Slashdot Mirror


Chinese Scientist Says He's First To Create Genetically Modified Babies Using CRISPR (npr.org)

For the first time, a scientist claims to have used a powerful new gene-editing technique to create genetically modified human babies. From a report: The scientist, He Jiankui of the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China, says he used human embryos modified with the gene-editing technique CRISPR to create twin girls. "Two beautiful little Chinese girls name Lulu and Nana came crying into the world as healthy as any other babies a few weeks ago." He says in a video posted online. "The babies are home now with their mom Grace and their dad Mark." He says his team performed "gene surgery" on embryos created from their parents' sperm and eggs to protect the children from the human immunodeficiency virus, HIV, which causes AIDS. The children' father is HIV-positive. "When Lulu and Nana were just a single cell, this surgery removed a doorway through which HIV enter to infect people," He says in the video, one of several posted online to justify and explain the work. Because the research has not yet been published in a scientific journal or carefully vetted by other scientists, many researchers and bioethicists remain cautious about the claim.

142 comments

  1. Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the multiple ways in which HIV can infect a cell this is prob BS.
    http://perspectivesinmedicine.cshlp.org/content/2/8/a006866.full

    1. Re: Very unlikely by reanjr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One guy was already cured of HIV through a bone marrow transplant from another individual with genetic immunity to the disease. To use CRISPR to make the genetic tweak doesn't seem all that farfetched.

    2. Re:Very unlikely by andydread · · Score: 1

      Read up on the CCR5 Delta32 mutation.

    3. Re: Very unlikely by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Yes but HIV is not genetic so why was the father being HIV positive a problem considering, as I understood it, we're talking in vitro here?

    4. Re: Very unlikely by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed. Innate resistance to HIV is well known. The gene that causes it has been identified, and 23andMe will even tell you if you have that gene.

      With an HIV positive dad, the benefit to these GMO babies outweighs the risks.

    5. Re:Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And probably unnecessary.

      I met a couple once who had twins via IVF and did so because the husband had HIV.

    6. Re: Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the chance of accidental transmission with a HIV positive father is above zero?

    7. Re: Very unlikely by parkinglot777 · · Score: 2

      The effect of gene modifying in human may not even show up for a long time. We still have to wait for at least another 20-30 years or even human life time. At least these twin girls would be the first guinea pig for the whole human race (regardless the ethical issue which may rise in the future).

    8. Re: Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People resistant to it still get infected and stay infected for life when they do, but it basically becomes as benign as it would if they were controlling HIV with the latest drugs. That is, it's still possible to spread it, but very unlikely.

      Also, this doesn't mean they can never get AIDS, rather it only confers resistance to one particular strain of the virus. HIV mutates often and quickly, which is why a cure has been so elusive. This is also why two people with the virus shouldn't have unprotected sex: Even if they both have the same strain, it can mutate to a slightly different variant in one person who then becomes a carrier, until they spread it to another person who will then have an all out infection and become dual infected. The strain they aren't resistant to can then develop into full blown AIDS, which they can then also reinfect to the first carrier, possibly enough to the point that the other person develops AIDS as well.

      Moral of the story, people still need to refrain from having sex with monkeys. Barbara Hudson counts as one, FYI.

    9. Re: Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...yes?

      Of those 7 billion people, guess who is susceptible to AIDs? All of them. This isn't some genetic deficiency. It's not a curse from god. His genes are just as viable as yours.

      Key point is "victim". If Elon Musk got a bad blood transfusion, do you think that should bar him from reproducing?

    10. Re: Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Innate resistance to HIV is well known. The gene that causes it has been identified, and 23andMe will even tell you if you have that gene.

      With an HIV positive dad, the benefit to these GMO babies outweighs the risks.

      Why? They're going to need to be protected when they share needles?

    11. Re:Very unlikely by clovis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sorta what you said, but also not.
      From the article you linked

      The second step of virus entry and the first absolutely required for infection entails binding of Env to its primary receptor,the host protein CD4 (Maddon et al. 1986; McDougal et al. 1986). Env is a heavily glycosylated trimer of gp120 and gp41 heterodimers.

