My uninformed guess is that even if you edit chromosomes it won’t change someone. Like if you edit someone’s DNA to give them DNA that makes blue eyes, their eyes won’t turn blue. I think they are just like turn signals that direct growth of a being during development.
I genuinely wonder where the line is between curing defects and eugenics. It seems razor thin how it can swing easiy into dark territory.
There will be no line for anyone who can afford it. Morality will not be in question. It’s basic human nature. To believe anything else is crazy
This isn’t eugenics or close to it, it’s fixing actual problems before someone is born, not choosing who has rights to breed. If they announced a therapy to guarantee a child will grow up immune to corporate propaganda or be able to use their brain in a rational, well-planned and thoughtful way, and have exceptional language skills, we should voluntarily hand the world over to them. Because what’s happening right now is the opposite of that.
Right now capitalism is imposing eugenics on us. The system and the cost of life has created a very real system deciding who can have families. If tools emerged that could guarantee the kids we DO have aren’t subject to the same weaknesses and limitations, we need to capitalize on every advantage we can.
I agree. Eugenics is about harming the rights of the would-be parents. It means telling them, “You have traits we consider undesirable, so we will forcibly prevent you from having any child whatsoever.”
To me, that’s different from parents choosing to avoid having a child with certain traits. Or not having children at all.
If parents decide to cure a disorder in their future child, or decide to abort a pregnancy, nobody is stopping those parents from trying again. The parents themselves have not been deemed undesirable and unworthy to pass on their genes.
Isn’t eugenics more about choosing who can reproduce for the best outcome? Curing after the facts doesn’t seem to fit that.
You’re definitely right how this without proper regulation could get out of hand with unethical individuals trying to edit genes. I’d say from my non-geneticist perspective the line would be “would editing this gene improve the individual’s quality of life or improve their life expectancy”. Operationalizing"quality of life" is obviously crucial here and can’t be defined socially but medically such as “no debilitating pain”.
I do wonder how things like this will impact existing communities of individuals with disabilities. I’d expect it would probably increase discrimination as it will increase the perception of people with disabilities as being “curable” which isn’t always possible or even desirable.
Yeah this is scary. Down syndrome is definitely in the gray area too where it can be viewed negatively but plenty of people have it and lead fulfilling lives. Wipe cystic fibrosis out of a fetus and all but the most staunch biological purists would agree it was a good thing. Make your fetus white, blonde, and blue eyed and it’s obviously eugenics. I don’t know how I feel about this.
Completely apart from the ethics, I think this technology is really cool though.
They live fulfilling lives at the detriment of others who have to live less fulfilling lives, maybe they don’t see it that way, but its added responsibility
There are a lot of reports and interviews with ppl who have down syndrome that are not happy at all with their situation. Ie. Unable to have a driving licence, go to university, huge disadvantage on the dating market… the list goes on. I’m not saying they can’t have fulfilling moments but we also shouldn’t kid ourselves and look at down syndrome with rosy eyes. If it could be cured everyone would do it instantly.
I’m not looking at it with “rosy eyes”, I’m just explaining that to me it’s not nearly as cut and dry as something like cystic fibrosis.
they should poll people with down syndrome. not carers, not family, no people who work with them.
if they consider they idea obscene, them or should be considered obscene, of they consider it a must, then it’s ok.
I think a fair line is removing debilitating genetic conditions, but not for cosmetic uses.
If the person grows old enough that they have dysphoria for some reason then cosmetic surgeries are pretty routine these days.
This is the beginning of countless sci-fi stories. According to the TV and movies I’ve seen, this will lead to customizing fetuses, mostly for intelligence, and then the question becomes does society accept those people as their leaders (Brave New World) or criminalize their gene-enhanced intellect (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine)?
Or enforce social hierarchies based on genetic traits? (Gattaca)
I was thinking red rising, but that sounds similar. Hadn’t heard about this, gotta watch this, thanks :D
Hm, well red rising was more about specialization and exploitation. While they were some great books, automation and AI should have made reds unnecessary. But pinks, they may not be covered enough by robots and AI and would be the first thing I bet the rich would go for.
