"Procedures" and "something" in my sentence

[Rachel Adams]

Hello.

I read that "corpses" are used to improve car safety.
If I say, for example, "It is ethically wrong to use corpses for something even for improving car safety procedures" would it be correct? I am not sure I can use "something" I think I should use "anything". I would also remove "procedures" and write instead "I think it is unethical to use corpses for improving car safety." "Ethically wrong" I changed into "unethical."
From Vorhees Duane "Topic-Discussion Textbook What Do You Think? 30 Controversial Issues Today for Very-Advanced Classes"

 

[emsr2d2]

I read that "corpses" are used to improve car safety.

If I [STRIKE]say[/STRIKE] said, for example, "It is [STRIKE]ethically wrong[/STRIKE] unethical to use corpses for something, even for improving car safety", [STRIKE]procedures"[/STRIKE] would it be correct?

I am not sure I can use "something". I think I should use "anything". Both are possible.

I would also remove "procedures" and write instead "I think it is unethical to use corpses for improving car safety."
I changed "Ethically wrong" [STRIKE]I changed[/STRIKE] into "unethical".
As you can see from my changes to your example sentence, I would make the same changes.

From Vorhees Duane's no quotation marks here topic-discussion textbook "What Do You Think? 30 Controversial Issues Today for Very no hyphen here Advanced Classes".

Note my corrections and comments above. Which sentences were taken from that textbook?

 

[Rachel Adams]

Note my corrections and comments above. Which sentences were taken from that textbook?

All the sentences are mine. Thank you very much for your detailed corrections. Can I say "I once read that it was also suggested to use guilty people's corpses/bodies or the corpses/bodies of donors/volunteers who agreed to their bodies being used in such experiments?"

I used both "corpses" and "bodies", "donors" and "volunteers" I am not sure I can use all if them and I also think "guilty people's corpses" is wrong.

I would rephrase it in the following way, "I once read that it had been suggested to use the bodies of people who were found guilty and executed as well as the bodies of the volunteers who agreed to take part in such experiments just like the people who agreed to donate their organs."

This scary opinion is not mine.

 

[emsr2d2]

All the sentences are mine. Thank you very much for your detailed corrections. Can I say "I once read that it was also suggested [STRIKE]to use[/STRIKE] that [STRIKE]guilty people's[/STRIKE] executed criminals' corpses/bodies, or [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] those [STRIKE]corpses/bodies[/STRIKE] of donors/volunteers [STRIKE]who agreed to their bodies[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]being[/STRIKE] be used in such experiments"?

I used [STRIKE]both[/STRIKE] "corpses" and "bodies", and "donors" and "volunteers". I am not sure I can use all if them and I also think "guilty people's corpses" is wrong.

I would rephrase it in the following way, "I once read that it had been suggested to use the bodies of people who were found guilty and executed as well as the bodies of the volunteers who agreed to take part in such experiments just like the people who agreed to donate their organs." See my amended version above.

This [STRIKE]scary opinion[/STRIKE] idea is not mine.

First, I should say that I now realise that you meant that you had taken the topic from that textbook, not that it was the source of any of the text.

Please note my changes above. Your long example sentence was a bit wordy and hard to correct yet keep it readable, so if you're struggling to work out what I'm suggesting, here it is:

I once read that it has been suggested that executed criminals' corpses/bodies, or those of donors/volunteers, be used in such experiments.

As you can see, I've left "corpses/bodies" because they mean the same thing (in this context). I prefer "donors" for the second part, perhaps even "body donors", but "volunteers" could be taken to mean that the people are still alive when used for the experiment.

I have deleted "scary opinion" because it's not an opinion - it's an idea or a suggestion. You could say "This idea is not mine - in fact, I find it scary".

 

[Rachel Adams]

Thank you so much. I used the past perfect, because I thought it was correct there in my sentence, as it had been first suggested and then later I read about it.
Can I use "cadavers"?

"I once read that it has been suggested that executed criminals' cadavers, or those of donors/volunteers, be used in such experiments."
Or "I once read that it has been suggested that cadavers of executed criminals' or those of donors/volunteers, be used in such experiments."

"I once read that it has been suggested that body donors, be used in such experiments." Is this how I can use "body donors"?

 

[GoesStation]

"I once read that it has been suggested that body donors, be used in such experiments." Is this how I can use "body donors"?

Aren't the researchers going to wait until the the donors die?

You could, at a stretch, say "donor bodies". Or you could move on to a less gruesome question.

 

[emsr2d2]

"Body donor" is OK, in my opinion. It's possible now to volunteer to leave your body to medical science (or to Gunther von Hagens and his plastination exhibitions) and I believe the people who sign those agreements are referred to as body donors.