      Note the "absolutely required"

      The third step of virus entry, coreceptor binding, is widely thought to be the trigger that activates the membrane fusionpotential of Env. HIV strains can be broadly classified based on their coreceptor usage. Viruses that use the chemokine receptor CCR5 are termed R5 HIV, those that use CXCR4 are termed X4 HIV, and viruses that can use both coreceptors are called R5X4HIV (Berger et al. 1998). There is no compelling evidence that coreceptors other than CCR5 and CXCR4 play important roles in supporting infection of HIV-1 in vivo. With rare exception, only R5 and R5X4 viruses are transmitted between individuals (Keele et al. 2008), likely owing to multiple imperfect but overlapping host restrictions on X4 HIV transmission (reviewed in Margolis and Shattock 2006).

      The NPR.org article says that the researcher blocked the CCR5 pathway, So if the father has the R5 or R5X4 HIV variant, then the genetic modification will indeed prevent the daughter's getting infected from their dad.
      If I recall correctly, this "fix" would also cause the daughters to be immune to the bubonic plague (Yersinia pestis). I suspect that what he did was copy the CCR5 delta 32 mutation into the embryo. it's a mutation known not to be harmful.

    12. Re: Very unlikely by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      Ah yes. Happened to get a disease, possibly from nothing you did "wrong"? NO KIDS FOR YOU! Sounds like a solid argument to me. /s

    13. Re: Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he shouldn't reproduce.

      why bring him up.

    14. Re: Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was a supercontroller donor. We don't know how that works (genes only explain 20%) so we can't fix based on it.
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4664299/

    15. Re: Very unlikely by piojo · · Score: 1

      Fuck's sake... we've got seven billion on this planet and people are helping AIDS victims reproduce??

      What in the flying fuck...

      It seems like we should help everyone or no one. Tell me how AIDS victims are less deserving than someone who waited until she was 40. The only tier of people that's more deserving is those who had no hand in making their situation, such as those with birth defects or gay couples.

      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
    16. Re: Very unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck's sake... we've got seven billion on this planet and people are helping AIDS victims reproduce??

      What in the flying fuck...

      Yes we do, and for the same reason we help people who catch the flu, herpes, or athlete's foot reproduce.

  2. Main Screen Turn on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In A.D. 2018
    Eugenics war was beginning.

    1. Re:Main Screen Turn on by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      It's you !!

    2. Re:Main Screen Turn on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody set up us the CRISPR

    3. Re: Main Screen Turn on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Main gullible gene turn on! All your political bases are belong to us! Take on every Trump familiy presidential nominee! For great justices are removed. You have no chance to survive make your time.

    4. Re:Main Screen Turn on by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      All your base pairs belong to us!

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    5. Re:Main Screen Turn on by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      You have no chance to survive make your time.

  3. Sounds super innovative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Where did they steal the technology from?

    1. Re:Sounds super innovative... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read most of the analysis of this, no where. Everybody believes he's lying.

    2. Re:Sounds super innovative... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      The Chinese recently let it be known that they will now start respect and enforce IP laws. That means they are in the process of moving beyond stealing because they are overtaking the west. The west has gotten fat, lazy, stupid and only interested in its own, homemade problems. Not saying the Chinese model of modern society is something to aspire to (I do not think so, the "social score" idea is right out of a 3rd Reich playbook...), but it is something that seems to begin to work and produce results. And that makes the failure of the west even more of a problem.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    3. Re:Sounds super innovative... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      We will see. Possibly. But since nobody in the West is doing this type research, it is kind of hard to be sure. But even if it is fake, the reactions to the news will be very interesting.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  4. Twin study chance missed by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

    Should have only done this to one twin, imho, it would be a great case study on side effects.

    --
    GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    1. Re:Twin study chance missed by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Why should that have been done? You realize this was done to save the lives of the children, right?

    2. Re:Twin study chance missed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy there, Josef Mengele.

    3. Re:Twin study chance missed by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Should have only done this to one twin, imho, it would be a great case study on side effects.

      The video implies that they were from separate ova and sperm. So they are fraternal twins, and only share ~50% of their DNA. That far outweighs any genetic difference caused by the gene edit.

    4. Re:Twin study chance missed by VitrosChemistryAnaly · · Score: 1

      The video implies that they were from separate ova and sperm. So they are fraternal twins, and only share ~50% of their DNA. That far outweighs any genetic difference caused by the gene edit.

