View Full Version : Gene splicing and manipulation on the horizon
https://www.livescience.com/59602-crispr-advances-gene-editing-field.html
"The tool, often called CRISPR for short, was first shown to be able to snip DNA in 2011. It consists of a protein and a cousin of DNA, called RNA. Scientists can use it to cut DNA strands at very precise locations, enabling them to remove mutated parts of genes from a strand of genetic material. "
Let's discuss the pros and cons of this type of tech.
I fear this type of tech for the possible long term side effects of manipulating our genes.
CRISPR-CAS9 tool is only being used for research now, but it's use in humans, other animals and plants on a large scale is inevitable.
What say you?
Pros - We may be able to create super humans.
Cons - Zombie apocalypse and the downfall of mankind.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Singlestack Wonder
06-26-17, 08:35
pelosi and schumer cloning on the horizon.....
RetroRevolver77
06-26-17, 09:08
There is honestly nothing good on the horizon for mankind.
7n6
Thanks to science we live in an ethically murky area. Now we can do all sorts of genetic testing; what do you do with the results? Let's say your child, a girl, tests positive for the BRCA gene and has a high probability of developing breast cancer. What do you do with this?
The next step is fixing or bypassing those genes. But we don't know the downhill sequelae, and side effects, etc.
On first blush it's easy to be supportive of this, but I see all sorts of potential pitfalls and perils.
thopkins22
06-26-17, 09:41
There has never been a better time in history to be a human being on the planet. You are less likely to die of starvation or violence than at any point prior, even the most impoverished humans today are wealthier than they ever were, and most of us enjoy a standard of living with luxuries that were unthinkable to the wealthiest people just a few generations prior.
In America's history there were politicians and journalists imprisoned for being anti-war, over 50% of the population had fewer rights extended to them than we think of as a minimum, and you have more rights and freedoms than was historically possible never mind theoretically protected.
Humans have been genetically modifying plants since we came into existence at least 200,000 years ago, and it's likely that our ancestors did too so perhaps for millions of years. We've been genetically modifying/selectively breeding ourselves for that long too.
CRISPR-CASx is not a human invention. Life on earth uses the exact same mechanism to modify itself every single second. It's more accurate and cheaper than earlier methods we used.
I think it's one thing to be a short term pessimist, but in general there has never been a better time to be alive, and almost everything points to your great grandkids saying that too.
We're doing fine.
There is no question in my mind that gene manipulation and splicing will be technically feasible and potentially widespread within 10 years. Whether it comes into widespread use remains to be seen due to the obvious moral and ethical questions.
skywalkrNCSU
06-26-17, 09:53
This technology is absolutely incredible and the next big thing in my opinion. It could pave the way to cure things once thought to be impossible. Sure there are ethical considerations to be discussed but that shouldn't shut everything down
This technology is absolutely incredible and the next big thing in my opinion. It could pave the way to cure things once thought to be impossible. Sure there are ethical considerations to be discussed but that shouldn't shut everything down
Exactly!
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 10:02
Pros - We may be able to create super humans.
Cons - Zombie apocalypse and the downfall of mankind.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
I hate to say it but your pro is actually a con. Super humans will get tired of their inferior brethren and wipe them out. Wait until humans with literally superhuman powers decide the rest of us are "in the way" or "consuming their resources."
NOTHING good comes of this.
Singlestack Wonder
06-26-17, 10:04
If this technology fixes all medical maladies and the population explodes, how does the planet support the masses?
Singlestack Wonder
06-26-17, 10:06
I hate to say it but your pro is actually a con. Super humans will get tired of their inferior brethren and wipe them out. Wait until humans with literally superhuman powers decide the rest of us are "in the way" or "consuming their resources."
NOTHING good comes of this.
Gene Roddenberry predicted this in the 60's with the "Wrath of Khan" Star Trek episode.
thopkins22
06-26-17, 10:11
If this technology fixes all medical maladies and the population explodes, how does the planet support the masses?
Probably the same way we support a population that's twice as big as what was thought to be unsustainable just a few decades ago(with less land use and fewer energy inputs.)
