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

UK to allow babies from three people

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 166 posts

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#21

Post by mikerichards »

JacobAldridge wrote: post #2

We (my beautiful wife and I) are currently going through the baby-making limbo, and it looks as though IVF will be the necessary next step. When you start actively trying to have children, there's loads of literature preparing you for the pregnancy swelling and the sleepless life of parenthood etc - less so preparing you for the anxiety, uncertainty, and just general feeling of not being in control of your life which…

We did IVF and got pregnant on our first try. We now have a beautiful 2 year old boy :)

Good luck.

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#22

Post by damon_c »

manicdee wrote: post #17
Tuna-Fish wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

World population is not exploding, and overpopulation is not and will not be a major world problem.

Are you suggesting there are no limits to growth? No limits to available fresh water supplies? No limits to energy production? Once you run you of fresh water and have to rely on nuclear power to run the desalination plants to keep people watered, you have three major problems.

The growth rate is slowing.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/#growthrate

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#23

Post by Cogito »

gameshot911 wrote: post #16
Cogito wrote: post #9

To those wondering, this does not involve gene splicing or anything like that. Instead, defective mitochondria are being replaced with mitochondria from a healthy donor. This technique is only valid for diseases involving defective mitochondria. The mitochondrial DNA is responsible for very very little of the genetic material that defines who a person is, essentially limited to how effective the mitochondria are at t…

>Those who think this is the start of ever more invasive genetic modification of humans, or so called "designer babies" Well...this is the start of ever more invasive genetic modification of humans.

I guess it is! That said, I don't think the 'slippery slope' arguments made in parliament are valid, precisely because this is a very specific kind of genetic modification:

> "But one thing is for sure, once this alteration has taken place, as someone has said, once the gene is out of the bottle, once these procedures that we're asked to authorise today go ahead, there will be no going back for society."

Replacing mitochondria is very different to designing genetic traits, either through careful selection of eggs and embryos, or splicing, and I think that conflating the two is silly.

If laws were introduced that would allow modification of the primary genetic material that debate would be had then. This law will not shoo-in laws that provide for that kind of genetic modification.

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#24

Post by alextgordon »

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #13
barking wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic doesn't seem like quite the right metaphor but at a time when the world's population is exploding this doesn't seem like our most pressing problem.

World population is not exploding, and overpopulation is not and will not be a major world problem.

Surely the large amount of greenhouse gasses festering in the upper atmosphere would seem to contradict that assertion. Or the fish populations mysteriously disappearing from the seas. Or the former rainforests suddenly becoming farmland and chopsticks. Or the many many species going extinct.

Yes I'm sure the Earth can support more humans but it is at the expense all other life.

Humans are so destructive they named an epoch after us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropocene

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#25

Post by maxerickson »

saidajigumi wrote: post #12
maxerickson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be absolutely stunning if the law gives them any rights at all.

One can hope that the updated legislation somehow addresses this. That said, it would be absolutely stunning if the previously existing law didn't simply go 'boink!' in the face of a heretofore novel circumstance. At very least, I could see the need for the courts to set a precedent if/when the first case came along.

I guess it isn't that novel anymore for a woman to donate eggs and not expect to have any rights to any resulting children.

Swapping out the nuclear DNA doesn't really complicate that.

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#26

Post by ceejayoz »

michaelsbradley wrote: post #4
JacobAldridge wrote: post #2

We (my beautiful wife and I) are currently going through the baby-making limbo, and it looks as though IVF will be the necessary next step. When you start actively trying to have children, there's loads of literature preparing you for the pregnancy swelling and the sleepless life of parenthood etc - less so preparing you for the anxiety, uncertainty, and just general feeling of not being in control of your life which…

I have some friends who struggled with infertility, went through the whole IVF thing (big medical bills, without success) but ultimately had repeat success with the help of modern NFP methods such as NaPro and Billings: http://www.thebillingsovulationmethod.org/ http://www.naprotechnology.com/

IVF involves all the same hormonal and ovulation monitoring that NFP would, so I'm a bit baffled by the apparent belief that this anecdote is anything other than raw probability in action.

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#27

Post by maxerickson »

geographomics wrote: post #18
mikerichards wrote: post #3

So was this banned before?

Yes, it was explicitly banned in 1990, with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act. In 2008 the government modified the act to allow mitochondrial transfer under future regulations, which enabled such research to take place on human tissue [1]. [1] Section 4 of http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2015/9780111125816/pdfs/...

(I wasn't) correct in saying that the implantation of modified embryos was banned in 2008:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/22/section/3

Here's the relevant original text:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/37/section/3/enacte...

edited for error.

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#29

Post by michaelsbradley »

ceejayoz wrote: post #26
michaelsbradley wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have some friends who struggled with infertility, went through the whole IVF thing (big medical bills, without success) but ultimately had repeat success with the help of modern NFP methods such as NaPro and Billings: http://www.thebillingsovulationmethod.org/ http://www.naprotechnology.com/

IVF involves all the same hormonal and ovulation monitoring that NFP would, so I'm a bit baffled by the apparent belief that this anecdote is anything other than raw probability in action.

I simply offered the anecdote for consideration.

I had three couples in mind. One went through IVF three times, the others two times each. In none of the cases were there successful results, though in all three cases there were significant financial costs. All three couples had a child (two of them more than one, so far) after they began using a modern NFP method to track the female partner's fertility; and the financial costs involved were a tiny fraction of the costs of IVF.

The anecdote certainly does not prove IVF does not work, nor was that my intention in relating it.

So what is the point? Well, many couples are oblivious to the existence of modern NFP and its effectiveness at helping couples both avoid and achieve pregnancy, without recourse to surgery and/or pharmaceuticals. I simply want/ed to help raise awareness of these methods.

Re: UK to allow babies from three people

#30

Post by geographomics »

maxerickson wrote: post #27
geographomics wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it was explicitly banned in 1990, with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act. In 2008 the government modified the act to allow mitochondrial transfer under future regulations, which enabled such research to take place on human tissue [1]. [1] Section 4 of http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2015/9780111125816/pdfs/...

(I wasn't) correct in saying that the implantation of modified embryos was banned in 2008: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/22/section/3 Here's the relevant original text: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/37/section/3/enacte... edited for error.

Perhaps I'm reading this incorrectly, but as far I can see it was implicitly banned in the 1990 Act by section 3(3d). And then section 3ZA(5) as introduced in 2008 enabled the development of oocyte or embryo-modifying technologies to prevent mitochondrial disease.
Post reply on HN