      On average fraternal twins (or you could think of them just as siblings who aren't temporally separated) share 50% of their DNA. On a case by case basis, it can wildly vary, however. Theoretically it spans from 0% to 100%.

      --
      "It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
    5. Re:Twin study chance missed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      50% of the part that varies from human to human, yes? What is the percentage of the whole genome? We share some very large percentage (much more than 50) with other species.

    6. Re:Twin study chance missed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy there, Josef Mengele.

      When the outcome is not certain, doing the fix is not necessarily better than not doing it. This is a common misconception with ethics of A/B tests.
      See the following podcast for interesting discussion on this:
      http://rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-209-christopher-chabris-on-collective-intelligence-the-et.html

    7. Re:Twin study chance missed by butchersong · · Score: 1

      Yes had they been identical this would have been a valuable approach. Obviously this has been happening under the radar in other countries for a while but what concerns me about this is that CRISPR has been shown to result in unintended "edits" or mutations. I can't locate the more interesting link I was reading yesterday but for instance

  5. No need for daycare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nana is already qualified to hold down the fort.

  6. Think of the possibilities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll soon be able to genetically engineer calm, productive and compliant citizens. Every engineered child will be able to attain a good social credit score with this technology. Deviance and antisocial behaviour will be eliminated from humanity!

    1. Re: Think of the possibilities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a Democrat Socialist wet dream.

  7. Cloning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bring on the clones!
    Want to extend your royal blood line? Just clone yourself!

    1. Re:Cloning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My god, just imagine a country of clones where everyone looks the same!

    2. Re:Cloning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like China.

    3. Re:Cloning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My god, just imagine a country of clones where everyone looks the same!

      Or a planet where everyone looks the same: "The Dorian Secret" - last episode (1981) of "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century".

  8. Hate to sound like this but.... by DalM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't trust any science claims coming out of China anymore.

    1. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is it racism? They lie about all their "groundbreaking" claims. And have you ever worked with Chinese grad students? They're great mimics but they can't innovate.

    2. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by DatbeDank · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not f*cking racism when it's been proven over and over again.

      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Chinese+f...

    3. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > How does this racism get modded up?!?

      You're the one being racist against all the expats living in China. The parent post said China, not Chinese.

    4. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up you fucking whining SJW.

    5. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      To describe you as a twat would be a grand understatement.

    6. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the fuck assumed it was racist?! My God!!! I'm surrounded by a bunch of SJW beta pussies! The world can't count on you mouthbreathers contributing to anything in society but stupidity!

    7. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Regardless of whether or not this is real or bullshit, it's EVIL, plain and simple. Two words: Josef Mengele.

    8. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The first comment wasn't racist, but yours is.

      And I have experienced what you describe (specifically students from China in my MS curriculum). What I found to be the common denominator among the ones I spoke with was that they came from wealthy families, and didn't make it into any of the most prestigious Chinese universities.

      So perhaps what you noticed is that a self selected group of wealthy kids who were not smart enough or connected enough to get into their preferred university end up not being the best students in your university. Big surprise.

    9. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you know that there are also fake science findings in US?
      check this https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/heart-cell-therapy-trial-paused-after-fraud-allegations-65018

    10. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're blaming a skin color for the malfeasance of a few scientists. It's racism, and it's modded up to +5 on Slashdot.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    11. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh. When did China's local universities becomes more prestigious than US schools? I mean, I imagine they have variation like we do. State university isn't going to be the same as Harvard or MIT. So of course some of our schools beat some of theirs. But how do our schools stack up these days?

    12. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by es330td · · Score: 2

      It is important to note that Dallas May doesn't distrust *Chinese* people, only that he doesn't trust science coming out of China. As it is well established that the Chinese government controls all aspects of information flow stating a distrust of "Information from China" is very different from saying he distrusts a race of people.

    13. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      No it isn't. If done carefully and ethically genetic research and modification has the potential save lives and end untold human suffering. From your post you would have us abandon entire lines of scientific research base on the works of some evil wack job 70 years ago.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    14. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by skinfaxi · · Score: 1

      but, it's free speech, right?