Gene Roddenberry predicted this in the 60's with the "Wrath of Khan" Star Trek episode.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-T7G7DHWh2wM/URsGbNx6V9I/AAAAAAAAB3U/6IDaNJt1u8s/s1600/Khan+MEme.jpeg
thopkins22
06-26-17, 10:18
NOTHING good comes of this.
I wonder if those suffering from Muscular dystrophy, Down syndrome, Huntington's, Cystic Fibrosis, hemophilia, and maybe even multiple sclerosis agree.
If your child was likely to develop life threatening allergies(like can exist with peanut, shellfish, or bee allergies,) and all it took to fix that and only that was something like an immunization shot for your pregnant wife, you would still feel that way?
Forgive the hyperbole, but this kind of thinking is the same type of crap that resulted in astronomers and other scientists being killed. That nothing good could possibly come from challenging the status quo line of "the earth is flat and the sun revolves around us." That the only outcome would be the destruction of faith.
I hate to say it but your pro is actually a con. Super humans will get tired of their inferior brethren and wipe them out. Wait until humans with literally superhuman powers decide the rest of us are "in the way" or "consuming their resources."
NOTHING good comes of this.
My son has a genetic neurological disorder. He's had it since he was born. Nothing in this world would make me happier than to toss some football or play basketball with him, or be able to take him swimming without having to hold him all the time.
I'm a realist, I decided long ago those things were never going to happen. I also decided a long ago to appreciate him, and let him do anything that he wants to do that won't kill him. Now if I could just inherit his six pack abs. :D
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes something or other....
http://i.imgur.com/ysu7pcK.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/MK0SpSD.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/eczOvTm.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/BWyqTcp.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/DQ77tcB.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/nmFbNAn.jpg
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 10:23
What worries me is that
1) They will splice animal characteristics into the human genome. Want a soldier that can go weeks without water? Splice in camel genes. How about a soldier that has a built-in layer of bulletproof armor? Splice in armadillo genes, or turtle genes or something. Create a hybrid organic/kevlar material that the creature grows in the womb. The end result: it will eventually be difficult to prevent these "modifications" from finding their way into the general population through procreation.
2) At some point, certain modifications will become so popular that they will proliferate like Viagara prescriptions. Again, normal inadequate humans won't be able to compete. Imagine trying to get a job with your "normal" brain when your competition is a bunch of genetically-enhanced geniuses.
3) Who knows what long-term consequences come about as a result of gene-splicing? Will new diseases be created? Will an attempt to extend the human lifespan backfire creating a fatal condition?
We must stop this nonsense NOW. I hate be blunt but every bit and byte of data concerning this should be eradicated and the people working on it should be prevented from every working on it again.
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 10:25
My son has a genetic neurological disorder. He's had it since he was born. Nothing in this world would make me happier than to toss some football or play basketball with him, or be able to take him swimming without having to hold him all the time.
I'm a realist, I decided long ago those things were never going to happen. I also decided a long ago to appreciate him, and let him do anything that he wants to do that won't kill him. Now if I could just inherit his six pack abs. :D
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes something or other....
]
With all due respect to you and your situation, I think the danger to the rest of us outweighs the benefits. Sure, it's nice to cure something and I wish the best for you and yours, but you KNOW this technology will be misused. Just like nuclear power can light cities or destroy them completely, this will become a blessing and a nightmare as well.
I'm not unsympathetic: I've got a mother with Alzheimer's that I'd love to have cured. But what if that cure creates monsters that destroy our entire civilization?
skywalkrNCSU
06-26-17, 10:28
What worries me is that
1) They will splice animal characteristics into the human genome. Want a soldier that can go weeks without water? Splice in camel genes. How about a soldier that has a built-in layer of bulletproof armor? Splice in armadillo genes, or turtle genes or something. Create a hybrid organic/kevlar material that the creature grows in the womb. The end result: it will eventually be difficult to prevent these "modifications" from finding their way into the general population through procreation.
2) At some point, certain modifications will become so popular that they will proliferate like Viagara prescriptions. Again, normal inadequate humans won't be able to compete. Imagine trying to get a job with your "normal" brain when your competition is a bunch of genetically-enhanced geniuses.
