Designer (Genetically Modified) Babies

viv1969 said:
You...not I.
Click to expand...

I think if you pop your glasses on and have a read it was definitely you that used that term, yep read it again, defo you.....
 
You need to read your own post again.
Slowly if necessary.
You used the words mutation and defects and immediately linked it to a specific story you'd invented read....questioning the mother's decisions and suggesting that her child having downs was somehow her fault for not having her child early enough.
 
viv1969 said:
You need to read your own post again.
Slowly if necessary.
You used the words mutation and defects and immediately linked it to a specific story you'd invented read....questioning the mother's decisions and suggesting that her child having downs was somehow her fault for not having her child early enough.
Click to expand...

cope can't be arsed you just pop off and fight with yourself in the corner :-)
 
This is getting silly now.
Paul used the words "defect" and "mutation", but were used in a general sense referring to genes, not to a specific human. It was Ruth who put the two words together, and turned them from nouns into adjectives ("defective mutant").

So - you're both wrong. Go and sit in opposite corners and fight yourselves. :p

Edit: Sorry, crossed with Cobra's post. I'll say no more. :muted: :schtum:
 
The problem with "designer" babies is we may be setting ourselves up for a fall. Many undesirable traits provide resilience to certain diseases and if we all select our babies to have the same desirable features then could be limiting the numbers within the population that may be able to survive those diseases (or even environmental factors) should they reach epidemic proportions. All hypothetical of course, and I'm certainly up for removing the risk of debilitating genetic diseases if possible.

Besides, we'll no doubt rely on genetic engineering to ensure we are capable of surviving the journey to our new solar system.
 
dejongj said:
Whilst very admirable and undoubtedly generate a lot of sympathy and likes it isn't a case of either / or. And very different people and research is required to do one versus the other. It is a total red herring which has no relevance to this topic in my opinion. To a similar extend as those argueing they wouldn't exist. No, you still have as much chance of existing and likely with less illness. How that can't be a good thing is beyond me.
Click to expand...

It isn't a red herring. With our inability to make even extremely low cost solutions available universally, how well do you think we would fare with undoubtably more costs gene screening / gene therapy solutions? For sure they are different people / skills needed as you say, but one common means makes both available - money, and money will be the determining factor in who gets access.

I'm a firm believer in you get what you work for in all things material, you want a bigger house - work for it, etc, but not when it comes to healthcare.

That aside, it's a very difficult area.

Scenarios - let's say you can get past the access issues.
  • As mutations can be introduced at the point of creation of the zygote, and not just be passed via the parental gametes, the only way we could achieve what is being discussed would be by screening in a lab, so it pretty much means IVF for all.
  • Germline editing is still in its infancy, but let's say they get that off to a fine art, so we can edit the DNA in the zygote to remove and replace genetic sequences consistently and accurately.
  • Let us also assume that we can identify the genetic sequences responsible for diseases and conditions we want to suppress.
  • Let us assume that we as a species moderate our impact on the environment so that we have resources enough to support the increased population,
  • and finally, let's work on the assumption that for once in our history, us Humans don't screw stuff up and don't use this immense power to f*** around with stuff that doesn't need to be - intelligence, looks, attitude etc.
In this scenario - absolutely, who would not want this.
  • But, as evidenced by our inability to provide clean drinking water, we've no chance to deliver IVF to all.
  • Our ability to repair through germline editing will come a lot later than our ability to identify the gene sequences that cause the conditions, so there will be significant pressure (socially, economically) in the intervening period to select and discard embryos.
  • We've still not managed to get to grips with the rate at which we are screwing over the planet, a significant factor of which is our inability to work as one global 'team', which brings me back to the last point - we're still going to make 'bad decisions locally to try to get one-up on the other buggers overseas who are clearly in the wrong here.'
In this scenario - absolutely not.

How do we get to utopia if we don't start working on the problem now? Well we won't clearly. We need to research and develop of course, but it has to be in the wider context set out above, so, no - I don't think it is a red herring.
 
Yes definitely a red herring, a confused one at that as well in my opinion as you are conflating many different disciplines and budgets. As I said in my first response it is not one or the other, but that shouldn't stop this or put up as an excuse.

Btw at least one of your assumptions is an epic fail. We know we will mess it up and won't get it right. If anything we've learned that. So let's deal with that and live with it and not assume that we won't because we will. Let's use that energy in s positive way.

Yes total red herring in the context of this subject and diverting from the discussion in my opinion.
 
dejongj said:
Yes definitely a red herring, a confused one at that as well in my opinion as you are conflating many different disciplines and budgets. As I said in my first response it is not one or the other, but that shouldn't stop this or put up as an excuse.

Btw at least one of your assumptions is an epic fail. We know we will mess it up and won't get it right. If anything we've learned that. So let's deal with that and live with it and not assume that we won't because we will. Let's use that energy in s positive way.

Yes total red herring in the context of this subject and diverting from the discussion in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Epic fail? Language aside, you've just agreed with me that we will mess it up today.

You're also missing the point. Yes they are different budgets, yes they are different disciplines, but to develop one without the others is akin to developing the nuclear bomb and giving the button to a kid in playgroup.

Yes, let's use our energy positively, yes let's solve the problems and progress. All I'm saying is we need to do so holistically, across the board, so that we are ready and worthy of the power such ability would bring.
 
Last edited:
Furtim said:
Germline editing is still in its infancy, but let's say they get that off to a fine art, so we can edit the DNA in the zygote to remove and replace genetic sequences consistently and accurately.
Click to expand...


Just to point out germline editing is and always has been illegal through out the EU. I suspect there are just too many ethical and realistic considerations with making permanent genetic changes. Changes that are passed through generations that is. Only somatic cells can be edited. Changes made there only last for the life of that person
 
Can't we just go back to the bit about leggy blondes with bit tits ,this is getting far to complicated for me
 
the black fox said:
Can't we just go back to the bit about leggy blondes with bit tits ,this is getting far to complicated for me
Click to expand...

boyfalldown said:
we could do, but I prefer redheads ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not fussed either way, as long as it is their natural colour. Can't stand dyed hair, especially not those gradients that seem to become popular.

Let's leave that out of the genes.
 
boyfalldown said:
go on, you were thinking as long as collar and cuffs match, weren't you? ;)
Click to expand...
I could not possibly have put it so eloquent. :)

But yes, damn right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top