UK set to become the first country to allow the creation of three-parent babies
20 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-31069173[/url]
[quote]MPs have voted in favour of the creation of babies with DNA from two women and one man, in an historic move.
The UK is now set to become the first country to introduce laws to allow the creation of babies from three people.
In a free vote in the Commons, 382 MPs were in favour and 128 against the technique that stops genetic diseases being passed from mother to child.
During the debate, ministers said the technique was "light at the end of a dark tunnel" for families.
A further vote is required in the House of Lords. It everything goes ahead then the first such baby could be born next year.[/quote]
Anything that helps people be born healthy is a good thing.
Does that mean you can also have multiple wives/husbands? Would be nice if yes.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;47068441]Does that mean you can also have multiple wives/husbands? Would be nice if yes.[/QUOTE]
I think it's meant for parents with a high risk of transmitting genetic diseases exclusively.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;47068441]Does that mean you can also have multiple wives/husbands? Would be nice if yes.[/QUOTE]
Nah, you should be able to but this is basically just taking mitochondrial DNA from a second woman to bypass any mitochondrial issues the true biological mother may pass on to baby.
Although I don't get why they can't use the fathers mitochondrial DNA, it's basically just his mothers.
The whole 3 parents thing is a bit misleading. The actual DNA of the person still comes from 2 people, the only thing changed is the mitochondrial DNA (the bit of the cell which turns glucose into forms of energy the cell can use) and this is for when the mother has mitochondrial disease which means all their babies will be unable to convert sugar into energy properly (the mitochondria always come from the mother). Most babies don't survive long at all, with one woman losing 6 children to it before finding out what it was, with most dying in early infancy, and one being the only known example of someone living with the condition getting to ~21.
The whole designer baby and eugenics arguments completely misunderstand what is going on. The only DNA coming from the third parent is the mitochondrial DNA which is entirely separate to the human genome.
[t]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62907000/gif/_62907355_pnt_slide1_624x398_2.gif[/t]
[video=youtube;00jbG_cfGuQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00jbG_cfGuQ[/video]
Some stuff on mitochondria and how the transfer works for those interested.
[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;47068461]The whole 3 parents thing is a bit misleading. The actual DNA of the person still comes from 2 people, the only thing changed is the mitochondrial DNA (the bit of the cell which turns glucose into forms of energy the cell can use) and this is for when the mother has mitochondrial disease which means all their babies will be unable to convert sugar into energy properly (the mitochondria always come from the mother). Most babies don't survive long at all, with one woman losing 6 children to it before finding out what it was, with most dying in early infancy, and one being the only known example of someone living with the condition getting to ~21.
The whole designer baby and eugenics arguments completely misunderstand what is going on. The only DNA coming from the third parent is the mitochondrial DNA which is entirely separate to the human genome.
[t]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62907000/gif/_62907355_pnt_slide1_624x398_2.gif[/t]
[video=youtube;00jbG_cfGuQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00jbG_cfGuQ[/video]
Some stuff on mitochondria and how the transfer works for those interested.[/QUOTE]
Can it also be used for other genetic diseases?
Not this technique, seen as the only thing it changes is the mitochondria. This doesn't fiddle with the dna of the child at all. That is a whole other ball game.
Would this be a viable method to help couples who can't have children be able to have one with their own DNA?
The only thing this particular technique cures is mitochondrial disease. Other techniques are probably being developed or have been (i.e. IVF) but this is only for when the mitochondria are defective.
[QUOTE=mcgrath618;47068575]Can it also be used for other genetic diseases?[/QUOTE]
The issue is mitochondria are KIND OF another organism that lives inside each of our cells, except it's not exactly alive on it's own, but still has it's own genetic code, so the woman's own human DNA is okay but the mitochondria her ovaries put into the embryos are fucky for some reason, so the woman will get the embryo including healthy mitochondria from another woman, and get her "human" DNA put into it.
At least that's how I understand it, I could be wrong.
Was this illegal before? Why?
[QUOTE=Krinkels;47068754]Was this illegal before? Why?[/QUOTE]
Well it's a new procedure, it was never illegal. It has it's obvious opposition from the Church and some other groups, but they've just solidified it's legality.
[QUOTE=Krinkels;47068754]Was this illegal before? Why?[/QUOTE]
You want to make sure this stuff is safe before you authorise it for public use
[QUOTE=Krinkels;47068754]Was this illegal before? Why?[/QUOTE]
Because a vocal majority deemed it unethical. Frankly, unethical is letting people die when you have the tools and methods to stop that
I feel like genetic engineering needs to be the future.
Maybe the only cure to cancers is to eliminate the probabilities through the process of genetic engineering.
[QUOTE=OrDnAs;47068793]Because a vocal majority deemed it unethical. Frankly, unethical is letting people die when you have the tools and methods to stop that[/QUOTE]
I really don't get what's so unethical about genetic engineering if you don't prevent people with risky genomes from reproducing. Heck, in some cases it would actually make it possible for them to have children without defects.
People feel like they're wise and all predicting the downfall of man for trying to "play god" or some shit like that, I personally don't see what's wrong with having more control over our own lives.
Glad to see this actually be supported somewhere (winners on the OP that is) - going to the Telegraph comments section and seeing "this is unethical" is infuriating - as if letting people suffer unnecessarily isn't?
[QUOTE=mcgrath618;47068575]Can it also be used for other genetic diseases?[/QUOTE]
No, no DNA is being changed, they are exchanging mitochondria
So could you have two girlfriends and have 1 baby between the three of you?
if the kid comes out happy and healthy, why not?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.