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

China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 150 posts

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#111

Post by vannevar »

wahern wrote: post #108
vannevar wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what people are trying to justify is an a priori assumption that gene editing (or germline editing if they're a little less cautious) is special and distinct. Gene editing is special and distinct, in the sense that the genome is a complex and nonlinear system, where small errors can be amplified into large consequences, not only local, biological consequences but social as well. In cases where technology offe…

The same debate occurred regarding innoculation nearly 250 years ago. In fact, it's still occurring. Moreover, we're still stumbling--just last week I think someone posted an article to HN regarding how the use of live polio (IIRC?) vaccines has led us to paint ourselves into a corner, perpetually unable to extinguish the last remaining reservoirs. So the original concerns about what we'd now characterize as "complex…

It was not the same debate, because innoculation doesn't have as much capacity for far-reaching consequences. With regard to the notion of relying on the stability of a complex system, they tend to return to a quasi-equilibrium state, not necessarily the state they were in before being 'kicked'. And rate of change matters. Gene editing has the capacity to vastly accelerate the rate of mutation---indeed, that's it's purpose. And even if the overall nature of the genomic system remained recognizably mathematically the same, our experience of it in this accelerated state might be quite different.

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#112

Post by wahern »

vannevar wrote: post #111
wahern wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same debate occurred regarding innoculation nearly 250 years ago. In fact, it's still occurring. Moreover, we're still stumbling--just last week I think someone posted an article to HN regarding how the use of live polio (IIRC?) vaccines has led us to paint ourselves into a corner, perpetually unable to extinguish the last remaining reservoirs. So the original concerns about what we'd now characterize as "complex…

It was not the same debate, because innoculation doesn't have as much capacity for far-reaching consequences. With regard to the notion of relying on the stability of a complex system, they tend to return to a quasi-equilibrium state, not necessarily the state they were in before being 'kicked'. And rate of change matters. Gene editing has the capacity to vastly accelerate the rate of mutation---indeed, that's it's p…

1) Inoculation resulted in known historical outbreaks that killed many people.

2) Vaccinations, not to mention treatments like antibiotics, have resulted in accelerated mutation of disease. It's a serious concern and a growing problem in ways both predicted and unpredicted.

And, yes, these have occurred together.

We can argue in circles all day, unless you can point out some novel effect, even hypothetical, that hasn't already been reported in the literature or debated to death. Arguing that it's "too dangerous" is fair. You just can't argue that reasonable people can't disagree on that score.

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#113

Post by mewpmewp2 »

anon73044 wrote: post #50
wnmurphy wrote: post #31

Isn't it the case that each gene does not have a single function? This seems like we're tampering with a many-variable equation for each gene we modify. It's like modifying a function when you're not aware that that function has potentially many side effects, which are necessary.

Actually, that's exactly what it is. Genes are the most tightly coupled code in existence (literally!), and we've barely scratched the surface in seeing what changes we could make and where to make them without bringing the whole thing crashing down.

Who coded that crap?!

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#114

Post by dependenttypes »

xvedejas wrote: post #85
smallgovt wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But worst case, we can eliminate harmful mutations from being passed on to subsequent generations through screening Are you suggesting that we should prohibit these babies from reproducing when they reach adulthood? If not, how do you suggest we prevent harmful mutations from being passed on with "screening"?

Adults only pass on half of their genes during reproduction. I imagine at least in the case of in vitro fertilization there's a fair amount you can do to make sure the harmful genes aren't the ones passed along, so long as the parent doesn't have two copies of an autosomal dominant harmful mutation. I wouldn't be surprised if more advanced methods exist either; as a carrier for a rare genetic disease maybe I should f…

Some genes have a (much) higher chance to be passed on than others.

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#115

Post by faissaloo »

RestlessMind wrote: post #102

China demonstrates that it is willing to cross moral boundaries (CRISPR, IP theft) and sacrifice the present to improve the future (Massive infrastructure paving over individual properties). Western world shows exactly opposite trends - absolute refusal to make any sort of sacrifices (see: reaction to Carbon taxes, minority property owners blocking major infrastructure projects), prioritizing status quo at the cost o…

I'm not sure what's immoral about IP 'theft'

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#116

Post by raducu »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #113
anon73044 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, that's exactly what it is. Genes are the most tightly coupled code in existence (literally!), and we've barely scratched the surface in seeing what changes we could make and where to make them without bringing the whole thing crashing down.

Who coded that crap?!

Maybe it's Gods DRM.

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#119

Post by neuronic »

im3w1l wrote: post #99
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Short term suffering from failed experiments. By "short term" you mean "only until the kids die of their mutations"?

Well I was thinking more along the lines of disabilities, weakness and abnormalities, but I guess death too.

You guess harming a human baby to the point of death might be a problem?

Re: China gene-edited baby experiment 'may have created unintended mutations'

#120

Post by mytailorisrich »

smallgovt wrote: post #84
im3w1l wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Random harmful mutations have happened all day every day as long as life has existed. We are basically designed for dealing with it. But worst case, we can eliminate harmful mutations from being passed on to subsequent generations through screening. I wouldn't worry about the long term problems of that, it's fairly easy to solve. What I would worry about is: a) Short term suffering from failed experiments. b) Reduced…

> But worst case, we can eliminate harmful mutations from being passed on to subsequent generations through screening Are you suggesting that we should prohibit these babies from reproducing when they reach adulthood? If not, how do you suggest we prevent harmful mutations from being passed on with "screening"?

> Are you suggesting that we should prohibit these babies from reproducing when they reach adulthood?

That's currently the only reasonable thing to do.

Post reply on HN