3) Who knows what long-term consequences come about as a result of gene-splicing? Will new diseases be created? Will an attempt to extend the human lifespan backfire creating a fatal condition?
We must stop this nonsense NOW. I hate be blunt but every bit and byte of data concerning this should be eradicated and the people working on it should be prevented from every working on it again.
This is absolutely absurd and complete fear mongering
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 10:31
This is absolutely absurd and complete fear mongering
Tell me how none of that will ever happen.
skywalkrNCSU
06-26-17, 10:39
Tell me how none of that will ever happen.
You are talking about splicing human genes with genes of an armadillo...
This is absolutely absurd and complete fear mongering
Number 1, I agree with you. Numbers 2 and 3, not so much. Concierge medicine is a thing now, and if genetic modification is available to make "something" better, people will pay. And then there will be consequences.
I am far more concerned about the ethical ramifications so are so important even now: just because you can, does it mean you should? We can keep a baby alive born at 23 weeks now, and we will, but it'll be blind, deaf, profoundly developmentally altered. because science.
Before I get labeled an anti-science-flat-earther, I am all for genetic research and engineering. Who wouldn't love to see DM, CP, et al., a thing of the past like polio?
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 10:44
You are talking about splicing human genes with genes of an armadillo...
Tell me how that won't happen. Not specifically an armadillo--that's just an example I came up with for illustration--but you KNOW some bright person will decide that the "super soldier" needs some capabilities that certain animals have, and that will get into the general population.
You can say that's tinfoil hat conspiracy if you want to, but with all the things human beings have created, name one that hasn't been misused.
THIS time we are talking about the potential corruption of the entire human genome. No, it won't happen overnight. It could take decades.
But tell me what will prevent it?
They couldn't even keep the killer bees locked up for Pete's sake. We live in fear of ISIS or Al Qaeda getting their hands on a nuke. Fukushima is still poisoning that part of the world.
Explain to me in detail, if you can, how gene splicing won't turn out to be another horror long-term?
Honestly, I hope I don't live to see the world this is going to create.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-26-17, 10:49
If this technology fixes all medical maladies and the population explodes, how does the planet support the masses?
Population is already on pace to start to decline as birth rates have dropped. People are living longer, so it will take some time to work through, but look at Japan now, the future demographics of China and the population (excluding immigration) of western Europe. People alive today will probably see peak population.
AI, nuclear weapons, global warming, silent spring, mass starvation-- actually it is a Mark 1 Mod 0 space rock that will get us.
Genetics are a tool. This is not your Bronze Age selective breeding. It is the direct manipulation of the genome. The worst thing is there will be errors and horrible outcomes as they develop the tech and someone always overdrives the scientific headlights.
Super soldiers? There are already humans that have four color receptors, adding one for IR seems to be a pretty basic task. Just the 'standard' four would make detecting camo easier.
As in AI, the genetic thing- outside of repairing horrible genetic based diseases- strikes me funny. We have been literally (up until the last 100 years) to be the apex predator, it would seem in our galaxy. But we think that we can do it better. Millions of years of evolution of hominids and we think we have a better plan, like we are some junker in a History Channel house repair TV show.
skywalkrNCSU
06-26-17, 10:49
Doc, are you anti vaccinations as well?
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 10:54
Are you anti vaccinations as well?
No, and I think you only posted that because you want to steer the narrative into proving I must be some kind of nut that's against all medical advances or something.
Nice try but I didn't just fall off the lettuce truck.
They are not even apples and oranges, more like apples and Brave New World.
Gene splicing will end our civilization as we know it. If that's okay with you, then enjoy your new genetic hybrid world. Hell, you may even get a dog that will talk to you and sit at the table and eat dinner with you, if that's what you want.
You may be able to inject yourself with something that gives you a porn-star-sized sex organ. Wouldn't that be nice?
But what if that injection causes your member to fall off in a few years?
No, these people are playing God and messing with things that they do not have the expertise or wisdom to control.