As I recall, the reason the Federation outlawed genetic manipulation is due to what happened with the Eugenics Wars, the details of which are murky due to temporal interference, but one of the root causes was clear. While the end results of genetic engineering (Khan Noonien-Singh and his Augments) were undoubtedly superior to normal humans in every way, they also incredibly aggressive and arrogant, a flaw their creators could not correct, as the science was still in its infancy. One of the scientists remarked that “Superior ability breeds superior ambition”.
Being raised in labs by dickheads may have also been a contributing factor in their personality flaws.
Homelander says hi.
checks correlation of education to voting outcomes
Checks news
It will be seen as an anti-control danger and banned entirely by the nearly single-circle Venn diagram of government officials, oligarchs, and religious figures.
They will be quiet about the true nature of their decision. Instead, it will be called a danger to society, ungodly, and unnatural. Rumors will be started that it creates autistic psychopaths, and that anyone in any country that touches the technology will need to be permanently ostracized.
I believe this will happen, only slowly enough that it will feel normal. First genetic diseases for a generation. As our understanding and editing improve, humans will start to edit for benefits, maybe something small like eyesight, so kids don’t need glasses. Eventually, it will just be a part of our medical culture. If everyone is edited, it won’t be taboo to keep going, after all, who wouldn’t want their kids to be better off than they are? 1000 years from now, our species won’t be recognizable to us today. Slightly related, have you seen what they’re doing with lab grown human brain cell organoids connected to microchips? 1000 years (or significantly less!), unrecognizable.
This is from the future I always dreamed about, amazing
Jesus freaks will always complain about playing god when any type of genetic modification is used.
The lab did specify that there’s a looooong road between here and putting this in the clinic, but it’s a good to see.
God that was such a bad intro tune. Adding the acoustic guitar didn’t help. Loved the show until they went full “Timecop”.
Never go full Timecop.
The intro sequence completely slapped though. A Wright Model A taking off, Glamorous Glennis rolling away, OV-101 Enterprise being pushed out of the hangar, the Spirit of St. Louis taxiing out, Saturn V’s launching, LM Eagle’s gear check, Actual footage of Sojourner rover rolling up to sample a Martian rock making this the first sci-fi show to feature footage actually filmed on another planet, Bruce McCandless’ untethered spacewalk from Discovery, the International Space Station taking shape…it’s a shame an intro that fucks that hard was wasted on Bakula’s Enterprise.
“We’ve built a new kind of apparatus and we are going to god damn mother fucking learn something even if it kills us in a new and exotic way.”
I absolutely hated it when I first watched, but it grew on me so much that by the end of the series it was by far my most favourite intro. None of the others come anywhere close.
The most recent ones are an absolute snooze fest only good for skipping
Absolutely. Fantastic opening sequence.
You’re right and yet now it’s a beloved classic
IT’S BEEN A LAWWNNGG ROAAWWWDDDDD GERRIN FROM DERRRR TOOO EEEEEARRRR
#FaithOfTheHeart
I did not realize CRISPR was so powerful as to remove chromosomes entirely. Can CRISPR be used to change someone’s genetic sex? Republicans would freak out.
RED ALERT! WOKE LIBERAL COMMUNISTS ARE USING CRISPR BEAMS FROM LOW IRBITING SATTELITES TO FORCIBLY CHANGE OUR GENDERS! BUY MY ANTI-WOKE SUPPLIMENTS TO PROTECT YOUR MANLINESS.
By my limited understanding that might be feasible right now in utero, which obviously is not exactly what we want.
I think that maybe in the future we could change someone’s sex when they’re older. Honestly I think it’s maybe just the matter of research on this not being focused on genetic changes after the womb.
The article was not clear about what stage in someone’s life the CRISPR treatment can be applied. I would have assumed early in gestation. But this raises questions such as how down syndrome would be detected at that stage. If in vitro is the method, then why not simply filter out down syndrome at that stage?
