First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
Post Reply Should Humans Be Genetically Modified?
867 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / ihlok
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
if it can eliminate some diseases, why not? if you want a monster
14470 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / I D ho
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
I am against genetic modifications not because I believe they are inherently evil, but because they are a tool that will be used by inherently evil humans.
5729 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
15 / M / Palatine, Illinois
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
I can't say too much on my opinion considering it's not one sided.
The pro's and con's vary if you think about since they have potential to evolve our future but coming along with major risks.

Genetically modifying a human seemed overrated if you ask me. But to think of the possibilities this could be a whole new level of evolution for the human race. But what comes along is the risks, if so there is a malfunction or even a slight failure it could damage the human itself.
No matter how hard we try to make up an excuse we're putting someone in danger. I can't say I agree nor can I say I disagree.
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
Self directed evolution will happen.

It will start with germ line modifications curing a few truly horrible conditions and proceed from there.
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/8/15

wingopanda wrote:

no, god made us in his image.

Yes. God created us to be creators.



28528 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
If CRISPR is just used to eliminate hereditary diseases or certain birth defects (such as down syndrome), I don't see the problem with it. Unfortunately, once someone succeeds with that, someone else is going to try making designer babies, which is very bad idea since we don't know the effects or won't consider them. For example, if genetically modified humans were a normal thing, and one year blue eyes were 'in', there'd be a problem, because blue eyes generally start to go bad earlier, meaning there'd possibly be a very large population going blind earlier. As for just switching gender: even without genetic modification, a coutry like China, where there's a limit to how many children you can have and a clear preference for men, is already having problems with there being an uneven population.
35017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 7/8/15
Before I say anything I'd like to offer a couple more comprehensive sources on what's going on and the controversy surrounding it since there seems to be some confusion:

http://www.nature.com/news/chinese-scientists-genetically-modify-human-embryos-1.17378
http://www.nature.com/news/don-t-edit-the-human-germ-line-1.17111

So essentially what's happened here is that a researcher in the PRC has applied a gene editing technique by using it on human germline cells (in this case, embryos obtained from a fertility clinic which were not viable) in the aim to substitute a sequence resulting in the development of a blood disorder with an alternative sequence, reporting afterward that the method isn't presently at a stage where it would be a beneficial therapeutic avenue since the process didn't result in selective genomic editing. In other words, Dr. Huang reported that the thing he and his team were trying to do didn't work, that the enzyme complex used was cutting up and substituting in places it shouldn't be.

The critical response from opponents has been scientific, ethical, and practical in scope. Concerns that the model Dr. Huang's team used (the embryos) was inappropriate for determining therapeutic usefulness in the first place have been raised, the higher rate of "off target" edits in germline cells than in rodent or adult human cell models has been pointed to as a problem with even pursuing such a therapeutic avenue since such edits could potentially prove harmful, and concerns about the ethics of editing genomes in heritable ways have been raised considering the potential to make non-therapeutic edits.

Dr. Huang's next aim is to try to determine how to knock down that rate of "off target" edits, whether by using a different technique, altering enzymatic concentrations, or editing the enzymes themselves. These are logical approaches to try to resolve that problem, but I also agree that there ought to be a broad discussion on exactly where we're going with this sort of research and that opponents are asking valid questions about the experiments Dr. Huang's team is running.

I'm just not sure I'm able to take a strong stance either way at this point since I could see the value of getting a head start against heritable disorders (particularly developmental ones) on the one hand, and the inherent risk of mistaken edits potentially creating serious problems (perhaps problems even worse than the ones we're trying to prevent) which are also now heritable on the other. I understand concerns that public outcry against making non-therapeutic edits or the potential risks of altering genomes in a heritable way could hinder support for other research, but at the same time it seems to me that this is primarily a hurdle which could be overcome by better educating people about the differences between germline editing and somatic cell editing. I'm just not sure I'm ready to put my foot down anywhere at this point, and would rather have more dialogue.
11680 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M
Offline
Posted 7/9/15 , edited 7/9/15
LF> more eye,hair, and skin colors/types.


Oh, and the 3 sizes.
1197 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Cincinnati, OH
Offline
Posted 7/22/15
Never.
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/22/15
Humans should be modified for

1. Improved health
2. Improved lifespan
3. Increased intelligence

Those modifications should occur through both genetic modification and technological integration.
37307 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 7/22/15
Maybe the Chinese government wants to create:

genetically obedient humans to replace the natural disobedient people they now tyrant over...

Or

genetically obedient humans that can travel in space for a long time without losing bone mass, and thus conquer the moon, and space in general.

Or

genetically obedient humans for slave labor that they don't have to pay... (They already do that with their prison population, but....)
91517 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Finland, city of...
Offline
Posted 7/22/15

Dariamus wrote:

Humans should be modified for

1. Improved health
2. Improved lifespan
3. Increased intelligence

Those modifications should occur through both genetic modification and technological integration.


though i must ask do people really need that long lifespan?i mean your body ages quite fast,so last 30 years isn't exactly very rosy.
91517 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Finland, city of...
Offline
Posted 7/22/15

DeadlyOats wrote:

Maybe the Chinese government wants to create:

genetically obedient humans to replace the natural disobedient people they now tyrant over...

Or

genetically obedient humans that can travel in space for a long time without losing bone mass, and thus conquer the moon, and space in general.

Or

genetically obedient humans for slave labor that they don't have to pay... (They already do that with their prison population, but....)


the last one was pretty much great stride (during mao zedungs reign between years 1958-1962).Though About 45(debatable that up to 60 million the usual practise of distorting the numbers to fit mao's vision makes it hard to say) million died due to idiotic ways to enforce communism. They tried trough fear/systemical violence/starvation create obedient society to maos communism. Still people don't really talk about this for some odd reason,it's all hush hush.
7420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/22/15 , edited 7/22/15

Jan- wrote:


Dariamus wrote:

Humans should be modified for

1. Improved health
2. Improved lifespan
3. Increased intelligence

Those modifications should occur through both genetic modification and technological integration.


though i must ask do people really need that long lifespan?i mean your body ages quite fast,so last 30 years isn't exactly very rosy.

Not all cells age.

All living things have germline cells that are already biologically immortal. The trick is, expanding that property to the rest of the body without inducing cancer. A large part of this involves long term damage to telomeres. Erase or prevent the damage, you can turn back the clock.

Scientist have already had some success, increasing the healthy lifespans of certain lab animals by 5x or more.

91517 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Finland, city of...
Offline
Posted 7/22/15

Dariamus wrote:


Jan- wrote:


Dariamus wrote:

Humans should be modified for

1. Improved health
2. Improved lifespan
3. Increased intelligence

Those modifications should occur through both genetic modification and technological integration.


though i must ask do people really need that long lifespan?i mean your body ages quite fast,so last 30 years isn't exactly very rosy.

Not all cells age.

All living things have germline cells that are already biologically immortal. The trick is, expanding that property to the rest of the body without inducing cancer. A large part of this involves long term damage to telomeres. Erase or prevent the damage, you can turn back the clock.

Scientist have already had some success, increasing the healthy lifespans of certain lab animals by 5x or more.



Hrmmm all well and good,but what about overpopulation issue?if the people keep being born at the same rate and people go loooot slower to beyond.Don't need to be genius to see a problem there.Something ought to be done about to limit the birth rate.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.