Tell me again--I missed your explanation on how this won't get out of control.
If I missed that post, please point it out to me.
skywalkrNCSU
06-26-17, 10:58
Do I think people could use this to go to far for vanity purposes? Sure but they already do that with plastic surgery. Do I think we are going to splice animal genes in to create super mutants? No because there are medical ethics and it should be regulated appropriately.
There is so much amazing potential from this that it is crazy to say it should be abandoned and burned to the ground because you've watched a few too many science fiction movies.
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 11:03
Do I think people could use this to go to far for vanity purposes? Sure but they already do that with plastic surgery. Do I think we are going to splice animal genes in to create super mutants? No because there are medical ethics and it should be regulated appropriately.
There is so much amazing potential from this that it is crazy to say it should be abandoned and burned to the ground because you've watched a few too many science fiction movies.
Oh, brother. I don't even like science fiction movies. Most of them are just impossible or stupid or both. I obtain my fear of what they will do with this just watching and reading news stories. Just look around you and see how rotten people are. You think a few good ethical scientists will be able to keep this genie from getting out of the bottle? Are you really that naive? And I don't want to insult you but your argument is really just unicorns and rainbows.
I will ask you again: explain to me in detail how this won't happen. And if you think "ethics" will carry the day, I think you are smart enough to know that medical people violate rules of ethics all the time. Please don't insult my intelligence by trying to float that turd in the punch bowl.
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 11:13
Here's just a small appetizer for your Brave New World banquet:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/545106/human-animal-chimeras-are-gestating-on-us-research-farms/
The effort to incubate organs in farm animals is ethically charged because it involves adding human cells to animal embryos in ways that could blur the line between species.
Last September, in a reversal of earlier policy, the National Institutes of Health announced it would not support studies involving such “human-animal chimeras” until it had reviewed the scientific and social implications more closely.
The agency, in a statement, said it was worried about the chance that animals’ “cognitive state” could be altered if they ended up with human brain cells.
The NIH action was triggered after it learned that scientists had begun such experiments with support from other funding sources, including from California’s state stem-cell agency. The human-animal mixtures are being created by injecting human stem cells into days-old animal embryos, then gestating these in female livestock.
Based on interviews with three teams, two in California and one in Minnesota, MIT Technology Review estimates that about 20 pregnancies of pig-human or sheep-human chimeras have been established during the last 12 months in the U.S., though so far no scientific paper describing the work has been published, and none of the animals were brought to term.
And if you read the rest of the article that I didn't quote, you'll see that the US Army is interested in this. Hmmmmm.....
But I must be tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist.
RetroRevolver77
06-26-17, 11:19
You want to create super humans? Stop feeding the stupid ones that can't support themselves, the exception being people born with disabilities or those that become ill.
So is this only at birth or can I get some velociraptor genomes now?
What worries me is that
1) They will splice animal characteristics into the human genome. Want a soldier that can go weeks without water? Splice in camel genes. How about a soldier that has a built-in layer of bulletproof armor? Splice in armadillo genes, or turtle genes or something. Create a hybrid organic/kevlar material that the creature grows in the womb. The end result: it will eventually be difficult to prevent these "modifications" from finding their way into the general population through procreation.
2) At some point, certain modifications will become so popular that they will proliferate like Viagara prescriptions. Again, normal inadequate humans won't be able to compete. Imagine trying to get a job with your "normal" brain when your competition is a bunch of genetically-enhanced geniuses.
3) Who knows what long-term consequences come about as a result of gene-splicing? Will new diseases be created? Will an attempt to extend the human lifespan backfire creating a fatal condition?
We must stop this nonsense NOW. I hate be blunt but every bit and byte of data concerning this should be eradicated and the people working on it should be prevented from every working on it again.
I don't think it really works like that.
I however am not biogenetic engineer or whatever their called.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 11:30
I don't think it really works like that.
I however am not biogenetic engineer or whatever their called.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Read post #29
Science marches relentlessly on. The genie is out of the bottle. Ain't goin' back in. Genetic manipulation is absolutely part of our world now and will become increasingly so. Instead of trying to artificially limit scientific advancement and its implementation, we'd be better off hashing out the way to approach this new reality.