People are already doing that. But if it can be removed instead then you could increase the viable number of embryos for IVF and decrease how many rounds you have to go through. Edit: not to mention that sometimes the baby is naturally conceived and then if this issue is found during testing, it means you have to choose whether or not to abort and start over. Being able to use CRISPR at that point reduces abortions.
CRISPR on our gonads to produce estrogen instead of testosterone?
🤔 It’s pretty tempting, and as long as it’s not hereditary, I’m all up for it. 🏳️⚧️
Or testosterone instead of estrogen. Though I’m doubtful that exchanging X and Y chromosomes will change the physiological function of your existing organs that much.
I honestly just meant to do this for no other reasons than to flip the bird to conservatives who arbitrarily define sex chromosomally.
While this is fabulous news I do worry that there could be similar done for other genetic conditions that are far more contentious as to whether they’re a disability not.
Neurodivergence is the one that springs to mind right away. The majority of people on the autism spectrum are at level 1. While it has negatives there are positives into thinking and seeing the world differently.
How many of those would have been ‘curered’ in the womb by scared parents who’ve just been told that their child will be born autistic? Scared parents who’s fear will mean when hearing that they think of someone at the far end of level 3.
Then what about for ADHD and dyslexia.
What about other physical conditions like dwarfism etc.
I don’t know if you personally have any disabilities, but generally, when I see this take, the person doesn’t.
I’d take a crispr treatment without hesitation. And everyone I know would do the same. My partner and I are doing IVF not for fertility reasons but to ensure certain genes don’t get passed down to our kids.
That whole disability-is-a-positive view is a very privileged thing to say.
So…Remember the X-Men series of movies? I forget which of the films it was, I stopped giving a shit about superhero movies a decade before it was cool, but one of them involved a “mutant cure.” Most of Professor X’s mutants saw it as an existential threat, but Rogue–whose ‘powers’ utterly sucked–saw it as something she wanted to do.
Ultimately I think the key here is individual consent. Yes and No need to be equally valid answers otherwise it gets pretty fucked up.
Some folks make a pretty good living for themselves looking at the world slightly differently than everyone else, other folks would like to do something with their life other than drool. Surely we the civilization that can split the atom and splice the genome can help both of these people live their best lives? Otherwise what the fuck are we even doing here?
I’m not like the other girls, I stopped caring about superhero movies long before others
No seriously, why did any of you continue to give a shit about Marvel after, like, 2006? That was about the time I realized I lost track of how many Incredible Hulk movies they made, and I would learn later that’s when my interest in movies overall died because that’s all they would ever make ever again
Son you sound young, there’s a lot more to cinema than popcorn flicks like marvel movies, they didn’t stop making good movies, it’s just harder to find and requires people put their money and time to go watch something other than summer blockbusters, expand your taste and maybe also watch older movies, many local theatre’s do reruns of older classics
What this guy said. Or, even better, why doesn’t Captain Aggravated just go make their own movie? It’s not super complicated to do, but it does require getting others involved, since nobody can do everything.
I’m 38 years old. The last time I remember having a good time at a movie theatre was Inglourious Basterds, and if the movies require effort to glean enjoyment out of it I hope I never see a movie again in my life. Used to be you could look up what’s playing at the 4-plex and there’d usually be something fun on. That hasn’t been the case since the last time I felt an emotion and I don’t think either thing is ever going to happen again so fuck it.
See that’s the thing, you want an amusement ride that’s fun, but movies can be more than that, if you can’t have fun anymore, try watching something that’s not trying to be fun, and maybe something clicks, I recently watched 12 Angry Men on a whim, it’s about 12 jurors discussing on a virdict for a man accused of killing his father, this movie came out in 1957, it’s black and white, I didn’t think I could even sit through such a old movie let alone like it, but it was one of the most engaging movies I’ve ever seen and the plot felt so relevant to the current times.
