. But her new situation and new husband, she didn't see reasons not to have a child. Is it evil?
3. Having a child or not has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with love. Not even the Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians, Egyptians, Norse, think that way. The ancients themselves understood this.
That line of thinking is very offensive. Try to say that to your friends and relatives who chose not to have a child, not even adopt, and see how your relationship with them change.
Says who?
ALL IS FAIR IN LOVE AND WAR.
You do know that when people are depressed, emotionally in pain, hurt, they can easily fall for the person who they're opening up with?
Here in the Philippines we even call that lucky/unlucky guy or girl, "rebound". Some lucky ones get married later but usually not.
Yes, it can take 2 years or more.
In fact, I'll probably go on and say, it took them 2 years because their mutual friend made sure to keep their relationship platonic. He doesn't want to be a rebound and make it awkward for them later.
It took her that long to actually sort herself and move on. When the bestie finally saw she's ready, 2 years already passed.
Does it happen it real life? A lot. It just is not a money-grabbing story. Not everyone is an *ss. Besides, being a rebound? The rebound is the one who'll get hurt the most. For the other person, it usually simply feels like turning a switch off or waking from a dream. I know because despite knowing this, I risked everything, in the end I lost everything.
> Bro code got broken
Nothing was broken other than someone's ego and controlling nature.
This childish "bro code" is just a macho name for "bullying everyone to get in line".
ALL IS FAIR IN LOVE AND WAR. Not some childish "bro code".
Absolutely no one can dictate who people can love and marry. You can say your reasons but at the end of the day, they have all the rights to love and marry who they want.
Whatever is your personal opinion or view in "your best friend or relative or sibling marrying your ex-wife or ex-husband", that is your own personal opinion and view, you can not force other people to subscribe to it. Otherwise, you're bullying and controlling.
And in a law drama like this? Saying, "she's my ex and you're my best friend" is him forgetting the law.
Oh. And "bro code" is not under morality either. Morality is different from ethical. If you're going to insist on "bro code", it falls under ethical. Even then it is highly questionable. The United Nations Convention on Human Rights values individuality and freedom. This "bro code" goes against that. It's dicatorship. It's bullying. It's nothing but control disguised as some unwritten macho rule.
ALL IS FAIR IN LOVE AND WAR.
I've been in one.such situation.
A member of our tight-knit organization was whining about how he was the first to woo a girl, and I should've waited until it was my turn.
Was he correct with his "bro code"? No.
All is fair in love and war.
In our case, if you need other guys to fall in line and wait for you to stop before they can woo the same girl, it means you are weak and have nothing to offer. If you think you're a better person, then there's nothing to be afraid of even if there are a million guys going after her.
I can't remember if I confrontend him about it because the rumours where going around about how I broke some childish "bro code". But it didn't affect me. She chose me too. 🤣
All is fair in love and war.
No, there is nothing fair about "bro code". It's a form of bullying labelled to make it sound like "macho". And if you break it, it gives the supposed "victim" justification to take their revenge however they want because "bro code".
P.s. I'm reacting to "bro code", I'm not saying you believe in it. 🖖🏽