    15. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Gotta agree with jwhyche. Learn some basic ethics... if you aren't hurting or using anybody, it's not evil. Mengele's experiments were unethical because he was hurting people. Not because he was studying genetics. This attempt to prevent HIV is focused on helping people and not hurting anybody.

      Also, logic: saying genetics is evil because Mengele was into genetics is a rather obvious fallacy. I think it's classified as an "Association Fallacy", closely related to the (hah hah) "Genetic Fallacy".

    16. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by butchersong · · Score: 2

      Well to be fair, objective facts are some of the most racist things you can utter today.

    17. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure your point, but yeah it is. And it's also free speech to reply YOU'RE A GODDAMNED RACIST. Stop acting like your side is the only one with free speech.

    18. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      No, that's bullshit. Do they really know what the long-term effects of their actions will be? Rhetorical question, the answer is a resounding NO, they don't. They could be dooming those children to a life of suffering, perhaps an early death, too, so fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

    19. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Fuck you and the horse you rode in in as well.

    20. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Ricky, Ricky, Ricky, you need to get a grip buddy. I know you don't like to be wrong, but you are. Spend some time researching subject, get a better ideal on what you are talking about. Avoid the nazi comparisons too. You lost your argument the moment you mentioned Mengele.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    21. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      If done carefully and ethically, it can also destroy species and ecologies. Unintended consequences are inevitable.

    22. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      You have to forgive Rick. He had a traumatic event a year ago and hasn't quite got over it.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    23. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one will forgive you for being a sociopath though will they? You should just surrender yourself to the FBI now, and show them where all the bodies are, they might just put you in prison for life without possibility of parole instead of executing you.

    24. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Don't you have a Klan meeting to go to?

    25. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      No one will forgive you for being a sociopath though will they?

      Rick, no need to bring in the sock puppets. If you have something to say, man up and say it. Don't hide behind some anonymous coward id. That is just bad form.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    26. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      Mmmmm, the butt hurt, strong in this one, it is. I'm really trying to stay on the level with you here. We don't want to let my inner troll out and have him drag you back under that bridge. I'm going to take the high road here and walk away. Figuratively speaking of course.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    27. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      All science can have unintended consequences. That is the nature of science. Galileo and Copernicus had the unintended consequence of bringing us out of the dark ages of superstition, well most of us. People like Rick would rather let children die of horrible diseases, like cystic fibrosis or Sickle Cell, than seek a cure for them. I imagine they do this because they are afraid of some thing they don't understand.

      It's the unethical use of genetic or the irresponsible that must be stopped. Curing children is one thing but bring about a GATTA like society is completely unethical.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    28. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That wack job, however immoral it was, actually created a large amount of knowledge that your modern medicine and treatments are based upon. Also it is very easy to always mention the one Mengele when in fact thousands of his and other science's accomplices have been quickly and quietly hushed out to the one United States where they continued the same job with new name.

    29. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He clearly said China, not Chinese.

    30. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone that doesn't agree with me is racist!!!! WAAAAA!!! Fucking moron.

    31. Re: Hate to sound like this but.... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Do you see the US government on your side defending you from having your racism broadcast to the world? If not STFU.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    32. Re:Hate to sound like this but.... by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      > All science can have unintended consequences. That is the nature of science.

      Yes, it's why I mentioned the potential damages of ethical research. Caution, and even a healthy level of paranoia, are needed for genetic work that may change a recipient's health, lifespan, and behavior decades after the original application of the technology. We're seeing this today, in mainland China, where genetic testing led parents living under the "one child" policies to abort female fetuses. While the policy has been relaxed somewhat in recent years, it is still in practice.

  9. Chinese kids? by BringsApples · · Score: 3, Funny

    Parents: Grace, Mark

    Are these Chinese names? Shit, am I being racist?

    --
    Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    1. Re:Chinese kids? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      Parents: Grace, Mark
        Are these Chinese names?

      It is very common for Chinese people to adopt an English name to use when communicating in English.

      Chinese has phonemes that do not exist in English, and is a tonal language, so Chinese names are often very difficult for native English speakers to properly pronounce. Using an English name makes communication smoother, and also signals that they are attempting a cultural fit rather than just learning the language.

      Shit, am I being racist?

      No. A language is not a race.

