Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 292 posts

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#101

Post by theWatcher37 »

tcbawo wrote: post #18
sethbannon wrote: post #12

I am so insanely excited for the potential of this technology. There are many ethical questions here, but the potential benefits far outweigh the downsides. In the near future, we can detect and eliminate genetic disorders, ensuring no child has to suffer from these defects any longer. Long term, this gives us a tool to take control of our own evolution in a way never before possible. Couldn't be more excited for wha…

While I appreciate the optimism in this sentiment, the similarity to the early atomic age gives me pause. Human beings have shown time and time again that they cannot be absolutely trusted.

The atomic age came without the world or our species ending.

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#102

Post by proton1h1 »

sethbannon wrote: post #12

I am so insanely excited for the potential of this technology. There are many ethical questions here, but the potential benefits far outweigh the downsides. In the near future, we can detect and eliminate genetic disorders, ensuring no child has to suffer from these defects any longer. Long term, this gives us a tool to take control of our own evolution in a way never before possible. Couldn't be more excited for wha…

Gene editing(modifying) to make someone faster than bolt and who knows what. Future is very scary and exiting.

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#103

Post by kanzure »

mattbettinson wrote: post #97
kanzure wrote: post #89

here's a TODO list i made for possibly interesting genome editing targets: http://diyhpl.us/wiki/genetic-modifications/ Many of these have low demonstrated correlation or significance so don't just blindly load everything on that document into your at-home CRISPR kit http://www.the-odin.com/gene-engineering-kits/ but it should be a good starting point for thinking about what can be modified, improved, disimproved, et…

Fascinating. This just popped in my head: does the human genome contain pointers? Or am I missing a key piece?

Many things in biology could be construed to be pointers if you squint hard enough--- promoters, transcription factors, all sorts of far-reaching regulation-effecting small molecules and proteins and variations of DNA/RNA molecules. Is "guide RNA" a pointer? what about the other gene targeting techniques-- like TALENs? see http://diyhpl.us/wiki/gene-editing/

"Primer for synthetic biology" http://www.openwetware.org/images/3/3d/SB_Primer_100707.pdf

pretty old presentation but here you go, "Synthetic Biology: A primer" http://cellbase.epfl.ch/twiki/pub/IGEM/PaperCollection/iGEM_...

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#105

Post by mattbettinson »

kanzure wrote: post #103
mattbettinson wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fascinating. This just popped in my head: does the human genome contain pointers? Or am I missing a key piece?

Many things in biology could be construed to be pointers if you squint hard enough--- promoters, transcription factors, all sorts of far-reaching regulation-effecting small molecules and proteins and variations of DNA/RNA molecules. Is "guide RNA" a pointer? what about the other gene targeting techniques-- like TALENs? see http://diyhpl.us/wiki/gene-editing/ "Primer for synthetic biology" http://www.openwetware.org/i…

This is what I was looking for without realizing it. Metastructures signing DNA to regulate. Wow!

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#106

Post by Turing_Machine »

cellis wrote: post #45
mac01021 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For each trillion dollars of company, you'll need a billion people to pay $1k each. I'm not sure current demographics allows for more than one such company in any given sector, and it would need to have a virtual monopoly on whatever it were selling.

100 million paying 10k is much more likely. And 1 trillion is in market value, not revenue. Imagine if you could sell a therapy such as a seasonal cure for "common cancer". Drugs can be insanely profitable and there are already several drug makers in the hundreds of billions of market cap.

"100 million paying 10k is much more likely."

10K is already well within the range people spend on births (currently about $8k including prenatal and postnatal care).

Not to mention the cost involved in raising the child to adulthood. :-)

You might even be able to charge $50k or $100k, if it actually got to the point of design-to-order (which, granted, would be orders of magnitude more difficult than simply removing one bad gene).

How much would a parent pay to have a kid with the mind of Richard Feynman and the body/appearance of David Beckham, or the mind of Marie Curie and the body/appearance of Kiira Korpi?

Quite a lot, I'd imagine.

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#107

Post by 88e282102ae2e5b »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #85

Wasn't there a HN post/thread a week or so ago about some scientist having a (new-ish) theory about DNA and the role specific genes play? If there's enough doubt that there's still room for other theories, is CRISPR really a good idea?

Well, you wouldn't want to modify a gene that isn't well-characterized, sure. But there are some things that are known with a great deal of certainty.

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#108

Post by abecedarius »

yohui wrote: post #88
abecedarius wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's already done for some genetically-modified crops. I don't know about the state of practice for animals.

While the technology exists, so-called "terminator genes" have not been implemented due to opposition from anti-GMO activists and other groups: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_use_restriction_techno...

Huh, thanks for the correction.

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#109

Post by taneq »

dr_ wrote: post #94

I realize that scientific consensus is that gene editing should not be permitted to enhance human performance - be it mental or physical. But if one nation ignores this consensus, and starts producing "super humans" wouldn't other nations be compelled to follow? Otherwise, over time, wouldn't their citizens, and their nation, slowly fall behind as a country of power and status? Just a thought.

Assuming it becomes possible - why shouldn't people edit their genes to produce superior children? We're already talking about just that, when we discuss editing out congenital diseases and the like. The only difference between the two cases is that one is eliminating unexpected weaknesses and the other is eliminating generally-expected weaknesses.

Really what's being said is that nobody should be allowed to use their resources to improve their offspring beyond the level of random chance. This mentality isn't about ensuring that anyone does well, it's about preventing anyone from doing better, like crabs in a bucket.

Re: First Human Embryos Edited in U.S

#110

Post by clort »

rubatuga wrote: post #51
devrandomguy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with not editing the germline, is that that could easily be used to implement a DRM scheme. The recipient of this sort of editing might have a very high chance of only producing disabled or dead offspring, as they themselves would have been, without intervention. They, and their descendants, would have to procure this same treatment in order to procreate.

I can’t imagine anybody in their right mind would create a genome that had a DRM. Furthermore, would you sign up for a procedure like that? Also it’s a violation of somebody’s human rights to stop them from reproducing! What is really happening is that normal copies of the human genome are being incorporated. Which are then passed on to your sperm/ovum.

There are enough sociopaths in the world, that nobody needs to sign up for a procedure like that.. its easy enough to buy genetic material, millions of people the world over are desperate enough for a better life that they will sell themselves and each other.
Post reply on HN