We ethically shouldn't do this. We should not edit human embryos. I can't write 5 pages of why we shouldn't but the fact that we could make the difference between the have and have nots will only get bigger and bigger. Doctor: So do you want the $500 edit to ensure your child won't have diabetes. How about the $2,000 Autism edit? Then the gender change edit is to late to perform. We could do artificial semination and…
It's sad the first comments are always stuff like this. So you want millions of people to suffer genetic diseases because income inequality?
This is like the premier example of a false dichotomy.
While I'm sure some variant of that will occur at some point, many genetic disorders are relatively simple and well understood. Even if we are still learning, there are dozens of disorders we could eliminate if we had robust genetic editing capability with pretty good odds of success.
"... many genetic disorders are relatively simple and well understood." Are they, really? As far as I know (and I am not a specialist, so someone more qualified may correct me), gene transcription and translation is far from well understood. It's as if we don't have access to the source code for the compiler, only the machine code and the syntax. You can draw correlations and infer causality from your changes, but yo…
We understand the compiler pretty well. You can grab a Bio textbook and find incredibly detailed diagrams of how the genetic transcription process works. It is true that we don't understand every factor, but it's likely the most significant ones are the ones we understand best.
FYI: I don't know if English is your first language but you are using commas excessively. All the commas in the first four sentences should be removed and the final comma should be 'of'. EDIT: Also, the second sentence should be "This should not stop us (humanity)."
FYI: I don't know about your language skills in general but https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/commata#English . Point I want to make: Please stop correcting so many people in general on HN. Edit: Yes, this was not a perfectly warranted criticism. Yes, I may come off as smug. It's my opinion that needing perfect english should not be a requirement to have a conversation about tech in general. I often get the feeling that…
But is diseases really the type of diversity we want though? Some mutation that is generally bad does turn out to be good in some cases [1] but I am still not 100% convinced that the disease causing mutations is diversity that needs to be preserved. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499995/
Sickle-cell anaemia is the ur-example. There will no doubt be others we haven't discovered yet.
Right, even if there are many, would you be able to justify keeping sickle cell? There was even a recent post on HN about it (thought I can't find the same link here's a jist [1]).
People will probably benefit from some type of cure as opposed to trying to save mutation that causes extreme discomfort (maybe death). I totally agree with importance of variety but i think it's equally important to understand and revert some of these unwanted mutations.
We ethically shouldn't do this. We should not edit human embryos. I can't write 5 pages of why we shouldn't but the fact that we could make the difference between the have and have nots will only get bigger and bigger. Doctor: So do you want the $500 edit to ensure your child won't have diabetes. How about the $2,000 Autism edit? Then the gender change edit is to late to perform. We could do artificial semination and…
Ethics or not, some country will do this, and they'll leave everyone else behind economically in a few generations.
FYI: I don't know if English is your first language but you are using commas excessively. All the commas in the first four sentences should be removed and the final comma should be 'of'. EDIT: Also, the second sentence should be "This should not stop us (humanity)."
FYI: I don't know about your language skills in general but https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/commata#English . Point I want to make: Please stop correcting so many people in general on HN. Edit: Yes, this was not a perfectly warranted criticism. Yes, I may come off as smug. It's my opinion that needing perfect english should not be a requirement to have a conversation about tech in general. I often get the feeling that…
Why was that offensive? As far as i can see, the feedback was devoid of any vitriol. I'd gladly take any of that kind.
We ethically shouldn't do this. We should not edit human embryos. I can't write 5 pages of why we shouldn't but the fact that we could make the difference between the have and have nots will only get bigger and bigger. Doctor: So do you want the $500 edit to ensure your child won't have diabetes. How about the $2,000 Autism edit? Then the gender change edit is to late to perform. We could do artificial semination and…
Ethics or not, some country will do this, and they'll leave everyone else behind economically in a few generations.
Or they won't, or they'll get worse somehow, or we'll all drown first.
We ethically shouldn't do this. We should not edit human embryos. I can't write 5 pages of why we shouldn't but the fact that we could make the difference between the have and have nots will only get bigger and bigger. Doctor: So do you want the $500 edit to ensure your child won't have diabetes. How about the $2,000 Autism edit? Then the gender change edit is to late to perform. We could do artificial semination and…
So instead you're fine with saying "your child will have cystic-fibrosis; she will grow up her entire life unable to breath without pain and likely die before the age 25".
Today rich people pay for better access to care through out all stages of life. That doesn't mean we should ban heart surgery (for example) because the rich can disproportionally afford to get it and catch conditions early enough to treat.
The "natural is ethical" argument disgusts me and I think you really should consider how much we already depend on progress before you argue for going back to the stone ages.
> Doctor: So do you want the $500 edit to ensure your child won't have diabetes. How about the $2,000 Autism edit? Then the gender change edit is to late to perform. We could do artificial semination and guarantee the gender of your child. That's a straight up violation of the Hippocratic oath and blackmail/racketeering combined. We should enforce it strictly, vigilantly, and put doctors who attempt to do this in jai…
>You won't be able to prevent the wealthy from modifying their offspring anyway and the unfairness of having them do it vs 99% not being able to afford do is not enough of a reason to stop progress, not even close. How is that not enough of a reason? The argument is the government has to step in and make it routine from the start. The alternative is to allow the wealthy to literally write superiority into their genes…
Well, we are not going to be able to stop that. Money rules the world. Furthermore, these technologies will appear, regardless of whether we want or not, be it legal or not, so why not do it from the start the right way, so that everyone can benefit from it? Reminds me of the age-reversing debate. It's going to happen, so we might as well bring it as soon as possible instead of letting people die.