    2. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The names are not their real names so they can remain anonymous

    3. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "A language is not a race"

      That is not the delimiting factor. If he had meant it as "Chinese people should stick to Chinese names" (which I don't think he did), then that would definitely be.

      Asking uncomfortable questions about other cultures and being open to the answer is not racist (and I concur with your answer).

    4. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife teaches through VIP kid (Teaching English to Chinese students over the Internet). Many of the students have English aliases they go by during class.

    5. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I assume Bill here has changed his name a couple of times to facilitate cultural fit with others...Lol who am I kidding? Change your names to fit Bill but never expect Bill and his kind to do the same...Of curse, Bill is definitely not racist, just needs his place atop the world recognized and acknowledged by little Chinese people changing their names to accommodate him.

    6. Re:Chinese kids? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Change your names to fit Bill but never expect Bill and his kind to do the same...

      Au contraire. I have a Chinese name. My wife is Chinese, so I use her surname, and the first hanzi of her given name, but replace the final hanzi.

      It is the name I use in China, it is printed on my business card, and it was printed on my residence card when I lived in Shanghai.

    7. Re: Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bravo. Nobody cares.

    8. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plenty of western people adopt a Chinese name when they work in Hong Kong / China. Some out right get a Chinese name that isn't related to their original name, some pick something that means/sound similar, and others just use the closest phonetic words. It's not that rare for people to adopt names to facilitate communication in other cultures - plus I'd rather go with an English name than spend 15 minutes with everyone I meet trying to teach them how to pronounce my name. Sort of like how someone with a complicated name will go with a shorter name in Starbucks...

    9. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about Mark, but Grace seems to be a very common name for Asian American women.

    10. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People that mention anything about people in starbucks dont matter in real life.

    11. Re:Chinese kids? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mark twain. from the movies i have seen and a few Chinese nationals i went to school with here in vegas. They stick to popular movie actor/actress names it seems.

      -highdude702(mods)

  10. Please buckle your setbelts and remain seated by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Marconi's spark radio to smartphones. A few base pair deletions to? We have no idea what is about to happen but it will be Earth shaking.

    1. Re:Please buckle your setbelts and remain seated by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      The movie Gattaca isn't that far off. Designer babies will be a thing within my lifetime. Obviously, assuming this doctor's claim is true, the Chinese couldn't care less about the ethical implication (shocker) and are willing to push the field. I can't wait for the first batch of bio-engineered Chinese Super Soldiers(tm) to show up on our shores.

    2. Re: Please buckle your setbelts and remain seated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Designer babies will be a thing within my lifetime.

      You're a bit slow or uninformed. Designer babies is already a thing. Read up on PGD. (Yes used for choosing embryos based on disease genes now, but literally the tech is there and "order me up a bunch of blue eyed blond haired children" is more of an ethics question now than a technical one. As in, doctors won't let you specify those criteria out of ethical concerns, but disease gene are fine...)

    3. Re: Please buckle your setbelts and remain seated by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      Read up on PGD.

      Analyzing a batch of embryos' genetics and selecting ones that have desirable traits is one thing. Enhanced selective breeding. Actually editing the genes is a completely different ballgame. And hasn't been done in human embryos that were carried to term, as far as I can tell.

      You're a bit slow or uninformed.

      You know it's not necessary to be dick to prove a point, right?

    4. Re: Please buckle your setbelts and remain seated by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      How about the gene for the ability to process lactose? I believe (but am willing to be corrected) that the gene is mostly European in origin. If you want that particular set of features, you'd choose "disease genes" that would fit the European "profile", and hope for the best.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    5. Re: Please buckle your setbelts and remain seated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aryans that were lactose tolerant migrated from the Indus valley to Europe several thousand years ago where they largely displaced the existing inhabitants.

      FYI, Aryans are found throughout Asia since they did not all just up and move to Europe, but dispersed more evenly from their initial homeland.

  11. Next up: Human extinction gene drive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it's not already ongoing.
    Any lab assistant could do it.
    Give it enough incubation time, and find something to trigger it everywhere at about the same time, and there's no stopping it.

    Which, yes, isn't called a genetic nuclear bomb for nothing. Although that's still an understatement.