Some other stuff I saw recently that I liked : Predator Killler of Killers
Sinners
Warfare
The Rule of Jenny Pen
Friendship
The Life of ChuckIf you want to watch some old movies that are genuinely special, look up the movies that Alfred Hitchcock made in the 40s and 50s, both color and B&W. I’m especially fond of the bunch he did at the end of the 50s - The Man Who Knew Too Much, North By Northwest, Vertigo, Psycho, and my favorite movie of all time, Rear Window. A few other really interesting ones are Strangers On A Train, Lifeboat, Dial M for Murder, Notorious, Rebecca, etc.
Absolutely mind-blowing, they’re so good. His stuff from the 30s and the 60s is okay, but his middle period was incredible.
other folks would like to do something with their life other than drool
Not trying to be an ass, but how would you know that? How could you get consent from someone in that state?
Okay I suppose force vegetables to be vegetables. I’m honestly to burned out to give the first two half-flaccid thrusts of a reluctant pity fuck about basically anyone.
I also meant more like, even if they “come back,” would they even be able to integrate? Can they (re)learn language and motor skills? Sorry to bother you.
Yeah, on the one hand it isn’t fair to let someone be born with a condition that negatively effects their life when there’s a treatment to prevent it happening. On the other hand, as you say it’s good to have divergent people in society - there really is strength in diversity.
If the world would accomidate for Neurodivergent people more they wouldnt have a problem
I’m still waiting to be tested but I swear if we were still hunters and gatherers in a small tribe then my suspected ADHD would be irrelevant.
Holy crap. The obvious use for this would be in vitro. However, I cannot wait to see how this affects those already born. Could it be used on someone who is a 7 year old to rid them of this? What if they’re 50? So cool. Can’t wait to see where this goes.
And in the US, religious assholes want to ban IVF for exactly this reason, because it’s “playing God”.
The article mentions the technique worked on most (differentiated) skin cells they tested on, in addition to working on (undifferentiated) stem cells.
But, there’s a lot of steps between this article and any sort of treatment, if I understand correctly.
It might be easier to just edit the gametes before they form a zygote at all. That would also make consent for treatment much clearer.
Could it be used on someone who is a 7 year old to rid them of this?
No. Gene editing works in this case since they’re just working with a few cells. But a whole human is way more cells. Not only that, but the cells have already developed into structures that are much harder to access, and difficult to change. Any gene therapy may only affect a few cells.
On top of that, there’s also a bunch of ethical issues around altering a human when they’ve already formed, and we don’t really know if it would be possible to do so, or if it would make things worse.
Hard to say at this point. This early testing was on cells in a petri dish. It will take a lot of study to convert this to a treatment on living humans and determine the best time to intervene.
i can’t tell if you’re serious.
Can it remove my depression and make me love myself?
Yes but you will get that extra chromosome back
I don’t think I understand. Are you saying i’d be mentally challenged?
Yes it was a joke because there is a prejudice that mentally handicapped people are always happy
Seems like very basic research - I wonder how far in the future it might turn into a human treatment, and what improvements people would see?
Humanity, one step closer to get rid of all of the genetic defects that we have accumulated because of our own reproductive stupidity.
I wish for a future in which genetic diseases do not exist. 👐
I wish for a future in which genetic diseases do not exist. 👐
That’s nice, but unambitious. Be bolder, think where we’ll be able to take this after that.
Me, I’m thinking catgirls.
We can solve the Fermi paradox by uplifting our animal friends
That’s a dilemma. The kids and parents not having the challenges is great, but also people with Downs are often some of the best humans to exist.
I work with special needs adults. Your experiences, while valid, with many of those that arent so disabled that they actually can engage with society, do not represent those with more extreme versions of this disability.
Often they will never get to experience the fullness of life they could without. Basically, people with Downs who dont have caretakers with means are fucked pretty hard.
Of the 6 I interact with daily, I think they all would rather not have the disability, and 2 have said they would trade places with the guy in the wheel chair that has seizures sometimes, but is otherwise living a normal life.
I would agree with you on that as well. I do some volunteering with the special Olympics, have family members, etc. it’s like you said and in these cases they are able to interact with the general public, maybe have basic jobs, live in group homes, and so forth.
