Live data from Hacker News

Using precision editing to study human embryo development shows master gene

cam.ac.uk

51–56 of 56 posts

Re: Using precision editing to study human embryo development shows master gene

#51
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So do all sexually reproducing species’ conception create souls? Or is it just a blessed few? What about asexually reproducing species?

>So do all sexually reproducing species’ conception create souls? No, what is your opinion? >Or is it just a blessed few? Specifically humans. >What about asexually reproducing species? They have life that's for sure but I think it's very different than humans.

Unfortunately, we found that there are not so many differences. Scientists have simply decided not to cross that line.

Re: Using precision editing to study human embryo development shows master gene

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can't seriously think there is a line in the sand between homo sapiens and heidelbergensis or neanderthals which demarcates "soul" and "no soul". Especially since the latter interbred with humans.

Are there any species you know of that would be able to interbred with each other? Why would that have been possible? Sounds like humans to me, perhaps ones who could live longer? Look, I think we know how these discussions go, I'm not sure they get anywhere. Your pretty sure you know what's going on, I'm pretty sure I know what's going on... Id hope there would be caution in manipulating the formation of a human whe…

> Are there any species you know of that would be able to interbred with each other?

Yes, it is called hybridisation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_(biology)

Re: Using precision editing to study human embryo development shows master gene

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will never understand this mindset. What exactly do you think primary scientific research is if not collecting data on questions to which you do not know the answer? How are you supposed to get data to said questions without observing the actual events? I suppose you’re sanguine with the idea of letting future generations of children be born with potentially preventable genetic disorders based on your squeamishness…

Lots of breakthroughs in medicine happen without editing genes? And why do you think Im opposed to the scientific method based on this view point that maybe experimenting on human embryos is not a great way to learn stuff? For example, what happens when we get to the point where we need to use the scientific method to test if the gene editing was successful and didn't cause negative outcomes for the child's entire ex…

> For example, what happens when we get to the point where we need to use the scientific method to test if the gene editing was successful and didn't cause negative outcomes for the child's entire existence perhaps?

Well that would be an entirely different line of research, which is not this research here, and a large expansion of the question which we could debate and discuss thoroughly on its own merits at such a time as the issue arises.

Aka this is just the slippery slope fallacy of argument.

Re: Using precision editing to study human embryo development shows master gene

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will never understand this mindset. What exactly do you think primary scientific research is if not collecting data on questions to which you do not know the answer? How are you supposed to get data to said questions without observing the actual events? I suppose you’re sanguine with the idea of letting future generations of children be born with potentially preventable genetic disorders based on your squeamishness…

Lots of breakthroughs in medicine happen without editing genes? And why do you think Im opposed to the scientific method based on this view point that maybe experimenting on human embryos is not a great way to learn stuff? For example, what happens when we get to the point where we need to use the scientific method to test if the gene editing was successful and didn't cause negative outcomes for the child's entire ex…

There is no progress without possible failure in medicine. Each treatment starts with assumptions and you can only go so far until you start testing on actual people. Until we understand the mechanisms completely there is no way around that.

Genes are an important part of lifeforms. Of course, you may object to tinkering with them and wait until nature has done the tinkering for you. That will inevitably slow down progress by obtaining information so much slower that countless lives will be miserable due to missing cures and treatments. This is a zone where there is no clear moral answer. The only thing I would say with confidence is that gene editing is very likely the key to a plethora of treatments and preventative measures.

> Will they need to live their whole life for us to confirm the cure worked? People already do that right now without gene editing. A friend of mine is 10 years over the life expectancy of their condition just because their parents decided to have them live their whole life "to confirm the treatment worked". 9 out of 10 people with that condition died by the age of 12 if not within the first year of birth. I'd wager being part of a medical/scientific program to monitor your condition is the least of your concerns at that point.

Re: Using precision editing to study human embryo development shows master gene

#55
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that skin I scraped off on the sidewalk is not a human just because it has human DNA (and indeed, the cells in it are still alive, for a time). Similarly neither are embryos. A human is a collection of trillions of cells arranged in a particular manner, not just any cell (or relatively small set of cells) that has human DNA. Human, as a word, has meaning far beyond that. I'd agree that personhood is the more impo…

Embryos have their own DNA and constitute the full amount of that cell line — unlike your skin shedding. They are absolutely a human. To sibling comment’s point: personhood versus humanity is already the legal distinction - eg, children and invalids are fully human but not fully people, so we don’t grant them full legal rights and instead let others exercise control over them. For children in particular, we grant the…

The hypothetical you provide only serves to weaken your point.

Re: Using precision editing to study human embryo development shows master gene

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can't seriously think there is a line in the sand between homo sapiens and heidelbergensis or neanderthals which demarcates "soul" and "no soul". Especially since the latter interbred with humans.

Are there any species you know of that would be able to interbred with each other? Why would that have been possible? Sounds like humans to me, perhaps ones who could live longer? Look, I think we know how these discussions go, I'm not sure they get anywhere. Your pretty sure you know what's going on, I'm pretty sure I know what's going on... Id hope there would be caution in manipulating the formation of a human whe…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN