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

Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

academic.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 520 posts

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#441

Post by wizzwizz4 »

ryandv wrote: post #410
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me there are two types of conservatism: concern about a change to society that does not have a clear evidential basis (which I'll call "small-c conservatism"), and a desire for other people to not have nice things (which I'll call "capital-C Conservatism"). If you read early radfems' complaints about trans women, you'll see concerns about men infiltrating the burgeoning movement to subvert or destroy its…

> It seems to me there are two types of conservatism: concern about a change to society that does not have a clear evidential basis (which I'll call "small-c conservatism"), and a desire for other people to not have nice things (which I'll call "capital-C Conservatism"). False dichotomy [0]. Basically a bunch of sophistry to say "all conservatism is bad." > the existence of trans people "erases differences" (Galatian…

> You can't just quote the Bible without providing a translation,

The quotation was from Pope Francis. The Bible reference (one of Saint Paul's letters) was me being facetious. Same with the Genesis reference: transphobic Catholics cite Genesis 1, but if you try to interpret Genesis 2 by the same logic, it says the opposite (and more definitively): the bigoted reading is eisegesis, and not even particularly good eisegesis.

For the record: I also think "my" reading of Genesis 2:22 is eisegesis. Very little of the Bible has to do with trans people specifically. Those passages of the Old Testament which do are best interpreted by an Orthodox rabbi, since they can't really be understood out of context (which hardly anyone else bothers with learning); and the few things Jesus is recorded as having said about trans people (that is, people who'd fall under the modern umbrella category "transgender") were positive; but trans people have little spiritual significance in the major Abrahamic religions (as compared to, say, Hinduism) and aren't major characters of any of the narratives, so there was little reason to say much about them (until the Talmud, which has rulings about a lot of uncommon situations, such as the appropriate treatment of many minority groups – but dates to after Christianity's split from Judaism and isn't really regarded by Christians).

This specific example wasn't my point. The Catholic Church is one of the few organisations in reissbaker's comment that's been around long enough to have taken a strong stance on two of the topics mentioned in the comment. (And I don't know enough about their take on slavery to neatly categorise it as small-c conservatism or capital-C Conservatism: from what little I know, it seems more like Realpolitik.)

> Apply principle of charity

That is me being charitable. There are harsher ways to apply "the purpose of a system is what it does", here.

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#442

Post by chongli »

somenameforme wrote: post #422
chongli wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do appreciate their citations but the spin is a bit much. I’m still very skeptical about the interpretation of a “return to religiosity” rather than religious immigrants continuing their religious observances in their new home countries. To show a proper “return to religious observance” (any religion, not just Christianity) means showing a large number of people who attend religious services regularly but whose par…

I agree that immigration is probably playing a role, perhaps even a significant one, in these numbers, but at the same time this is also expected even without immigration. Religious families are having more children which means that, over time, there would be an inflection such that a generation starts becoming significantly more religious than the one prior - even if it's 100% because the children of that generation…

Yes perhaps I should not have focused on immigrants when the overall question I want to ask is if this effect is driven by religious subgroups/subcultures which include both immigrants from religious countries as well as people from religious communities within the US.

My hypothesis is that we’re not seeing much of a “return to religious observance” from children of parents with low/no religiosity and that nearly all of the resurgence is driven by the aforementioned religious subgroups.

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#443

Post by frumper »

magicalhippo wrote: post #187
vtbassmatt wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this point would be better made without using the word “extreme” so much. All children bring new challenges; kids with DS often bring more; my child with DS has never, ever been an “extreme” challenge (just like most of the other families with kids with DS we know). There are definitely outliers where the “extreme” applies, but it’s not a helpful way of thinking about DS in general.

From this[1] list of associated complications one can read: People with Down syndrome are much more likely to die from untreated and unmonitored infections than other people. Children with Down syndrome are much more likely than other children to develop leukemia Children with Down syndrome are more likely to have epilepsy [...] Almost half of people with Down syndrome who are older than age 50 have epilepsy. And fro…

It's interesting about the leukemia one. They're also more likely to survive it than children without Down Syndrome and less likely to get a second cancer.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2017/11/408906/survivors-childhood...

Aside from that, it is actually hard to paint an accurate picture of today with historical data for people with Down Syndrome as the childhood Trisomy 21 strategies have improved and been implemented in the past 20-30 years. 60 years ago kids with Trisomy 21 were moved into institutions. Kids 30 years ago got some basic treatments to keep them alive. Now kids get all kinds of screenings for hearing, vision, thyroid, heart conditions before problems develop. Turns out it's very difficult to grow, learn and thrive when your thyroid doesn't work, or your cardiovascular system wasn't circulating enough oxygen.

There are more struggles for sure, including intellectual disabilities, but many more kids are doing significantly better than their past generations. It costs more, is more work, but like the parent poster said, my experience certainly isn't extreme. We go to more doctor's appointments, have IEP meetings, and she's in speech therapy. She's generally been pretty healthy, happy and very active.

