China, world 1st in human embryo genetic manipulation
82 replies, posted
[QUOTE=codemaster85;47582098]Just eliminating disease? Try a new era of human evolution with giving people new genetic traits to age slower, burn fat easier, lowered cholesterol, even radiation resistance. It will be a new era in human history.[/QUOTE]
Aw yeah, sharper division into rich and poor here we go!
[QUOTE=proch;47582974]Aw yeah, sharper division into rich and poor here we go![/QUOTE]
I think even some people having advantages could be better than all having none.
Given, I don't actually believe in what you say, I don't think the division won't get sharper than it already is. Maybe poor won't be able to get genetic treatments, but hey, perhaps cancer will be easier and cheaper for the poor then?
Like how food was once a rich man's thing, but in the West it is a right. Today's privileges will be rights, but tomorrow will bring new privileges.
[QUOTE=cxcxxxxx;47582956]I don't think that it's single gene treatments that people are fearful over. People are fearful of what this can mean for the future of our development as a species, because with every discovery comes people seeking ways to profit from it. The deeper we delve into gene therapy, the more catastrophic it can become. Changes to single genes are one thing, but it is when we eventually try to change things such as eye color, and offer it a price, that the biological and ethical issues arise.[/QUOTE]
Well we'll overcome those problems when we come to them. At present, considering what is already standard practice, the treatment of blood disorders is very trivial, and should not raise any objections.
Old men will finally be flexible like never before
I really don't want my kid to have my color blindness or asthma. maybe science can help
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;47583679]Old men will finally be flexible like never before[/QUOTE]
Electronic old men.
If in a few years I could prevent my kid from developing my Crohn's disease, I would be very happy.
Yeah I've considered adoption instead, but I can't shake the feeling that I'd never love them like my own kid, and even if I did, without a biological kid, how would I know for sure?
[QUOTE=Sprockethead;47582224]Well im obviously not too knowledgeable about this sort of thing.
But humans have a penchant to be way too comfortable in the belief that they have dominion over nature.
They should still go ahead with it i think, but just being slightly weary that nature, by wich i mean this whole biosphere of organisms that has had billions of years to evolve is not exactly inclined to give up its living space.[/QUOTE]
If this works (and one day it will) Humans will have dominion over nature
[QUOTE=SpartanXC9;47584789]If this works (and one day it will) Humans will have dominion over nature[/QUOTE]
Well, humans are bound by natural laws. These laws include both those of physics and economics, and everything inbetween.
And thus begins the age of the chinese super human
[QUOTE=Dostoyevsky;47583032]I think even some people having advantages could be better than all having none.
Given, I don't actually believe in what you say, I don't think the division won't get sharper than it already is. Maybe poor won't be able to get genetic treatments, but hey, perhaps cancer will be easier and cheaper for the poor then?
Like how food was once a rich man's thing, but in the West it is a right. Today's privileges will be rights, but tomorrow will bring new privileges.[/QUOTE]
remember most if not all privileges were fought for with blood, and still are in some places.
genetic engineering + inequality is a recipe for disaster and while i don't think it will be much of an issue in the western nations due to pressure from various religious groups and human rights groups, if china decides to go nuts with it, western nations will feel pressured to do it too.
[QUOTE=Impact1986;47585846]And thus begins the age of the chinese super human[/QUOTE]
Don't jump ahead of yourself; this technique is only good for issues causes by a single gene. Any manner of meaningful enhancement will require - at minimum - tens of genes. It's fundamentally a repair tool, nothing more.
Mutants!
I still think that Augmentation will be more widespread among humans then genetic manipulation, because being clean of "manipulation" and "being natural" will be more important in the future, and biotornic augmentations can give humans a higher advantage then genetically engineered enhancements to the human body.
[QUOTE=Deng;47582756]I don't know why people see this as something major and against nature and that we shouldn't fuck about with it too much.
I mean, humans have already moved mountains both literal and metaphorical in both civil and genetic engineering. Feats that have completely and irreversibly changed how every single human on earth lives, but somehow preventing a blood disorder is too far.[/QUOTE]
"There, cured your blood disorder, and while I was at it, gave you superhuman reflexes aswell! It's gonna cost ye' extra buddy."
