[Debate] New biotech discovery will make design babies and genetically edited humans possible

Akаsh

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
25,039
Reaction score
881
The biggest biotech discovery of the century will make designer babies and genetically edited humans possible

You must be registered for see images

Designer babies, genetically engineered to be super-smart, disease free, and physically fit, are the stuff of science fiction. But science fiction often predicts reality.
The ability to edit human genes and, consequently, actually engineer a human being from birth, is something science is far closer to achieving than many may think.

A fascinating new deep dive from MIT Technology Review explains just how close this technology is and why at this point, even though there are still scientific hurdles that need to be cleared, it's almost more a question of ethics than science: what kind of genetic edits to a person are acceptable, especially before they are even born?

The simple and marginally more accepted use of this technology would be to make sure that no one is born with a genetic condition like Huntington's disease, which causes an incurable breakdown of the brain. The scarier and seemingly sci-fi scenario is that genetic editing could allow an elite group to create children who are naturally smarter, stronger, and healthier than everyone else in society.

Jennifer Doudna, a Berkeley biologist who co-discovered the key technology that will theoretically make genetic engineered children possible, is so concerned about what this technology could do that in January she held a meeting to try to get American scientists to pause research before it's irreversible. But with studies being carried out all over the globe and rumors of experiments editing human embryos already said to be under review for publication in China, the fact that this will happen seems inevitable.

"Most of the public," Doudna told MIT Tech Review's Antonio Regalado, "does not appreciate what is coming."


Where the science is now

You must be registered for see images

(successful in monkeys!)

The key to gene editing that Doudna helped discover three years ago is CRISPR-Cas9, a technology from the natural world that she and Emmanuelle Charpentier harnessed and that is now already in wide use. Regalado describes CRISPR as a tool that allows biologists to basically "search-and-replace" components of DNA, meaning they can rewrite specific segments of something's genetic code.

Don't want the code that's related to a particular disease? This will allow us to rewrite it.

That can't be done with perfect accuracy yet: CRISPR currently successfully deletes target code 40% of the time and switches it out correctly about 20% of the time. It can make other unwanted changes too, meaning that now, it's largely unreliable and inconsistent. But researchers expect these rates to improve.

Despite these imperfections, CRISPR has already been used in livestock like cows and pigs and even in monkeys, which showed last year for the first time that targeted genetic editing could be done successfully in primates. Livestock have been engineered to be healthier, while in the monkeys, researchers modified genes that regulate metabolism, immune cell development, and stem cells.

The video below explains how CRISPR works:


Researchers are developing ways to use CRISPR to treat genetic conditions like sickle-cell anemia and cystic fibrosis, and are also experimenting with genetic changes that could eliminate viruses like HIV. Even though viruses aren't genetic diseases, certain gene edits have been shown to prevent the virus from spreading to new cells and to "destroy inactive HIV residing in the human genome by altering critical viral genes," according to a look at genome surgery in MIT Tech Review. Experts even think these types of changes could eventually help treat complex conditions with genetic components like schizophrenia and autism, according to MIT Tech Review — though we still need to understand those conditions better.

Still, editing adult genes to cure conditions or even hacking the adult genome to make stronger, smarter humans (something George Church, a leading researcher in the field at Harvard, thinks will eventually be possible) doesn't change the genes that'll be passed on to any children that person has. As Regalado explains, these adult changes might replace the faulty genes in adult blood or bone cells, but that wouldn't affect the sperm and egg cells, which are what pass DNA on to the next generation.

In order to pass those fixed or augmented cells on, you'd have to edit a human embryo or the sperm and egg (or the adult cells that produce sperm and eggs, as another MIT Tech Review story points out) used to create the embryo — something called "germ line editing."

Designer Babies

You must be registered for see images

Editing an embryo wouldn't just remove a health problem — or, in the dystopian future model, create an augmented human. It would leave lasting changes that are passed on, something that many scientists say is desirable in the case of awful health problems, but much more questionable in the case of enhancements.

"It makes you ask if humans should be exercising that kind of power," Doudna told Regalado, of MIT Technology Review. "If germ line editing is conducted in humans, that is changing human evolution."

Of course, some would say that that's the point, that humanity needs to be improved and that we should hasten the process. Regalado quotes bioethicist John Harris, who says "the human genome is not perfect," and "it's ethically imperative to positively support this technology."

Most researchers told Regalado that they wouldn't do embryo enhancements other than the ones that would remove disease, at least not at this point — but he also says that many stopped answering his questions after he'd asked about the existing research in that area.

So how close are we?

Some skeptical researchers told Regalado that even though "we know it's possible," it's still far too error prone to be considered practical to use in editing human embryos for now.

However, progress is being made. Researchers told Regalado that using CRISPR right now, they probably have to edit 20 embryos to make a monkey in the way that they want. Guoping Feng, a researcher at MIT's McGovern Institute (who made the video explaining CRISPR above), thinks that making a genetically edited human — either without disease or augmented — will be possible in 10 to 20 years.