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 11:53
Science marches relentlessly on. The genie is out of the bottle. Ain't goin' back in. Genetic manipulation is absolutely part of our world now and will become increasingly so. Instead of trying to artificially limit scientific advancement and its implementation, we'd be better off hashing out the way to approach this new reality.
Unfortunately I do believe you are correct. It's already too late to stop this.
Great. Now we will need to isolate a group of non-modified humans to create a control group, so there will be humans left if this whole genetic genie renders the human race sterile.
Great. Now we will need to isolate a group of non-modified humans to create a control group, so there will be humans left if this whole genetic genie renders the human race sterile.
Me personally, I would never do it. I'm a fat bald bastage, and that's my lot in life. Now, if there was a doctor who could beyond a shadow of a doubt help my son walk, I'd sell everything to make it happen.
Doc, I understand a lot of your concerns. I've had (and still have some too), but we can't go through life thinking "what if" all the time. Your rationale on this is the same as the gun control crowd. What if is just what if. Pound the evildoers into the sand. If they (gene splicers) break the law, then they deserve what every other criminal deserves. Lumping a whole science into on category is what they want, and it is fear mongering.
I used to be totally on your side of the fence, then life and reality hit me. As I've grown older, and watched my son grow older I'm sure there's a way that science can help prevent and cure a lot of the problems we never thought cureable. Polio has been used as an example, and it's a great one. How far have we come since then? A heck of a lot. Sure someone will try to break the rules (law if you will), and that's when it's the government's job to step in and stop it.
Genetic splicing and stem cell research are good things. Can they be abused just like anything else? You bet. You can't blame the truck, gun, knife etc... any more than you can blame the science either.
I dbl. majored with a minor in Microbiology. Worked in a Genetics lab and did gene manipulation.
We were using viral vectors to insert genes into Drosophila. Stop codons were of particular interest to our research. Loved running the DNA gel electrophoresis to see if successful. Was a nerd for the PCR machine as well. DNA sequencing, PCR machines, HAC(s), CRISPR machines, etc., most people have no clue how far we are already down this path.
The changes in genetic manipulation that have occurred in the past 10-20yrs. are staggering.
There is a phuck ton of bad things that could be brought about through genetic manipulation. There are also plenty of good things that could be brought to the table.
However, considering human nature, it could bring us some bad news.
To me, it would be really interesting, and challenging, to try and genetically manipulate and select for traits, manipulate, select, over and over, until I made a Black Widow that could fly, with a venom toxicity that has been increased 50X, and the ability to breathe underwater. Now, put those same tools in the hands of nut jobs, BG's, state actors, etc. that don't have the same mentality, ideology, whatever, and...
Curiosity can kill more than the cat.
MountainRaven
06-26-17, 14:04
I hate to say it but your pro is actually a con. Super humans will get tired of their inferior brethren and wipe them out. Wait until humans with literally superhuman powers decide the rest of us are "in the way" or "consuming their resources."
NOTHING good comes of this.
Easy-peasy, lemon-squeezy: Just raise them with better morals than the person who posted this:
You want to create super humans? Stop feeding the stupid ones that can't support themselves, the exception being people born with disabilities or those that become ill.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
---
Great. Now we will need to isolate a group of non-modified humans to create a control group, so there will be humans left if this whole genetic genie renders the human race sterile.
Being that sterility would be a result of genetic engineering and that sterility is something that can be fixed through genetic engineering... I don't think you need to worry about it.
Even so, we're rapidly approaching a time when, "test tube baby," might not mean someone conceived in a lab but grown in a womb, to someone conceived in a lab and grown in an artificial womb.
Doc Safari
06-26-17, 14:08
I'm half-kidding, but I wonder if it will be legal to hunt human-hog hybrids by helicopter?
