Human embryos edited to stop disease
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-08-2017, 10:23 PM
Human embryos edited to stop disease
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40802147

Quote:Scientists have, for the first time, successfully freed embryos of a piece of faulty DNA that causes deadly heart disease to run in families.
It potentially opens the door to preventing 10,000 disorders that are passed down the generations.

The US and South Korean team allowed the embryos to develop for five days before stopping the experiment.

The study hints at the future of medicine, but also provokes deep questions about what is morally right.

Science is going through a golden age in editing DNA thanks to a new technology called Crispr, named breakthrough of the year in just 2015.

Its applications in medicine are vast and include the idea of wiping out genetic faults that cause diseases from cystic fibrosis to breast cancer.

Yay! Fuck anyone who thinks this is wrong!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like GenesisNemesis's post
03-08-2017, 07:03 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
If we could manipulate genes so that all people were healthy, intelligent, prosperous and good looking, there would be those that would claim that the sickly, dumb, poor, ugly motherfuckers are being discriminated against....


Yeah..

We really need more ugly, dumb people...

Facepalm

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2017, 07:40 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
Whilst it is an amazing thing to do, is it the right thing? A different discussion to be had possibly.

"Whatever you say, Stone Cold Steve Austin." - Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2017, 09:06 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
(03-08-2017 07:40 AM)OakTree500 Wrote:  Whilst it is an amazing thing to do, is it the right thing? A different discussion to be had possibly.

I would posit that not pursuing gene editing tech for the elimination of genetic diseases is wrong. Much in the same way as vaccination, I would suggest that to not seek avenues which may reduce disease exposure and totally suffering is to contribute in some way to the suffering as we could have prevented or lessened the probability of it occurring.

It's late, did that make any sense?

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free Thought's post
03-08-2017, 09:38 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
Ha, yes it did Smile

Yeah, I'm kind of on the fence about it, as yes the initial thought of "no more disease" [eventually] is amazing, and just insane, BUT one could argue that this goes against the evolutionary process and thus we are "playing god" to some sort of extent. It opens a can of worms I think, and I'm not 100% sure this is as good as it seems in our minds.

I suppose we'd never really know the implications of it until it's done out in the real world. I presume at first it'll only be done for those that pay for it, then you get genetic lines of people with no disease in roles of power etc

It just raises a lot of questions for me.

"Whatever you say, Stone Cold Steve Austin." - Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2017, 09:49 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
(02-08-2017 10:23 PM)GenesisNemesis Wrote:  http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40802147

Quote:Scientists have, for the first time, successfully freed embryos of a piece of faulty DNA that causes deadly heart disease to run in families.
It potentially opens the door to preventing 10,000 disorders that are passed down the generations.

The US and South Korean team allowed the embryos to develop for five days before stopping the experiment.

The study hints at the future of medicine, but also provokes deep questions about what is morally right.

Science is going through a golden age in editing DNA thanks to a new technology called Crispr, named breakthrough of the year in just 2015.

Its applications in medicine are vast and include the idea of wiping out genetic faults that cause diseases from cystic fibrosis to breast cancer.

Yay! Fuck anyone who thinks this is wrong!

It is certainly not wrong to want to fund research to find cures for anything no. But just like with any new technology it would be foolish to think the powerful or greedy could not use it for selfish reasons.

Einstein certainly didn't want his science ending up being used for the atomic bomb, but it did.

Think about just the greed of the big corporations in what they charge for medical technology, such as the epi pen. Really no different than say the difference between the ability for a millionaire or billionaire to pay for their own cancer treatment vs the inability for a fast food worker with no insurance. This kind of medical research technology could be monopolized by big corporations too.

The key with anything new isn't to prevent it, or say no rules, but the ethics of the powers in both the public and private sector. It would still need to be regulated just like any other aspect of life to prevent abuse of power.

I would agree that stupid objections based on religion would be nonsense, just like I think religious objections to abortion are nonsense. But I would still want the doctor who preforms them to have a medical degree. I thing with even gene correction you should still want regulations and oversight.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2017, 10:19 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
Having lost a theatre friend to cystic fibrosis FAR too young, I applaud the efforts to cure that prior to birth.