Other researchers said the key would be editing the DNA of stem cells using CRISPR, then growing and replicating those cell into human egg or sperm cells — something that isn't possible yet, but scientists "think they will soon be able" to do, according to MIT Tech Review. Those new sperm and egg cells could be joined to create an embryo. In that case, researchers could make sure the embryo they'd created had the specific changes they wanted and no unwanted other substitutions before creating an embryo.

Even though the technology required to turn stem cells into those egg and sperm cells is still being developed, stem cell expert Jonathan Tilly at Northeastern told Regalado that his lab is already trying to edit egg cells with CRISPR. Once CRISPR can be used more stably and once the stem cell puzzle is solved — no small thing — that'll be the key, Tilly suggested, to actually growing an animal from a stem cell.

Tilly said that once this is done with animals, it'll prove that it can be done, but at that point you'd want to think long and hard before doing such a thing with humans.

"'Can you do it?' is one thing," he said, but then you ask "'Would you do it? Why would you want to do it? What is the purpose?' As scientists we want to know if it's feasible, but then we get into the bigger questions, and it's not a science question, it's a society question."


CREDITS:




MY QUESTION: IS IT ETHICAL??

Its cool but I dont think its ethical :/

#KEEPITCOOL
 
Last edited:

Punk Hazard

Sage of Six Posts 🔮
Immortal
Joined
Apr 21, 2011
Messages
59,557
Reaction score
4,729
I think it is ethical. ¨Eliminating diseases and giving people more favorable physical conditions, how eeee-vulll!¨
 

Joon

DalbitEcho
Supreme
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
23,681
Reaction score
1,480
Cool and all, but something is not right about.
 

Akаsh

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
25,039
Reaction score
881
I think it is ethical. ¨Eliminating diseases and giving people more favorable physical conditions, how eeee-vulll!¨

I agree, but that would also have the question of choosing a boy or a girl, physical appearances etc, there would be instability in the *** ratios as well as other biases. the 'ideal' child would be no more than a replica of few other million children. No one will be 'special' in their own way, naturality is lost :(

Though its cool to eliminate diseases though :3
 

Wabbit

Banned
Legendary
Joined
Nov 15, 2011
Messages
11,335
Reaction score
797
Why dont you think it is ethical? Do you feel better about your self seeing ugly people?
Everybody wants their kids to be smarter, stronger, and healthier.
 

Hàdes1

Banned
Veteran
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Messages
4,036
Reaction score
358
Here It comes. The Destruction of humanity.
 
Last edited:

Akаsh

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
25,039
Reaction score
881
Cool and all, but something is not right about.

Yes there is :/

Why dont you think it is ethical? Do you feel better about your self seeing ugly people?
Everybody wants their kids to be smarter, stronger, and healthier.

No, as i said, it has its plus points, but naturality will be lost, :/
 

Punk Hazard

Sage of Six Posts 🔮
Immortal
Joined
Apr 21, 2011
Messages
59,557
Reaction score
4,729
I agree, but that would also have the question of choosing a boy or a girl, physical appearances etc, there would be instability in the *** ratios as well as other biases. the 'ideal' child would be no more than a replica of few other million children. No one will be 'special' in their own way, naturality is lost :(

Though its cool to eliminate diseases though :3
I don't see that as any different than now; you and I unique, just like everyone else. You have millions of people with the same body type and millions of people who share traits already. ¨Unique¨ and ¨special¨ these days fall within personality, not physical traits, which is what this should be used for. ***, sexuality, I think those should be off-limits, and we shouldn't let that stop the possibility of removing genetic malfunctions and life-crippling diseases.
 

Wabbit

Banned
Legendary
Joined
Nov 15, 2011
Messages
11,335
Reaction score
797
Yes there is :/



No, as i said, it has its plus points, but naturality will be lost, :/
That conservative attitude not going to help..
It is like choosing best possibilities our selves rather than leaving it to nature/randomness.
 

Akаsh

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
25,039
Reaction score
881
I don't see that as any different than now; you and I unique, just like everyone else. You have millions of people with the same body type and millions of people who share traits already. ¨Unique¨ and ¨special¨ these days fall within personality, not physical traits, which is what this should be used for. ***, sexuality, I think those should be off-limits, and we shouldn't let that stop the possibility of removing genetic malfunctions and life-crippling diseases.

Agreed. *** and sexuality must be offlimits, but I doubt its implementation will be strong if sucha service is ever available to the public.
 

sage1999

Jōnin Strategist 🧠
Regular
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
1,623
Reaction score
142
I hv mixed feelings bout this 1. While I agree th changing the gender is absolutely wrong, we humans hv to take evolution into our own hands and not let it run by natures, or a shady being such as Gods hand.
 

Mikeuhsomething36

Sannin of the Scrolls 📜
Elite
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
5,024
Reaction score
375
Oh My, this is like Final Fantasy seven the failed experiment being genesis bit the child of no disease, the perfect child, sephiroth. So we are trying to create an army of human sephiroths hmm? Or captain america's? Personally I don't find this unethical but tbh human beings by nature are going to evolve to such a point regardless, it's called an algorithm. But right now we're using a heuristic and trying to short cut to it, imo I feel from philosophical sense that human beings have a subconscious drive to be gods, our need towards advancement whether you agree or not seems to stem from nothing more than insecurities with our current state so we advance to compensate for this inner insecurity to become as gods, perfect beings, to advance until we can advance no more. The only problem that may stem is that everyone is given the positives but not the negatives. Sure you may become smarter and stronger and a better immune system but that also leads to a bigger ego, and more people will develop superiority complexes causing them to rapidly advance further to outdo one another to the point where we may destroy one another, so we may in fact be speeding up our extinction, emotions are still a factor and humans are still humans and the last thing we need is more people with NPD or SCD it sounds good but this is like a commercial on tv you get all the good stuff while ignoring the bad, you've all seen irobot and the next thing we know humanity will be just like how it us in the book "the giver".
 

Akаsh

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
25,039
Reaction score
881
That conservative attitude not going to help..
It is like choosing best possibilities our selves rather than leaving it to nature/randomness.

Im not really conservative XD
But yes, I do agree with you that we must have control over these possibilities, but humans arent perfect, as in, it may give rise to new problems, as said in the video, they mentioned that the broken DNA can be fixed itself but leads to mutations, which can be prevented by adding artificial dna at the specific target, now this involves great risk.
moreover, this may also involve secret experiments which are unethical (kinda like orochimaru in naruto xd)

But i get your idea, and i would also agree to this, if and only if this is ensured safe and 'bad' things wont happen >_>
 

Akаsh

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
25,039
Reaction score
881
I hv mixed feelings bout this 1. While I agree th changing the gender is absolutely wrong, we humans hv to take evolution into our own hands and not let it run by natures, or a shady being such as Gods hand.

Oh My, this is like Final Fantasy seven the failed experiment being genesis bit the child of no disease, the perfect child, sephiroth. So we are trying to create an army of human sephiroths hmm? Or captain america's? Personally I don't find this unethical but tbh human beings by nature are going to evolve to such a point regardless, it's called an algorithm. But right now we're using a heuristic and trying to short cut to it, imo I feel from philosophical sense that human beings have a subconscious drive to be gods, our need towards advancement whether you agree or not seems to stem from nothing more than insecurities with our current state so we advance to compensate for this inner insecurity to become as gods, perfect beings, to advance until we can advance no more. The only problem that may stem is that everyone is given the positives but not the negatives. Sure you may become smarter and stronger and a better immune system but that also leads to a bigger ego, and more people will develop superiority complexes causing them to rapidly advance further to outdo one another to the point where we may destroy one another, so we may in fact be speeding up our extinction, emotions are still a factor and humans are still humans and the last thing we need is more people with NPD or SCD it sounds good but this is like a commercial on tv you get all the good stuff while ignoring the bad, you've all seen irobot and the next thing we know humanity will be just like how it us in the book "the giver".

You guys totally get me :win:
 

Itαchi Uchihα

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
3,296
Reaction score
142
Seems like their intent is ethical. Using this technology to help fix the human genome does not seem unethical to me at all. Sure, eventually someone will use this tech for different purposes, but if they can actually do what they say is possible with it, i am all for it.
 

Akаsh

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
25,039
Reaction score
881
Seems like their intent is ethical. Using this technology to help fix the human genome does not seem unethical to me at all. Sure, eventually someone will use this tech for different purposes, but if they can actually do what they say is possible with it, i am all for it.

science always intends for god of humanity, but its humans who misuse it.
kinda like what happened with nuclear energy being a solution to power production and led to the atom bombs in Hiroshima and nagasaki.


THIS MAY ALSO BE: A plus point for advanced biological warfare....
 

Callypigia

Anbu Operative 🎭
Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
2,945
Reaction score
403
Eugenics under the guise of scientific breakthrough seems good, but I've heard that can go wrong. I read something about that in history. The best and most natural way is to pick a partner with desirable genetic traits. It's like recording music: it's better to get a good recording from the start instead of having to complicate the process with too much post-production.
 

MidnightBlaze

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
27
Reaction score
1
What if this tech just gives rise to a zombie apocalypse or something.Maybe the new genetically altered humans think they are better than us the originals and this ultimately leads to a war almost like ww2 but they can back up their claims of being a super race.correct me if I am wrong cause I don't know that much about ww2
 
Last edited:

SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO

Legendary Shinobi 🐸
Supreme
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
39,759
Reaction score
7,032
It seems Gattaca is coming closer in becoming a reality.

You must be registered for see images
 

Jazzy Stardust

Banned
Legendary
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
13,494
Reaction score
987
I don't like the word "ethics", it's full of shit.

I do think they're wasting resources and time, there are so many problems in the world and they're discovering more and more useless things than useful ones. This won't make the world better. It's interesting but we don't need it.
 
Top