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

CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 85 posts

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#41

Post by fma »

zavi wrote: post #28
bilbo0s wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst part is that by the time they were in Kindergarten, the newer models would obsolete them. Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter! Now 10% off!

I'm 26 right now and I'm not planning to have kids until I'm 35 for this exact reason. I don't want my kid to say: "Daddy, why do other kids have disease resistance and I don't? Do you not love me? Or were you one of those stupid anti-CRISPRers who don't believe in science (the anti-vaxxers of the next decades)?" I'd rather wait for 5-10 years to make sure I don't make a lifelong mistake.

5-10 years for this stuff to pass FDA approval? Better luck with your grandkids instead.

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#42

Post by zozbot123 »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #35
zavi wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 26 right now and I'm not planning to have kids until I'm 35 for this exact reason. I don't want my kid to say: "Daddy, why do other kids have disease resistance and I don't? Do you not love me? Or were you one of those stupid anti-CRISPRers who don't believe in science (the anti-vaxxers of the next decades)?" I'd rather wait for 5-10 years to make sure I don't make a lifelong mistake.

Every year you wait, your sperms carry more and more mutations.

That's easily fixed: freeze your sperms. A bit pricey, but not nearly as much as a baby, CRISPR or otherwise.

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#43

Post by saalweachter »

zavi wrote: post #28
bilbo0s wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst part is that by the time they were in Kindergarten, the newer models would obsolete them. Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter! Now 10% off!

I'm 26 right now and I'm not planning to have kids until I'm 35 for this exact reason. I don't want my kid to say: "Daddy, why do other kids have disease resistance and I don't? Do you not love me? Or were you one of those stupid anti-CRISPRers who don't believe in science (the anti-vaxxers of the next decades)?" I'd rather wait for 5-10 years to make sure I don't make a lifelong mistake.

Frankly the technology is not 5-10 years away. Decades, plural. I'd be surprised if we saw it used as a reproductive aid to correct severe hereditary genetic disorders in the next 5-10 years, and we won't see it used for optional modifications until we have twenty or thirty years of experience from the "better than the alternatives" modifications that the techniques aren't just creating massive amounts of cancer.

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#44

Post by justAnotherNET »

kingkawn wrote: post #23
jostmey wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you seek medical authorization, you will find that no one will approve it

Because it will most likely lead to inhumane atrocities that would turn the general public against the technology for a generation

disguting anti science rhetoric. Amazing this is on HN

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#45

Post by joesb »

rmellow wrote: post #33
songco wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ok and good thing if the results is only positive like "Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter". (Maybe not include Bigger?) The worst part of this is that it may not safe. If this introduced some flaws in the babies gene, how to control this, don't allow them have babies?

Please rethink that it's a good world where positive genetic traits can be added to babies - in a world where this is common, you or your kids would be in unfair competition with genetically superior people simply because their parents are rich. And the poor would be, for the first time in history, objectively inferior. Yes, kids with rich parents are already at advantage - just wait to see what genetic superiority d…

On one hand, I kinda agree with you.

On the other hand, I usually stop and inspect myself whenever my reasoning that something is bad is not because it hurts me, but because I can't accept to see others improve.

Good rule of thumb is that people should have the freedom to do anything as long as it doesn't violate other people's right. How does a rich family violate poor family's right by making their rich baby better?

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#46

Post by meowface »

jcranmer wrote: post #39
state_less wrote: post #15

I feel like this turns babies into technology. We might have version 1 where babies aren't likely to get HIV or some other malady. Next round, perhaps we'll see more height, different skin color, increased intelligence. If it's like any other product, it appears babies would be coming out of a factory and with tiers for different features you can buy based on your purchasing power. Sort of like buying an iPhone excep…

Okay, let's get this silly sci-fi trope out the way. Genetics doesn't work like that. We don't have a clue how to edit DNA to make people smarter or taller or stronger. And there's no sign that we're going to get to that knowledge sometime this century. Furthermore, what we do know about our genome and our proteome strongly suggests that lots of stuff are doing double-duty. The gene that causes sickle cell anemia als…

You could be right, but I think you're being a bit pessimistic. We're nowhere near fine-tuning complex traits like intelligence and strength, but I could see it happening within all of our lifetimes.

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#47

Post by zavi »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #35
zavi wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 26 right now and I'm not planning to have kids until I'm 35 for this exact reason. I don't want my kid to say: "Daddy, why do other kids have disease resistance and I don't? Do you not love me? Or were you one of those stupid anti-CRISPRers who don't believe in science (the anti-vaxxers of the next decades)?" I'd rather wait for 5-10 years to make sure I don't make a lifelong mistake.

Every year you wait, your sperms carry more and more mutations.

Sperm frozen in a foreign cryobank since 2017

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#48

Post by zavi »

fma wrote: post #41
zavi wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 26 right now and I'm not planning to have kids until I'm 35 for this exact reason. I don't want my kid to say: "Daddy, why do other kids have disease resistance and I don't? Do you not love me? Or were you one of those stupid anti-CRISPRers who don't believe in science (the anti-vaxxers of the next decades)?" I'd rather wait for 5-10 years to make sure I don't make a lifelong mistake.

5-10 years for this stuff to pass FDA approval? Better luck with your grandkids instead.

中国更快

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#49

Post by duxup »

bilbo0s wrote: post #16
state_less wrote: post #15

I feel like this turns babies into technology. We might have version 1 where babies aren't likely to get HIV or some other malady. Next round, perhaps we'll see more height, different skin color, increased intelligence. If it's like any other product, it appears babies would be coming out of a factory and with tiers for different features you can buy based on your purchasing power. Sort of like buying an iPhone excep…

The worst part is that by the time they were in Kindergarten, the newer models would obsolete them. Bigger, faster, stronger, and MUCH smarter! Now 10% off!

I wonder if a new version, new advancement would be a terror for everyone else. They'd drop a social step, can't do things, less needed, etc.

The movie Gattaca explored this a bit. People in the film are heavily defined by their engineering. They might not BE just engineered, but being superior, or inferior is all encompassing. It becomes all they are.

In the film it is a bit of a curse even for the best. Jerome failed (got a silver medal) at something and can't recover. His medal only turns to gold at the very end.

Re: CRISPR-baby scientist fired by university

#50

Post by toomuchtodo »

p1esk wrote: post #37
toomuchtodo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t wait too long, reproductive tissue begins to degrade in your 30s.

Source?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/3536609/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3253726/

Post reply on HN