    1. Re:Next up: Human extinction gene drive. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mosquito gene drive "bomb" is effective because the mosquitos have a very short lifespan and their window for breeding is a day or two long.

      This makes it very easy to disrupt be injecting a large number of insects who will breed but not produce viable offspring.

      This is very close to screwworm eradication efforts which use sterilized males to disrupt breeding

      Humans, on the other hand have much longer breeding windows and manage to find a way to breed, even when a large percentage decide to make themselves sterile

  12. Vote me down if you wish.. by dhaen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If true, I think this can be good for the human race. Not to make us all the same, but to make us different. It's accepted that species with wider gene diversity are more resilient. OK some of us may die because of mistakes and wrongdoing but that happens every day in our society anyway - traffic accidents, crime, war etc.

    1. Re:Vote me down if you wish.. by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Yeah, plus we can start giving people tails, which I think would be really useful but alas evolution has "decided" we don't need for some reason.

      Also a hand on the end of that tail, perhaps a symmetrical one with two thumbs, would be pretty useful.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Vote me down if you wish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hybrid vigor is a meme.

    3. Re:Vote me down if you wish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_JYSPZznSA ... you're welcome =)

    4. Re:Vote me down if you wish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might be good, but likely won't amount to anything. There are already people who were born naturally with the CCR5-D32 chemokine allele, but the problem is that even if both parents have it, there is only a 50% chance of the offspring inheriting the same defect. You can CRISPR the defect into as many eggs as you wish but it would not magically bestow HIV resistance on the descendants.

    5. Re:Vote me down if you wish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like when mixed race Americans kicked the pure aryan Germans collective asses in the 1936 Summer Games

    6. Re:Vote me down if you wish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're thinking too small, my friend, too small.
      Maybe now we can finally get some fukken catgirls for real.
      Also a Chocobo.
      And maybe, just maybe, a beowulf cluster of ponies. Actually I think that may be beyond science.

    7. Re:Vote me down if you wish.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who has four thumbs and likes tailjobs?
      THIS guy!

  13. I got my mutation from a microwave oven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My genes are kind of soggy but hey it was either that or an atomic blast.

  14. What if they visit California? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Funny

    Will they have to have CONTAINS GMO tattoos?

    1. Re:What if they visit California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      only when they're sold at the market... CRISPEEBABEES(tm)

    2. Re:What if they visit California? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should have a tag on forehead or not released from a laboratory. If you mate with them the genes of all your future offspring will be contaminated. Remember that DNA is highly self-referencing and there is no single gene responsible for only 1 single thing. So there's no idea what messing with any gene will do in the long run. Unstoppable mass sterility among the worst of outcomes.

      And by the way perhaps the reason why we've not been visited by aliens is cos at one point in species evolution they learn to muck about with their own genes. And that's the end of them, because there's not enough knowledge and time to figure it out.

  15. Fixed title for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chinese Scientist Says He's First To Create Genetically Modified Babies Using CRISPR Against all international conventions not to modify human germ-line cells.

    1. Re:Fixed title for you by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      Yeah, while other countries are still enforcing their naive ethics-based bans, the Chinese just power ahead. I, for one, welcome our new Chinese mutant overlords.

  16. So many existential questions! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will cannibals enact a legislation to protect their rights to biological food? Will EU castrate them to prevent dissemination?

  17. Sounds Like You Dont Know What Words Mean by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tell us about American public school. Tell us about your exciting career you trained for at DeVry "University".

  18. Master Race by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and we now see the re-emergence of a Master race.

  19. KAIJU! by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

    Here come the Kaiju!

  20. Not really news by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 0

    as China has a tendency to proclaim the most outrageous achievements in all things on a weekly basis to show the world how amazing they are :|

    1. Re:Not really news by inking · · Score: 1

      To be fair, it would not be surprising in the least if they did achieve outrageous things with CRISPR. I am not in biotech, but I have been to a number of talks about CRISPR by the people in the field and it is incredible how often something is a no-go because of legislation. There is a whole huge discussion about where to draw a line between using CRISPR to help sick people and making sure that whatever it is you helped them with doesn’t get passed on to their offspring. China just modifies away.

  21. Re:Did he get the tech from a flying saucer cult? by Thud457 · · Score: 0

    Exxxxxcccuuuussssseeee meeeee!

