Live data from Hacker News

CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos for the first time

qz.com

91–96 of 96 posts

Re: CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos for the first time

#91

Jokes on you! Abortion laws have tightly given time periods on when embryos and fetuses exist in the human/non-human spectrum, and thus, this simple legal loophole will allow you to do anything you want to it during the non-human phase. Roe vs. Wade will always win forever. There's an army of pinkhats who will kill you if you say otherwise.

Yes, all those anti-abortionists who have been killed simply for expressing their opinions by pro-choice advocates...

And now, a short list of people refusing to undergo abortions (anti-abortionists) being killed by people who demand they have an abortion. (pro-abortionists)

http://www.apnewsarchive.com/2002/Pa-Men-Gets-Life-For-Fireb...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/maine-man-accused-kill...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/surrey-man-co...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2338710/Man-begged-f...

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/parents-north-carolina-tee...

http://www.whio.com/news/local/woman-shot-man-demanding-abor...

Re: CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos for the first time

#92

Jokes on you! Abortion laws have tightly given time periods on when embryos and fetuses exist in the human/non-human spectrum, and thus, this simple legal loophole will allow you to do anything you want to it during the non-human phase. Roe vs. Wade will always win forever. There's an army of pinkhats who will kill you if you say otherwise.

> Abortion laws have tightly given time periods on when embryos and fetuses exist in the human/non-human spectrum Untrue. While claims about where a fetus lies on the human/non-human spectrum are often central to anti-abortion arguments, the Constitutional cases starting with Roe on abortion do not address that issue or dictate a result on it. (The anti-abortion camp tends to misrepresent this because they believe th…

And now, the preamble of Roe vs. Wade:

"1. A state criminal abortion statute of the current Texas type, that excepts from criminality only a life-saving procedure on behalf of the mother, without regard to pregnancy stage and without recognition of the other interests involved, is violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician.

(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health.

(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life [410 U.S. 113, 165] may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

> For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester

The Supreme Court legislates classifications of time in an attempt to delineate what is and is not human.

> For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life

The Supreme Court legislates the concept of a "non-human", with the words "viability" and "potentiality of human life" instead.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/wmn/rvw/rvw11.htm

Re: CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos for the first time

#93
post #23
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm sure some variant of that will occur at some point, many genetic disorders are relatively simple and well understood. Even if we are still learning, there are dozens of disorders we could eliminate if we had robust genetic editing capability with pretty good odds of success.

"... many genetic disorders are relatively simple and well understood." Are they, really? As far as I know (and I am not a specialist, so someone more qualified may correct me), gene transcription and translation is far from well understood. It's as if we don't have access to the source code for the compiler, only the machine code and the syntax. You can draw correlations and infer causality from your changes, but yo…

Thanks for the insightful responses

Re: CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos for the first time

#94

Jokes on you! Abortion laws have tightly given time periods on when embryos and fetuses exist in the human/non-human spectrum, and thus, this simple legal loophole will allow you to do anything you want to it during the non-human phase. Roe vs. Wade will always win forever. There's an army of pinkhats who will kill you if you say otherwise.

We've banned this account. HN is no place for partisan battle.

Please don't create accounts to break HN's guidelines with.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13839925 and marked it off-topic.

Re: CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos for the first time

#95
post #94

Jokes on you! Abortion laws have tightly given time periods on when embryos and fetuses exist in the human/non-human spectrum, and thus, this simple legal loophole will allow you to do anything you want to it during the non-human phase. Roe vs. Wade will always win forever. There's an army of pinkhats who will kill you if you say otherwise.

We've banned this account. HN is no place for partisan battle. Please don't create accounts to break HN's guidelines with. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13839925 and marked it off-topic.

LOL @ HN is not a place for partisan battles.

Okay, anti-Trump Silicon Valley.

May the interest rates rise and your markets drain. :D

Re: CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos for the first time

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sort of sounds like a familial prion disease but really - I don't see that as a legit concern. The enzyme is already present in Strep pyogenes which is practically ubiquitous. A lot of us have that same bacteria colonized in our throats. I never used CRISPR when I worked in a molecular lab, just a TOL2 system which was pretty cool in its own right. But CRISPR needs a DNA probe (probes are attached to CRISPR to t…

Thanks for replying. I'm a layman in this field, so I'm not quite sure about how to parse your response. But wanted to make sure you were aware of the existence of Gene Drive. To me it seems dangerous, but I'd love to hear thoughts from someone more educated in the topic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR#Gene_drive This is the point where my thought process forked off into wondering about the implications if the…

Gene Drive with CRISPR is pretty neat, thanks for sharing, I honestly haven't worked with molecular techniques in over 4 years now, so it's been quite a while since I've reviewed a lot of this kind of stuff. From the gene drive wiki, this is one of my favorite lines:

"Endonuclease gene drives work by cutting chromosomes that do not encode the drive at a specific site, inducing the cell to repair the damage by copying the drive sequence onto the damaged chromosome. This is derived from genome editing techniques and similarly relies on the fact that double strand breaks are most frequently repaired by homologous recombination if a template is present, and less often by non-homologous end joining. The cell then has two copies of the drive sequence."

So that is pretty sweet. The researcher just hijacked the cell's repair mechanism in order to ensure the gene is present in both chromosome copies (I'm assuming the human 2n chromosomes here). That mean's all sexual progeny (zygote) will have to inherit one of these copies - and once that happens the single copy can duplicate itself by breaking the chromosome received from the other mating partner and then replicating the gene/drive via homologous repair.

If you want to say it could be dangerous then yea, I'll agree with you. It would obviously depend on the gene you would include with the gene drive (the gene drive I'm assuming is just the homing endonuclease and RNA guide sequence used to target the drive-less chromosome). If a deleterious gene somehow managed to attach itself to the drive system - either artificially or randomly acquiring the sequence in vivo, then that person may have permanently ruined their chances for normal offspring.

As far as an "airborne" vector with the gene drive/and bad gene someone wanted to be propagated, that would be a lot harder I think. I believe you would need the vector to be a virus, so it could gain access to the host's cells and DNA. So you would need a pretty high powered lab working extensively to make an infectious but not virulent virus - with the gene drive and harmful gene it carries. Those labs would be highly regulated and controlled bio weapons facilities. So yea, it could be dangerous.

Or it could be fantastic and something like this could be used to cure all of sickle cell disease by coding for a normal beta hemoglobin gene. Sickle cell only occurs from a single amino acid change, it's not a super complicated genetic disease. It's just one amino acid change that causes red blood cell sickling shape and fragility - which leads to a lot of pain and eventual early demise. There are other genetic diseases that are very simple that could be cured as well.

Anyways, sorry for the late response. I think there is potential to do a lot of good and a lot of harm with this technology. Let's hope we keep it in the right hands.

Post reply on HN