Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
1–10 of 47 posts
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#2Its easy and inevitable. Better than a moratorium: an open database to help track what works and what doesn't, to help you decide.
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#3Its easy and inevitable. Better than a moratorium: an open database to help track what works and what doesn't, to help you decide.
While building this database and working out what doesn't work, would you not have a moratorium?
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#4This article made me want to try human genome editing. It's obvious that given the possibility people are not going to be able to resist.
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#5We should carefully build up the knowledge and experience on genome editing. If we can prevent children to be born with genetic defects, we should. And I don't care if the rich and powerful get to make their kids extra smart and beautiful if that means millions of other children don't have to live with a disability.
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#6This article made me want to try human genome editing. It's obvious that given the possibility people are not going to be able to resist.
When subcultures like furries or bronies get hold of it, things may get more than a bit odd.
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#7This perspective is interesting:
"Many ethicists have accepted the idea of gene therapy, changes that die with the patient, but draw a clear line at altering the germline, since these will extend to future generations."
Doesn't this imply that ethically you can alter your own geneline as long as from that point on you cannot have progeny?
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#8This perspective is interesting: "Many ethicists have accepted the idea of gene therapy, changes that die with the patient, but draw a clear line at altering the germline, since these will extend to future generations." Doesn't this imply that ethically you can alter your own geneline as long as from that point on you cannot have progeny?
It's a weird situation. Why wouldn't I want to edit out BRCA1/2 for myself and my downline? Who gets to say that my progeny have to live with the significant risk of dying from breast cancer?
That's why this is so touchy. Who gets to draw these lines, and why? Bans on anything are rarely helpful.
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#9The world has changed significantly since the 70ies, when such a moratorium worked. I don't think that it would in today's world, where information is more free than ever.
Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome
#10We should carefully build up the knowledge and experience on genome editing. If we can prevent children to be born with genetic defects, we should. And I don't care if the rich and powerful get to make their kids extra smart and beautiful if that means millions of other children don't have to live with a disability.
one man's defect is another's feature. the old bug vs. feature debate, applies here. maybe my thinking has been horribly warped by over exposure to computing.