I also agree they are fucked without support. I am not advocating for more people to have the disease so much as I wish more people had the vibes of the population I’m referencing.
I think you have a super healthy view of this dilemma through your experience. As a person who has experienced the worst Down’s has to offer with a very close relative, i can’t imagine a happier thing they could have told my mother than, “your child doesn’t have to be born with down’s syndrome”.
Due to religion, terminating the pregnancy was never an option, so a set of cosmic dice was spun in how positive or negative this experience would be. Let me tell you right now, I wouldn’t wish my family’s experience on anyone, and that breaks me apart to say more than I’m willing to admit.
But how would them not having the disease make them worse people?
It wouldn’t, necessarily.
Then what the heck is your point? If they would not become worse for being cured of down syndrome, then what’s the dilemma?
They become worse for having to interact with society the same way as everyone else. Most people are assholes. The specific population of people I know are awesome and I consider them better humans than most because society is fucked.
That is a compelling argument. I can’t deny society sucks. But in this case, should we not be promoting down syndrome? Wouldn’t it be better for everyone to have down syndrome? Do we have reason to believe that a society run exclusively by people with down syndrome would be better than other societies, or are the people you know with down syndrome better than the typical person because they receive a lot of care? These are earnest questions by the way, and not meant to be rhetorical.
I kind of understand because I worry about it purely in my own case. I have severe ADHD and, overall, I really wish I could just function without it being a struggle every single day. But in my case and many others with my type of ADHD, its comorbidity with Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria makes me extremely empathetic. A lot of my friends over the years have told me that, when they need someone to truly understand them and see them and give perspective that resonates, they come to me first.
If someday, a doctor would be able to snip off some chromosomes and suddenly I’m cured, it would be positively life-changing. But I would hesitate. The emotional resonance that comes easily to me is something I hold dear to my heart. Would I Iose that part of myself? Would I care? I don’t know. I love that part of me, and while I wouldn’t necessarily be a worse person, losing that part of me means a lot of people that love me lose something they love about me too.
Sounds kinda biblical like eating from the tree of knowledge.
It’s fine and not at all contradictory to care for existing people with Downs and also work to eliminate the condition.
No one’s saying they’re not. But Down syndrome also predisposes kids to cataracts, hearing loss, heart disease, leukemia, thyroid problems, severe constipation, and gum disease. It’s a disorder that causes a litany of health problems, and it’s not fair to saddle a person with potentially life-threatening conditions on the grounds that many with the disorder are nice people.
I don’t think anyone is disagreeing with that. Please read the other comments.
they still can be.
I’ve known plenty of people with down syndrome that were abused and were some of the most vile people I’ve ever known.
perhaps they are the best because they are treated differently and we should treat everyone that way.
I agree. We should treat others differently. Case in point: several people trying to pick a flight with me about this.
Of course I’m not saying “we shouldn’t try to cure this disease.” Maybe I’m saying, “these people are 'Innocents ’ who don’t have to have the same interactions with society as we do, and in some ways that’s better because society is fucked.”
Idk man, having down syndrome also gives you a much greater chance of things like heart defects. Life expectancy has improved recently to 50-60yrs old for them according to a quick search. I don’t think there’s a dilemma here at all. I wouldn’t want a disease that decreases my lifespan.
“Gattaca” and “Brave new world” are becoming reality.
CRISPR is the uranium of biology. Could use it to make cheap, reliable, clean energy, or could use it to make nukes.
Too bad history has showed us that when a new technology appears, bad uses of it tends to become the norm.
Dark Angel doesn’t seem too far fetched now, but seemed impossible in my lifetime when it aired.
deleted by creator
Official confirmation that Reddit liberals have arrived.
The account was since banned, but looking into it, it appeared to be an impersonator account that existed to assassinate the character of an actual person named Danica Jefferies and in reality had nothing to do with her.
I’m guessing some virulent fascist with an ax to grind regarding some of the actual person’s journalism-adjacent work.
How many generations of inbreeding would be necessary before it returns again?
