Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A Chinese researcher claims that he helped make the world’s first genetically edited babies — twin girls born this month whose DNA he said he altered with a powerful new tool capable of rewriting the very blueprint of life.
The genes were altered to be resistant to HIV infection. I'd like to know how they would know it was effective or not without attempting to infect those babies.
There is no independent confirmation of He’s claim, and it has not been published in a journal, where it would be vetted by other experts.
Some scientists were astounded to hear of the claim and strongly condemned it.
However, one famed geneticist, Harvard University’s George Church, defended attempting gene editing for HIV,
So here how it works.
1. we don't know how true it is. There were claims of cloned babies years ago.
2. This is Overtone Window opened. First, there is a claim. Of something unacceptable. Condemned. Then, there is someone who find it acceptable. Then, there's more of those who do so. Then, it becomes accepted. Then, it becomes mandatory.
There is no independent confirmation of He’s claim, and it has not been published in a journal, where it would be vetted by other experts.
Some scientists were astounded to hear of the claim and strongly condemned it.
However, one famed geneticist, Harvard University’s George Church, defended attempting gene editing for HIV,
So here how it works.
1. we don't know how true it is. There were claims of cloned babies years ago.
2. This is Overtone Window opened. First, there is a claim. Of something unacceptable. Condemned. Then, there is someone who find it acceptable. Then, there's more of those who do so. Then, it becomes accepted. Then, it becomes mandatory.
As it was said, welcome to the brave new world.
My son also tried to confirm the information. He has PHD in genetics. He basically told me the same thing that you're saying. We need a lot more information and that is not forthcoming.
At this point, I would be in favor of gene editing only in situations of terrible inherited diseases in which children would greatly suffer if allowed to be born. (I reserve the right to add more exceptions, however.)
The father has HIV, the mother does not. It seems the Dr recruited couples where the father was HIV and the mother was not. Trying to edit the gene so the babies don't get HIV. Reports claim there are other ways to prevent the children from getting HIV, especially when it's from the father.
Scary to read all that can go wrong with this type of procedure.
Playing God is 1 of the most ethically-questionable practices in science/medicine, so I am not for designer babies.
Isn't our quest for smarter robots/computers the same? We could very well be engineering our extinction. It's hard to say where all of this will take us.
My feeling is that we have all the wrong desires: We want robots and computer to do all of our work; but work keeps us in shape and gives us a will to live. We want to live forever without any disease or maladies; but engineering the 'uniformity' is not our idea of freedom. We want to 'procreate' but our planet does have limited resources. We want better and smarter weapons and the hands of the 'Doomsday Clock' continue to move closer to midnight.
That said; history will be the ultimate judge. First we have to survive so we can study our history!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.