    That's race-car flying saucer sex cult , bub!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  22. Grow up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being offended at everything, in particular when particular section of the world have traits, doesn't help - it's a way of dumbing down.

    Hey, Chinese eat a lot of Chinese food! [dats wasis!]

    They also have a history of bogus scientific claims to the point where they are met with a lot of scepticsm.

    The rest of slashdot don't need to be ignorant of history and pattern recognition, just because it offends babysnookums.

  23. Verify, then Trust by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Hasn't been published in a peer reviewed scientific journal, probably another fake.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  24. what could go wrong? by guygo · · Score: 1

    From the people who brought us Tiangong-1: New, Improved, Much Better than Before Human Beings. Yeah, what could go wrong?

  25. Long Term by Only+Time+Will+Tell · · Score: 1

    I'd be curious about long-term testing for these twins if they've developed true permanent HIV immunity and if they're able to pass it along to offspring. Also, if there are any unintended consequences of this modification.

    1. Re:Long Term by LetterRip · · Score: 1

      I'd be curious about long-term testing for these twins if they've developed true permanent HIV immunity and if they're able to pass it along to offspring. Also, if there are any unintended consequences of this modification.

      What they are doing is removing a receptor that the HIV virus requires for cellular entry. Since it is being removed at the level of DNA, it should be heritable.

      There are known consequences for removal of this receptor - namely greater susceptibility to some other infections such as West Nile Virus; and possibly reduced ability to suppress immune response.

  26. Genetically Engineered Catgirls For Domestic Owner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally, we'll get genetically engineered catgirls for domestic ownership.

    In the mean time, since they can already create Lulu and Nana, can they make me a Lala, Nana and Momo?

  27. No, that dude is racist all the time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That post was by BringsApples. He was being racist. He's always posting racist shit on here. He bitches when foreigners "won't adopt the culture and assimilate" and then posts bullshit like he did when they try to assimilate. He doesn't want foreigners in america, at all, period, forget the inherent irony.

  28. Re:Genetically Engineered Catgirls For Domestic Ow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First it would be necessary to categorize anybody with altered DNA as non-humans, they give them the same legal standing as livestock

  29. Boils down to $$$ and Retaining Power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, isn't it interesting that they created two girls??? Why I wonder...could it be due to the number of men > women by something like 40 million. So who are all those men going to seek companionship from? Well...other men of course which means that HIV will spread like wildfire. Now, with HIV resistant baby girls...in about 16 or 18 years there will be a ready crop of girls for those men to seek companionship with and they will now be immune..and of course with the men being HIV positive this will be just like their little test-tube twins.

    If those 40 million men don't have companionship then what do they do...overthrow the ruling class...just food for thought.

  30. Does the gene patent owner own the children? by aberglas · · Score: 1

    Or maybe the grandchildren -- farmers are not allowed to breed seed.

  31. As I said: Use long incubation times. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Virus writer 101.

  32. Where are the parents from? by sabbede · · Score: 1

    Grace and Mark are not Chinese names. Are Anglicized names common in Hong Kong, or are the parents from somewhere else?

    1. Re:Where are the parents from? by mirthworks · · Score: 1

      It's very common for Chinese people to have English names.

      --
      n/a.
    2. Re:Where are the parents from? by sabbede · · Score: 1

      In mainland China or Hong Kong?

  33. Time to force evolution I guess by atrex · · Score: 1

    Since humanity has pretty much overridden many of the facets of natural selection in the human race with our medical technologies, gene editing like this is probably about the only way we're going to evolve as a species. Future generations could be free of genetic diseases, obesity, and have extended life spans. Assuming the religious nuts don't go to war on it.

    Certainly there are some ethical concerns - ie what if the modifications cause a child to be born with massive defects, extreme pain, or a short life span. The scientists performing the work will have to be very careful with the modifications they make to avoid something like that from happening, but I think as long as they take proper care in their work that it shouldn't. It's also worth asking the question, if we have the technology, is it ethical to not try and cure genetic diseases/etc and let children suffer that could otherwise have been free of illness? Certainly this case at least falls under that umbrella.

  34. Will the protesters... by Doc+Right · · Score: 0

    ...be screaming gattaca! gattaca! ?