Page 1 of 1 [ 9 posts ] 

firemonkey
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,563
Location: Calne,England

18 Jul 2018, 5:58 am

By Marcy Darnovsky 17 Jul 2018


Quote:
The Nuffield Council on Bioethics has taken what it clearly regards as a brave new step: it has openly endorsed the use of genome editing to engineer the traits of future children and generations. The council’s report, Genome editing and human reproduction: social and ethical issues, asserts that such a move could be “morally permissible” under certain circumstances. In effect, it argues that the creation of genetically modified human beings should proceed after a few bioethics-lite boxes are checked off.


Genetically modifying future children isn’t just wrong. It would harm all of us | Marcy Darnovsky | Opinion | The Guardian

The pathway to a super race? Even greater inequality? Does a civilised society really need this?


_________________
Support mental health research
Please support mental health research
http://www.mentalhealthresearchuk.org.uk/
http://mcpin.org/
https://www.mqmentalhealth.org/


Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 133 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 47 of 200
You are very likely neurodiverse (Aspie)


fromamegaverse
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jun 2018
Age: 23
Gender: Female
Posts: 99
Location: Earth

18 Jul 2018, 6:36 am

I don't see gene editing as a pathway to a super race, since genes survive depending on environment. Also possible greater inequality could happen, or possible equality could happen. But that can depend on "who" wants and can distribute gene editing and the "why". And a civilised society could need this depending on the goal of that society. For instance, if the goal of that society is to decrease physical suffering caused by aging, gene editing could be the solution.


_________________
Trying to learn. My views are changing while my knowledge is growing.


Okkano
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 15 Jun 2018
Age: 16
Gender: Male
Posts: 72
Location: Germany

18 Jul 2018, 7:56 am

Simple as that, it's a tool to advance humanity like so many others, and eventually it will happen.
Problem: we do live in a society that enforces social and official control, and the way it is now the technology is very exclusive.


_________________
Is there a reason to judge somebody for seeking contact?
Those who know who they are: think again


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,367
Location: Stendec

18 Jul 2018, 8:54 am

Always consider the source first. Marcy Darnovsky is an American policy advocate and author who has extensively spoken and written on the politics of human biotechnology, focusing on their feminist, social justice, human rights, health equity, and public-interest implications. She completed her Ph.D. in the History of Consciousness program at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and is currently serving as the Executive Director at the Center for Genetics and Society. She is frequently cited by television, radio, and online sources.

Basically, she's a political activist, a social justice warrior, a historian, an administrator, and a media darling -- she is neither a geneticist nor a medical doctor.

Objecting to genetic treatments that could eliminate gene-based disabilities is both inhuman and inhumane. She deserves to be ignored.


_________________
Fnord, the Metasyntactic Variable -- Keeping it real
since '57 by explaining the obvious to the oblivious!


RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,645
Location: Adelaide, Australia

10 Aug 2018, 12:33 am

What is this luddite hysteria? Of course it isn't wrong!


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


Mythos
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 457
Location: England

13 Aug 2018, 11:17 pm

This doesn't bother me in any particular way, since I'm fairly certain when I have children that they're just going to be naturally homegrown demonic creatures. I just find it darkly amusing, an image in my head of somebody picking the visual characteristics of their child and it being a replica of a garbage character creator a la Fallout or Dark Souls.



TessSpoon
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2011
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Posts: 31

14 Aug 2018, 3:05 am

Considering the benefits, I'd say it's not wrong at all. With gene editing, we could make it so that no baby dies early due to some genetic disease. We could also create more geniuses, which would only help advance human society in at least some ways.

As for the inequality issue, I guess that depends on how the gene editing is used. Even then, it'll still exist; even without gene editing, some will just have way better genes than others.



MisterSpock
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 557
Location: Manchester, UK

14 Aug 2018, 11:20 am

On the point that gene editing is not needed because of embryo screening, I feel that it is a logical fallacy. However uncommon, it may be that no embryos are viable/do it have a hereditary genetic defect. To outright deny it in that front is closed-minded. I've not read the 200 page report, just this article, but saying they've greenlit Gattaca is a it sensationalist. As long as doctors are held to the same standards as they have always been, and put care of the patient first, then I do not see a problem unless nations allow privatised, profit-driven corporations to make the decision.

One argument that often comes up is along the lines of "look at my relative, x, and they're doing great - if we had gene editing they wouldn't be here". To which I say, no, they would still be here, but they might not have muscular dystrophy or ALS. While we don't know what all genes do, in a significant number of cases, we know what gene defect causes the fuses or syndrome.

Also, look at the English aristocracy - I'd say that's pretty specific gene editing done the old-fashioned way. People aren't clamouring for Boris Johnson's genes.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,367
Location: Stendec

14 Aug 2018, 12:22 pm

MisterSpock wrote:
On the point that gene editing is not needed because of embryo screening...
Translation: Cure their gene-based disabilities while they are still embryos or simply abort all of the imperfect embryos.


_________________
Fnord, the Metasyntactic Variable -- Keeping it real
since '57 by explaining the obvious to the oblivious!