In a semi-related way, among the causes I donate to is the International Society For Stem Cell Research. And I firmly believe that aborted fetal material should be allowed to be used for research and development.

And in some ways, I accept that "first the powerful and greedy" will always have access to the newest developments/treatments/cures. But eventually that helps enable it to start to become affordable to the rest of society.

Non-medical example: When the CD player and DVD players first came out the cheapest versions out there were over $300 for either one. Computers were waaaaaay out of reach for a typical family. Only the rich could afford these luxury items. My last DVD player was about $25. My last desktop computer was on sale for about $300. New things generally cost more. That's just how it is.

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like outtathereligioncloset's post
03-08-2017, 10:30 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
(03-08-2017 10:19 AM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  Having lost a theatre friend to cystic fibrosis FAR too young, I applaud the efforts to cure that prior to birth.

In a semi-related way, among the causes I donate to is the International Society For Stem Cell Research. And I firmly believe that aborted fetal material should be allowed to be used for research and development.

And in some ways, I accept that "first the powerful and greedy" will always have access to the newest developments/treatments/cures. But eventually that helps enable it to start to become affordable to the rest of society.

Non-medical example: When the CD player and DVD players first came out the cheapest versions out there were over $300 for either one. Computers were waaaaaay out of reach for a typical family. Only the rich could afford these luxury items. My last DVD player was about $25. My last desktop computer was on sale for about $300. New things generally cost more. That's just how it is.

Why not? If the female who aborts says it is ok, how would that be any different than say when you sign yourself up to be an organ donor in case you die in a car crash?

It would only be unethical if the female were forced by government to give it up for research. I am donating my body to science when I die so I don't see that as any different.

Consent is what matters, not that it is done. Now if government got to forcing the individual to give it up to a private corporation or to the government itself, then yea, that would be unethical or immoral. But I don't see how donating your own material in a consensual manor would be immoral.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2017, 10:35 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
(03-08-2017 10:30 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(03-08-2017 10:19 AM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  Having lost a theatre friend to cystic fibrosis FAR too young, I applaud the efforts to cure that prior to birth.

In a semi-related way, among the causes I donate to is the International Society For Stem Cell Research. And I firmly believe that aborted fetal material should be allowed to be used for research and development.

And in some ways, I accept that "first the powerful and greedy" will always have access to the newest developments/treatments/cures. But eventually that helps enable it to start to become affordable to the rest of society.

Non-medical example: When the CD player and DVD players first came out the cheapest versions out there were over $300 for either one. Computers were waaaaaay out of reach for a typical family. Only the rich could afford these luxury items. My last DVD player was about $25. My last desktop computer was on sale for about $300. New things generally cost more. That's just how it is.

Why not? If the female who aborts says it is ok, how would that be any different than say when you sign yourself up to be an organ donor in case you die in a car crash?

It would only be unethical if the female were forced by government to give it up for research. I am donating my body to science when I die so I don't see that as any different.

Consent is what matters, not that it is done. Now if government got to forcing the individual to give it up to a private corporation or to the government itself, then yea, that would be unethical or immoral. But I don't see how donating your own material in a consensual manor would be immoral.


I may be wrong but I'm almost certain the US government outlawed use of aborted material for research.

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2017, 11:11 AM
RE: Human embryos edited to stop disease
(03-08-2017 10:35 AM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  
(03-08-2017 10:30 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  Why not? If the female who aborts says it is ok, how would that be any different than say when you sign yourself up to be an organ donor in case you die in a car crash?

It would only be unethical if the female were forced by government to give it up for research. I am donating my body to science when I die so I don't see that as any different.

Consent is what matters, not that it is done. Now if government got to forcing the individual to give it up to a private corporation or to the government itself, then yea, that would be unethical or immoral. But I don't see how donating your own material in a consensual manor would be immoral.


I may be wrong but I'm almost certain the US government outlawed use of aborted material for research.

They have, but not because it should not be done, but they are too afraid of the fundies. They cant grasp the concept of consent and even outside genetic research they also want to outlaw all abortions anyway.

I don't think stem cell research has completely been banned though.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: