Slashdot Mirror
In Breakthrough, Scientists Edit a Dangerous Mutation From Genes in Human Embryos (npr.org)
Scientists for the first time have successfully edited genes in human embryos to repair a common and serious disease-causing mutation, producing apparently healthy embryos, according to a study published on Wednesday. From a report: Now, an international team of scientists reports they have, for the first time, figured out a way to successfully edit the DNA in human embryos -- without introducing the harmful mutations that were a problem in previous attempts elsewhere. "It's a pretty exciting piece of science," says George Daley, dean of the Harvard Medical School, who was not involved in the research. "It's a technical tour-de-force. It's really remarkable." The research is ultimately aimed at helping families plagued by genetic diseases. The new experiment used a powerful new gene-editing technique to correct a genetic defect behind a heart disorder that can cause seemingly healthy young people to suddenly die from heart failure. The experiment corrected the defect in nearly two-thirds of several dozen embryos, without causing potentially dangerous mutations elsewhere in the DNA. None of the embryos were used to try to create a baby. But if future experiments confirm the techniques are safe and effective, the scientists say the same approach could be used to prevent a long list of inheritable diseases.
So sick of all the alarmist bullshit. Gene editing is GOING to happen. It's another medical technology. Get over it.
Designer babies that don't suddenly die of inherited diseases OHMEGRD KILL IT WITH FIRE. /s
That disease may have been beneficial in 0.0075% of situations we shouldn't get rid of it! /s
Just gonna leave this here -
http://www.baen.com/Chapters/ERBAEN0036/ERBAEN0036___1.htm
Would it be racialist to eliminate sickle cell?
I'm more worried about Peter Pan.
Mad Scientists for the first time have successfully edited genes in human embryos to induce a common and serious disease-causing mutation, producing apparently unhealthy embryos
Bwuhahahahaahaha
Is there anything it can't do?
Have gnu, will travel.
I have a super cool teenager with Down's Syndrome, there was never a question of carrying to term, and no regrets. But I wonder if there will ever be a way to early DNA hack enough cells to flip a kid to being a mostly unmutated chimera with a shot at no physical weakness or IQ hit. I dont feel sorry for her, but what would I give for another 50 IQ points and a similar bump in social skill.
It's going to be a fun fight, but I suspect the initial discrimination will be against the modified, not the unmodified.
But if I can open up a catalog and choose the best designer genes to have edited into my future child so they're healthy and strong (and smart, if we figure out the rats' nest of interconnected genes influencing intelligence), damn right I'd buy every 'upgrade' I could.
If we had this in mass use today, I believe we'd end up removing many positive attributes from the human germ line. We are very quick to limit what we consider "normal" without a full understanding of the effects beyond the individual and caregivers that a trait has.
For example, it has been shown that ADD is a success trait in more nomadic societies. Those with ADD get "treated" today because they don't fit into our education system. Most ADD disappears as a problem in adults not because it actually goes away but because they are finally free to fill the type of slot that nature chose for them. They find a career and life that benefits from dropping stability and going.
Another example is autism. Many of our geniuses have been a little off in the autism spectrum. Eliminating that variance in the germ line could dampen innovation forever.
There are many other examples of traits that fill positive roles in our society that we would probably seek to edit out because the people with them don't fit into the "norm". Until we gain the capacity to understand that the norm must be judged in relation to making sure that the larger animal is "normal" and has all of its individual "organs" intact, we aren't ready for this.
1: It's not quite a dupe, but this seems to be confirmation of the previously unconfirmed story posted on Slashdot last week: https://science.slashdot.org/s...
2: As reported in both TFA and the previous Slashdot story, the "powerful new gene-editing technique" is CRISPR. (As i'm sure many here could have guessed.)
3: As reported in the previous Slashdot story this is not exactly a "breakthrough". It's the first time it's been done in the US (officially) but teams in other parts of the world have been done it officially (and probably unofficially) as well. This study from China earlier this year claims to be the first attempt to edit "normal" embryos, but earlier attempts had been made with "abnormal" embryos.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
So this technique could be used to eliminate the problems of inbreeding depression, right?
Asking for a friend.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
is paved with good intentions.
Actually, playing god would mean introducing genetic defects. We're correcting his and nature's incompetence.
This is only the beginning and there isn't a damned thing you paranoid luddites can do to stop it.
Is this a Poe? I honestly can't tell with how retarded anti-GMO people are.
I can't wait until the Statist Elites breed themselves to superiority over the rest of us.
I hope that you are joking, for it would be difficult to reveal more ignorance and prejudice in just two lines.
This will be a fantastic technological evolution for the likes of Warren Buffett and Donald Trump.
For the rest of us... if they can jack up the cost of necessary medication like EpiPens by orders of magnitude, for no reason other than "profit," how accessible do you honestly think gene editing will be for you and yours?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
If someone has bad genes just give them a pair of Levi's.
"they're calling it a cure".
The experiment corrected the defect in nearly two-thirds of several dozen embryos, without causing potentially dangerous mutations elsewhere in the DNA
Do they survey the entire genome before and after the edition to check that?
Also, I wonder if an edition could higher (or lower) the odds of mutations later in lifetime at some specific place in the DNA
And thus, a subtle and unconscious admission that the benefits of such technology will likely be cost-prohibitive for the vast majority of the human population.
It depends. Not everything has to be paid in advance. I am certain that we will see rise of "Genetic IP Indenture" where human beings will be encumbered by contractual obligations before they are even born, to return profit to entrepreneur investors into their genetic excellence, over the lifetime of the g.modified. And if offspring of that people inherit these precious genes, they too will be obliged to the contract/copyright owners. I guess that will be especially good opportunity for pension funds to invest into (long term and all that). Ultimately, everybody will have opportunity to chip in. Oh, and the lives of the "invested in" will be insured, so ... if they underachieve, they may still give back, by accident . /sarcasm
So there, who says capitalism isn't good for everyone?
Go back to tweeting, Donald. By the way, Vladimir wants a blowjob.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"