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

Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome

#41

Post by vezzy-fnord »

probablyfiction wrote: post #31

You can't honestly expect people to observe a ban on technology, voluntary or otherwise. Just look at the music and movie industry. As soon as the technology existed to bypass DRM, people embraced it whole-heartedly. If people have a chance to rid themselves and their descendants of defective genes, they sure as hell are going to do it, regardless of whether it's legal.

The barrier to entry simply isn't comparable. The technology to bypass DRM and copy protection has existed since the day of its invention. You've always had black-box analysis.

Amateur genetic engineering (so-called "biohacking") is in its very early infancy, and it's early to tell how accessible it might become.

Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome

#43

Post by rdudek »

booruguru wrote: post #39

> “We worry about people making changes without the knowledge of what those changes mean in terms of the overall genome,” Dr. Baltimore said. “I personally think we are just not smart enough — and won’t be for a very long time — to feel comfortable about the consequences of changing heredity, even in a single individual.” Yet, we're suppose to trust that GMOs are safe for consumption?

Because I do believe that this is the next step in our human evolution. Be able to modify our DNA to increase our chance of survival in the future. Fungi, bacteria, and viruses modify at an alarming rate and outpace us humans. Humans are complex creatures and it takes many generations for enhancements. We may not be fast enough in the future without some modification help.

Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome

#44

Post by maxerickson »

throwawayaway wrote: post #10
Patrikvo wrote: post #5

We 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.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_mutation#Specific_disease...

None of those are features (and they are "perfect targets" for gene therapy because we have a thorough understanding of the consequences of the edit).

Sickle cell anemia gets trotted around because carriers are somewhat resistant to malaria, but it turns out that everyone who had the choice eradicated malaria rather than deal with it. And people that have two copies of the mutation are more susceptible to malaria.

Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome

#45

Post by probablyfiction »

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #41
probablyfiction wrote: post #31

You can't honestly expect people to observe a ban on technology, voluntary or otherwise. Just look at the music and movie industry. As soon as the technology existed to bypass DRM, people embraced it whole-heartedly. If people have a chance to rid themselves and their descendants of defective genes, they sure as hell are going to do it, regardless of whether it's legal.

The barrier to entry simply isn't comparable. The technology to bypass DRM and copy protection has existed since the day of its invention. You've always had black-box analysis. Amateur genetic engineering (so-called "biohacking") is in its very early infancy, and it's early to tell how accessible it might become.

Back in the 70's when you had people phone phreaking, the barrier to entry was high. You would need access to a box of Cap'n Crunch along with the knowledge on how to phreak. The barrier to entry was low with DRM-bypassing. You didn't need special knowledge; all you needed was a computer and the right software program. In this case the barrier to entry is high: by necessity you need to be a scientist with years of training. The principle, however, is the same. Once set lose, technology cannot be put back in the box.

Unless you're the steam engine.

Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome

#46

Post by transphenomenal »

nsxwolf wrote: post #33
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simultaneously its easy. We modify bacteria, fish, dogs all the time with success. Sure you can go wrong sometimes, but you can go very right too. Add limbs to flies. Make them glow in the dark. And so on.

But there are limits to what genes can express, based on the cell's capabilities. For instance, you could make someone a wolfman by adding hair, but you couldn't have them grow leaves like the Jolly Green Giant. Our cells just don't have the kernel level support or whatever you want to call it.

We share half our genes with the banana. Granted the scientists are (probably) only talking about editing the 0.3% of the genome that makes humans different from each other, but with so much of our DNA shared with other eukaryote celled life, adding leaves may not be that difficult.

Re: Scientists Seek Ban on Method of Editing the Human Genome

#47

Post by lotsofmangos »

transphenomenal wrote: post #46
nsxwolf wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there are limits to what genes can express, based on the cell's capabilities. For instance, you could make someone a wolfman by adding hair, but you couldn't have them grow leaves like the Jolly Green Giant. Our cells just don't have the kernel level support or whatever you want to call it.

We share half our genes with the banana. Granted the scientists are (probably) only talking about editing the 0.3% of the genome that makes humans different from each other, but with so much of our DNA shared with other eukaryote celled life, adding leaves may not be that difficult.

We share half our genes with the banana.

Given that the other half come from monkeys, is this why babies try and eat their toes?

Post reply on HN