111–120 of 166 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But no DNA is being modified.
Technically you are correct, no DNA is being modified. However, the mix of genetic material is being altered.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Opposition is also from those who don't think that human reproduction is a moral imperative to be guaranteed by the state - under the fallacy that it somehow increases our collective quality of life. Like me.
That's an interesting point, and perhaps a good argument for not diverting public health resources towards this kind of procedure (I'm sure there are good arguments for the opposite, too). But there's a big difference between not actively endorsing a procedure like this and making it illegal.
My argument is that one's ability to reproduce should not be guaranteed by the state, and therefore the state should not create laws that overtly or inadvertently sanction the genetic engineering of eggs or embryos to that end.
This law does precisely that.
> Other groups, including Human Genetics Alert, say the move would open the door to further genetic modification of children in the future - so-called designer babies, genetically modified for beauty, intelligence or to be free of disease. There are people who don't think this is a good thing?! If we could eliminate congenital disease, and make everyone smarter, it would be like fast-forwarding human evolution.
And the kids whose parents couldn't afford to have them genetically improved? They just exist as some sort of permanent underclass? If you think the inequality and the way poor people get treated is a problem now, wait until rich people are actually genetically superior to the poor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an interesting point, and perhaps a good argument for not diverting public health resources towards this kind of procedure (I'm sure there are good arguments for the opposite, too). But there's a big difference between not actively endorsing a procedure like this and making it illegal.
Not really. This procedure is likely to be inaccessible to the general public without subsidy via insurance (public or private). My argument is that one's ability to reproduce should not be guaranteed by the state, and therefore the state should not create laws that overtly or inadvertently sanction the genetic engineering of eggs or embryos to that end. This law does precisely that.
Ok, but even taking the first part of that as given I don't understand why the second part follows.
I don't think one's ability to go on holiday should be guaranteed by the state, either, but that doesn't mean plane travel should be illegal.
I really hate this sensational "from three people" thing. It's a mitochondria transplant. We don't start calling people "frankenstein's monsters" because they've had a lung transplant, even though that technically makes them a "person from FOUR people!" Shock!
It is sensational because it is an example of the state sanctioning the customization of human eggs and embryos - which is a pivot of public policy that creates vast consequences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> invasive genetic modification of humans Besides safety, are there any issues with that?
There is the GATTACA argument that unequal access to genetic modification will foster even greater socioeconomic inequality than we already face today. The film imagined a future in which genetic superiority could be measured by percentile and that job eligibility was based almost exclusively on your genetic score. The implication is that the widespread but costly availability of genetic modification in tandem with f…
The current lottery in genetic endowment that nature provides us is horrendously unfair. I expect that fixing problems is going to be a lot easier than creating super-human abilities so I expect that genetic modification will tend to make life much fairer for the foreseeable future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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.
My concern about this isn't the specific procedure, it is the moving of the line of what is allowed. What will happen next? I am sure there will be an illness where just a tiny bit of gene splicing could improve the lives of x amount of babies. You look the blocking of websites.. It started with child porn which everyone thought was acceptable but then the same legislation was used against piracy websites. Now Britai…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We did IVF and got pregnant on our first try. We now have a beautiful 2 year old boy :) Good luck.
We did it four times, and now have four beautiful sons aged 4 - 15 (some requiring a couple of attempts). Not saying IVF will be easy for you, but that it's perfectly fine and - for some people - more efficient way of making babies. We never did find out why making babies the old-fashioned way doesn't work for us. Very good luck!
Chaps - when the docs tell you you're infertile and need IVF, don't assume you'll be infertile forever. Have a vasectomy and "make it so".
Good luck with your IVF, if it works, it'll totally be worth it. Probably.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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.
It is for saving lives, not making people prettier.
I don't think it will make them happier though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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.
What's wrong with "designer babies". I think it would be cool if you could clean up your DNA removing all the nasty genetic diseases you could pass on to your children. I wouldn't really change the appearance of my child though. Plus I would keep most of the original genetic material just fix the bits that are detrimental to a long and healthy life.