It was scary when she was born. We were given a pamphlet with a list of things similar to your first link. The reality though is she's more likely to have those than the general population, but some of those things are very rare. 100x very rare is still rare. Having all of those issues would be even more rare. The greater point though is that any kid can have those issues too.

The epilepsy link seems to conflict with what I've seen. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31391451/ https://www.downs-syndrome.org.uk/about-downs-syndrome/healt...

Both of those put it closer to 10% sometime in their life, with about half of those at birth.

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#444

Post by rbanffy »

robertlagrant wrote: post #385
rbanffy wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Conservatives” yearn for an idealised version of something that has been, but that is no more. In that, they are the very definition of sore losers.

You've done it too.

Can you elaborate on that?

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#445

Post by trhway »

jjj123 wrote: post #413
trhway wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But I’m gay, and while there are pros and cons to it, I wouldn’t trade it for anything in the world. Having Dawn syndrome is severe impairment. Being gay isn't an impairment. At least nowadays in US. I'm not sure you would feel the same if you were gay in Chechnja ... where supposedly gays just don't exist, and when something like gay happens the family deals with him themselves (the rule there - either the family d…

My comment makes it clear I’m not comparing the two, I’m just saying it’s not a good argument as it does not hold for other cases.

>I’m just saying it’s not a good argument as it does not hold for other cases.

No. It does hold for other cases where severe impairment is present.

>My comment makes it clear I’m not comparing the two

exactly. Because your case doesn't contain severe impairment. When such an impairment is added - like say making you a father of a gay child in Chechnja where you have to commit a "honor killing" of that child to save the rest of your family - the cases become much more comparable. I'm pretty sure that in Chechnja you'd choose DNA edit to remove gay gene from your child if you're given that choice.

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#446

Post by tptacek »

cornholio wrote: post #224
Daub wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I run the risk of being downvoted on this issue, but there is a personality type associated with downs syndrome. My experience of living in a community of down syndrome young people certainly supported this, but there has also been quite a bit of research on the matter... search Google Scholar and you will see a ton. In brief: very social, positive minded and very creative. Importantly, this seemed not to be effected…

[flagged]

What a hostile and uncharitable thing to say.

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#447

Post by tptacek »

renewiltord wrote: post #45
heavyset_go wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Willing to bet money that it will, there's a ton of investment right now in what I'd call blatant eugenics. There are companies right now making bank on embryo selection based on genetics, the next step is modifying genes instead of rolling a crap shoot and hoping to get what they want. Funnily enough, such companies are funded by and led by some HN subcultures' favorite people, I would know because I was recruited b…

IQ polygenic score companies do exist. Just look at the circle around Jonathan Anomaly and you likely will find them all. I know of a couple that are going to go full open this year. You have to be of the right genetic origin because of the source data, but the truth is it's very risky to do embryo editing. It's hard to tell which way things will land. For all we know, gametogenesis may arrive first. And if that happ…

Does anybody believe IQ/EA PGS companies are a serious thing?

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#448

Post by csin »

user____name wrote: post #381
iLoveOncall wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it is ethical AT ALL to let new children have Down syndrome when we have the ability to eliminate the gene. If Nazis hadn't practiced eugenics it wouldn't have been shuned as it is today. There's nothing wrong with eugenics in itself, just with how it's applied.

The social effects at scale are what bothers me. Just wait a century until employers put "no genetic defects" in their job applications. Or parents who decide to have old fashioned non-designer babies have trouble getting their kids insured. Or homophobia will become normalized again because "they should have fixed it in the womb". Is this a sufficient reason to not prevent genetic defects? Who can say.

This was the premises for the movie Gattaca (1997). One of my favorite movies as a kid.

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#449

Post by wonderwonder »

danw1979 wrote: post #254
wonderwonder wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last year? Its just a house in a residential neighborhood. Neighbors obviously did not want to interact with them very often, limited to a wave if one of them was taking out the trash. The segregation is pretty much desired by the neighbors and understood by the nurses. No one raising a family really wants to have to interact with mentally challenged non family people every day of their lives. Keeping the interaction…

My experience of interacting with people who have Down’s syndrome is that they are especially outgoing, preternaturally friendly and just generally lovely to be around. I’m not arguing for either side of the treatment/screening debate here, but vehemently against an apartheid-like view on how people with disabilities should be treated, i.e. not as outcasts but as fellow humans.

I agree, reality is though that they have special needs and for the most part are unable to care for themselves. The people in the home were there because their families were either unable or unwilling to do it.

Reality is that the vast majority of families don’t want a facility in their neighborhood. If downs could be prevented its an overall positive outcome. I wish nothing but happiness for those already affected

Re: Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome

#450

Post by esseph »

bpt3 wrote: post #420
esseph wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Who is telling you that you "have to live under constant surveillance" and so on?" I was born in the US, didn't have a choice!

You think you live under constant surveillance in the US? While there might be more surveillance than you like, claiming there is constant surveillance everywhere in the nation (or anywhere really) is ridiculous.

You highly and vastly underestimate the scope of data collection.
Post reply on HN