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.
Is there anything it can't do?
Have gnu, will travel.
For every problem technology "solves", it creates 10 new ones.
If this statement was supposed to mean "technology makes things 10 times worse," then you're right to call BS. However, it's true that while new technology solves problems, it also creates new ones.
For example, the smart phone has changes the way we live, solving many problems. It's easy to get ahold of people. It's easier to do business on the go. With GPS and maps, it's almost impossible to get lost unless you can't get a signal. We have immediate access to all kinds of media, almost anywhere in the world.
However, there are also loads of associated problems. Everything from the need to keep your battery charged to the adverse effects of social change from ever-present social networking apps, they're "problems". It doesn't mean the new problems outweigh the old ones that technology solves, but at the same time, you'd have to be blind to think that new technology is simply an absolute good thing.
And once you recognize that there can be drawbacks to technological advancement, you have to acknowledge the possibility of a technology where the problems it creates outweigh the benefits. A lot of people might argue, for example, that the world would be a better place if we hadn't invented nuclear weapons.
Still, even if we concede that we'd be better if some technology weren't invented, we aren't able to un-invent it. We have to figure out if there's a way to regulate it to prevent the negative uses and unintended consequences don't get out of control.
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