 

[Rachel Adams]

"Body donor" is OK, in my opinion. It's possible now to volunteer to leave your body to medical science (or to Gunther von Hagens and his plastination exhibitions) and I believe the people who sign those agreements are referred to as body donors.

I used "being" here as well and it was wrong. "Can I say "I once read that it was also suggested to use guilty people's corpses/bodies or the corpses/bodies of donors/volunteers who agreed to their bodies being used in such experiments."
I mean this part "...agreed to their bodies being used..." Is it used in passive when we talk about people or animals or things in general?

 

[GoesStation]

"Body donor" is OK, in my opinion. It's possible now to volunteer to leave your body to medical science (or to Gunther von Hagens and his plastination exhibitions) and I believe the people who sign those agreements are referred to as body donors.

They are. The problem is that "body donors" are living people, unless you're talking about them in the past. Rachel is talking about corpses.

 

[emsr2d2]

"Body donors" are only alive when they sign the agreement. The point of the agreement is that, after they die, their body can be used by medical science for research. I'm not talking about people who volunteer to take part in medical experiments on the living. "Body" in "body donor" is understood to mean "corpse".

 

[Tarheel]

I would use executed criminals and not guilty people.

 

[emsr2d2]

I would use executed criminals and not guilty people.

I made that alteration in post #4. "Guilty people" aren't necessarily dead so you can't use the phrase on its own if you're talking only about corpses.

 

[Rachel Adams]

I made that alteration in post #4. "Guilty people" aren't necessarily dead so you can't use the phrase on its own if you're talking only about corpses.

But if I am not really talking about "criminals" but about people who had a fatal car accident which killed them and other people who were involved in the accident, what would be the best way to refer to them? I used "People responsible for crimes" that's in case I am talking about different crimes but I am not sure in my context it's correct.

 

[emsr2d2]

But if I am not really talking about "criminals" but about people who had a fatal car accident which killed them and other people who were involved in the accident, what would be the best way to refer to them? I used "People responsible for crimes" that's in case I am talking about different crimes but I am not sure in my context it's correct.

Now I'm more confused. People who are killed in a car crash are neither criminals nor have they been executed. They are accident victims. Other people who are involved in accidents but don't die aren't dead (obviously!) They might or might not be criminals - they might already have a criminal record or they might have caused an accident through some criminal act (such as drink-driving).

You need to be more clear. You said you saw a suggestion that certain people's bodies be used to improve car safety. Exactly who are those people?

 

[Rachel Adams]

You need to be more clear. You said you saw a suggestion that certain people's bodies be used to improve car safety. Exactly who are those people?

I am sorry if I confused you. They are people who caused the car accident while drunk. They didn't survive the accident either.

 

[emsr2d2]

Someone who dies in a car accident because they were drunk is not, legally, a criminal. If they survived the accident, they would probably face criminal charges but, except in very rare circumstances, charges are not brought against people after their death.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Someone who dies in a car accident because they were drunk is not, legally, a criminal. If they survived the accident, they would probably face criminal charges but, except in very rare circumstances, charges are not brought against people after their death.

What do call those who survive the accident and face criminal charges? They aren't called "criminals" either.

 

[emsr2d2]

In court, they'd be called "the defendant" or "the accused". If they're found guilty, they would officially have a criminal record so it's possible to refer to them as a criminal. If they're found not guilty, they're not referred to as anything in particular.

I am, of course, not including the regular use of the word "criminal" to refer to anyone who breaks the law, regardless of whether they get caught. You will hear people saying "There's a gang of criminals going round stealing cars in my area at the moment. Be aware!" Everyone knows what they mean and that is one of the definitions of the word.

I think part of the problem is the context you chose. If we'd been talking about a burglar or a shoplifter, I don't think we'd be debating the use of the word "criminal". It's the drink-driving aspect that's making it more complicated. It's a very specific offence and it's usually referred to by name. I'd say "My friend's brother was killed by a drink-driver just before his 18th birthday". I wouldn't say "My friend's brother was killed by a criminal in a car accident ...".

 

[GoesStation]

What do we call those who survive [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] an accident and face criminal charges?

Xxxx

 

[KATYILH16]

All the sentences are mine. Thank you very much for your detailed corrections. Can I say "I once read that it was also suggested to use guilty people's corpses/bodies or the corpses/bodies of donors/volunteers who agreed to their bodies being used in such experiments?"

I used both "corpses" and "bodies", "donors" and "volunteers" I am not sure I can use all if them and I also think "guilty people's corpses" is wrong.

I would rephrase it in the following way, "I once read that it had been suggested to use the bodies of people who were found guilty and executed as well as the bodies of the volunteers who agreed to take part in such experiments just like the people who agreed to donate their organs."

This scary opinion is not mine.

​My sense here is that you're thinking of a Chinese word and trying to find an English translation