:v:
[QUOTE=codemaster85;47582098]Just eliminating disease? Try a new era of human evolution with giving people new genetic traits to age slower, burn fat easier, lowered cholesterol, even radiation resistance. It will be a new era in human history.[/QUOTE]
Pity I was born to late for it.. It would be amazing if they came up with a chemical that could target and replace select genes in a body... then you could do the modifications on the fly... how great would that be...
Would every embryo that was fixed/cured of a disease be able to pass on those traits naturally to their offspring? I don't know anything about genetics but I would hope that these traits would be passed along to future generations naturally or else it may not be a true fix in the long run.
Homo Sapiens Geneticus when?
And just like AI, we're gonna stream right into this head on without thinking ahead, at all.
Because this definitely cannot get fuck'd right?
[QUOTE=Swilly;47705563]And just like AI, we're gonna stream right into this head on without thinking ahead, at all.
Because this definitely cannot get fuck'd right?[/QUOTE]
They said the same about nuclear power.
We still exist.
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;47705711]They said the same about nuclear power.
We still exist.[/QUOTE]
And we still have nuclear weapons everywhere and old reactors while we use Uranium as fuel source instead of Thorium because we didn't think ahead.
I really think robotics will serve humanity better in the long run, but for now genetics will do. Cheers to a small step in the right direction.
[QUOTE=apierce1289;47705461]Would every embryo that was fixed/cured of a disease be able to pass on those traits naturally to their offspring? I don't know anything about genetics but I would hope that these traits would be passed along to future generations naturally or else it may not be a true fix in the long run.[/QUOTE]
Yes, which is actually one of the key points that need to be figured out ethically before more is done. What kind of profound, unpredictable effect will this have on future generations?
At the risk of sounding like a Luddite, it sounds like everyone here is too keen on genetic manipulation, and not just because the technique right now is terribly unrefined. While it hasn't been entirely confirmed, the reason the paper was published in a seemingly low-impact journal was because Nature and Science rejected it on ethical grounds. There was already a call for scientists around the world using the CRISPR technique to not work on human embryos until the ethics of genetic manipulation of the human genome had been sorted out. But of course a group has to rush out something like this for the publicity and to say they were the first. This raises another terrifying question; whether or not this should be stopped, can it be stopped? And if it can't, what then? Does it become a pseudo-arms race or do we have to make a conscious effort to seek out and work with those in less regulated jurisdictions to have better control and knowledge; assuming that science can even be regulated to prevent something bad from happening (see: issues with gain of function or the continued existence of infectious diseases that should have been completely phased into history)
Digestion of fiber would be nice.
[QUOTE=Jabberwocky;47707823]At the risk of sounding like a Luddite, it sounds like everyone here is too keen on genetic manipulation, and not just because the technique right now is terribly unrefined.[/QUOTE]
How do you mean unrefined? The advances that have been made since the discovery of plasmids, recombinant dna technology, etc in the 60s and 70s have been huge. Cutting edge stuff 40 years ago is now basically routine work now.
Remove all heritable diseases, later, when possible, modify more so that people are a bit better in the maintenance department(which would have the side effect of a massively increased healthiness, aging being slowed down and obesity not causing the body to glitch up like a fool)
[QUOTE=Deng;47708053]How do you mean unrefined? The advances that have been made since the discovery of plasmids, recombinant dna technology, etc in the 60s and 70s have been huge. Cutting edge stuff 40 years ago is now basically routine work now.[/QUOTE]
I'm not doubting the advances we've made; I'm just saying that the CRISPR technique was definitely not ready for human embryos. It sounds like there was still plenty of work to do for mammalian systems but people wanted to jump the gun.
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;47583679]Old men will finally be flexible like never before[/QUOTE]
Slow aging youth, running the world. A new age.
[QUOTE=Swilly;47705563]And just like AI, we're gonna stream right into this head on without thinking ahead, at all.
Because this definitely cannot get fuck'd right?[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty confused why you have this opinion toward AI.
[QUOTE=Krinkels;47708535]I'm pretty confused why you have this opinion toward AI.[/QUOTE]
Because the way AI and genetics are portrayed in media shows them in a bad light. I'm sure this will be sorted out in time, it's not like they're breeding super people to conquer the world. Yes, there could be some implications in the future but so far society has managed to stay flexible and adapt, but that is the history of humanity. With progress man changes and so do the world he lives in. If man in the past feared progress we would still be living in caves.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.