Human Gene Editing Receives Science Panel’s Support
81 replies, posted
[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;51830167]Who says we might accidentally create new ones.[/QUOTE]
No one, because if they understand genetics they'll know that we can do thing like correct deleterious SNPs to prevent the expression of malformed proteins.
What you're concerned about is akin to saying that we should not correct a single letter in a misprint of a book, for fear that it will change the meaning of a phrase. E.g. back -> beck.
Think about people with sickle cell anemia - their malformed hemoglobin occurs as a result of a single "letter" change from A for T, resulting in an amino acid change that modified the higher order structure of the peptide. We can safely prevent this change.
[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;51831607]Forget genetic diseases, I want to [B]survive car crashes[/B].[/QUOTE]
[t]http://roa.h-cdn.co/assets/16/29/980x490/landscape-1469108157-grahamtaccrashmodel.jpg[/t]
?
Also I'm all on board for gene therapy. Wipe out cystic fibrosis, cancer, diabetes, etc. Wouldn't that be the bee's knees!
also catgirls
Given the detail of medical records and layers upon layers of ethics committees, I'm hopeful that some exploitative parent will be blocked from any non-disease-correcting gene editing. At the very least until we can address the core issues of today's society of inequality, etc.
I don't have an answer for whether such intellect/strength/stamina/aesthetic genes ought to be blocked, allowed or regulated but thankfully nature vs nurture steps in. In that you can't gene edit in will or personality completely.
One may be breed to be an ubermensch, but if their superiority makes them complacent instead of go-getters who put in honest work then hopefully that sort of behaviour is shunned and honest work triumphs.
[B]Also we're poorly equipped as a society (in the educational sense) to begin raising these concerns, educating people to think critically and rationally.[/B] Because, at this moment some people will default to "NAZIS!!!111" or "Lets exploit the shit out of this because money" instead of the far reaching social, philosophical implications and effects.
How about a gene that actually grows your teeth, fuck yeah now you can eat all the sugar you want.
[QUOTE=spectator1;51832477]How about a gene that actually grows your teeth, fuck yeah now you can eat all the sugar you want.[/QUOTE]
What you mean like a beaver? You'd have to get your teeth grounded down every once in a while, it would really suck.
[QUOTE=spectator1;51832477]How about a gene that actually grows your teeth, fuck yeah now you can eat all the sugar you want.[/QUOTE]
There seems to be [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/01/09/end-fillings-sight-scientists-find-alzheimers-drug-makes-teeth/"]some progress in a different department already[/URL] for that.
I want to be able to reactivate that one gene that lets you grow back stuff. I don't know why, but to me growing back a finger or toe seems like the kind of thing we should be able to do.
It'll be interesting if we ever get to manipulating the genes of a fetus due to the ethical concerns. Would it be right for parents to change their child's sexual orientation, if it could cause them pain later in life?
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;51833670]It'll be interesting if we ever get to manipulating the genes of a fetus due to the ethical concerns. Would it be right for parents to change their child's sexual orientation, if it could cause them pain later in life?[/QUOTE]
Honestly I think any parent who obsesses that they want a specifically boy or girl is not fit to be a parent. The act of specifying sex dehumanizes their child into an object to be owned instead of another human being IMO.
Its not the 12th century anymore where a child has to be male to lead a country, sex isn't a factor of a person's value.
[QUOTE=Cliff2;51832693]What you mean like a beaver? You'd have to get your teeth grounded down every once in a while, it would really suck.[/QUOTE]
It would, but there's probably a race of pseudo-rodents out there that deals with this as part of daily life. Probably by gnawing on dental bricks after meals or something.
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;51832270][t]http://roa.h-cdn.co/assets/16/29/980x490/landscape-1469108157-grahamtaccrashmodel.jpg[/t]
?[/QUOTE]
It's like someone tried to turn a human into a Sontaran, but forgot the all-important potato DNA. Good lord.
[QUOTE=ironman17;51834210]It would, but there's probably a race of pseudo-rodents out there that deals with this as part of daily life. Probably by gnawing on dental bricks after meals or something.
It's like someone tried to turn a human into a Sontaran, but forgot the all-important potato DNA. Good lord.[/QUOTE]
There's a reason we don't hold our species standards of living to that of a rodents.
[QUOTE=Dr.C;51828649]nah, b[B]iologists won't fall into the eugenics trap of the early to mid 1900s. [/B]They really make you learn why that was such a bad idea. You'll just see genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis edited out first then it will move onto things that are affected by lifestyle like heart disease[/QUOTE]
What a bold statement.
If there's money to be made, someone will attempt it.
I'm surprised no one got my time machine reference.
[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51834703]Now that actually still depends what culture your born into.
There are a lot of statistically missing women in China i.e. females that statistically should have been born but aren't for reasons I'm sure you can guess.[/QUOTE]
I guess that's my idealism showing, but yeah there's still places like China and specifically some of the Middle East that have sex inequality. Which goes back to my second previous post that we ought to avoid non-diseases correcting gene mods before we can address the inequality of the world.
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;51829708]There's something empowering about reading that.
"Nature thinks it can fuck us? Well fuck you, Nature, we're in control now."[/QUOTE]
That's what we will say before this thing's "Jurassic Park" happens.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