(Love the alliteration). :jester:
This is absolutely absurd and complete fear mongering
Russians tried it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilya_Ivanovich_Ivanov#Human-ape_hybridization_experiments
skywalkrNCSU
06-26-17, 14:51
Russians tried it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilya_Ivanovich_Ivanov#Human-ape_hybridization_experiments
That does not surprise me. Some of the stuff that the Russsians, Japanese, and Germans did back then was terrifying. I'm sure other places did some pretty messed up stuff too but it's just not as known.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-26-17, 15:14
I am far more concerned about the ethical ramifications so are so important even now: just because you can, does it mean you should? We can keep a baby alive born at 23 weeks now, and we will, but it'll be blind, deaf, profoundly developmentally altered. because science.
25% survival rate and a 50-50 on if they end up as you describe. Of course sub 32 weekers were screwed until there were advances on the lungs/respiration. Pretty much at any time where you seems bad, until they work out the issues and run into the next problem. Maybe we should never have done C-sections?
I'm half-kidding, but I wonder if it will be legal to hunt human-hog hybrids by helicopter?
(Love the alliteration). :jester:
Have you seen the baboon shoots that Tubb put online?
I am far more concerned about the ethical ramifications so are so important even now: just because you can, does it mean you should? We can keep a baby alive born at 23 weeks now, and we will, but it'll be blind, deaf, profoundly developmentally altered. because science.
Before I get labeled an anti-science-flat-earther, I am all for genetic research and engineering. Who wouldn't love to see DM, CP, et al., a thing of the past like polio?
Just as with many, many other areas of science and medicine, the ethics will adjust to the new frontiers and new capabilities. It is absolutely commonplace throughout history that what had been previously unethical becomes completely ethical as science marches on. It is also absolutely commonplace for some people to decry the "ethics" without really even understanding the technology or its possibilities. http://creatingminds.org/quotes/by_experts.htm
I like this one. Seems like something one might have read on an internet discussion forum at one time back on the threshold of modern medicine. As we today are on the threshold of modern genetics.
‘The abdomen, the chest and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon.’
— Sir John Eric Ericson, Surgeon to Queen Victoria, 1873
That does not surprise me. Some of the stuff that the Russsians, Japanese, and Germans did back then was terrifying. I'm sure other places did some pretty messed up stuff too but it's just not as known.
Don't think it can't happen today. The US deliberately infected black servicemen with syphilis and let them go untreated from 1932 to 1972 simply for a clinical study. This is what the US government and our military is capable of doing to our own servicemen in our lifetimes.
I also remember the early failures of gene therapy when people thought they finally had it all figured out and couldn't understand why it wasn't working. All it takes is one guy who is convinced he's right and is just missing some small detail and he will send endless people through an agonizing treatment program trying to crack the code. And this is a person who is idealistically trying to help everyone.
If you get somebody with less than noble ideas, the dark path goes on forever. I'm all for modern science and medicine, and this is something that certainly needs to be looked at, but with a lot of oversight and caution. We have a tendency to engage in things that get away from us.
I also understand there isn't a "authentic human" in the intended sense and we are currently the product of a sometimes random evolutionary process and environmental influences. If we remained in Africa longer, went east rather than west on a different timeline or if the last ice age held strong another 5,000 years we would likely be very different people today.
So in an objective sense tinkering with the code by humans isn't much different than our environment driving changes in the code. So if we were able to turn off the gene that causes cancer without significant repercussions that would be great. But we are just as likely to do something incredibly stupid like attempt to modify our ability to tolerate opiates so everyone could do drugs without fear of overdosing.
This is much bigger than messing with stem cells and all of the potential of abuse associated with obtaining stem cells.
turn off the gene that causes cancer without significant repercussions
Herein lies the problem(I think you already see it); plenty of evidence to suggests genes can control multiple pathways not just one.
Herein lies the problem(I think you already see it); plenty of evidence to suggests genes can control multiple pathways not just one.
Yep, we are groping in the dark for sure. Reminds me of those early nuclear tests where people are close enough to need a trench to protect them from the blast wave and seemingly oblivious to the reach of radiation and fallout.
My concern isn't even what could go catastrophically wrong in the trial and error phase but what happens when a premature success is declared and upgrades become mandatory. Think of it as a reverse scenario to the "inoculations cause autism" hysteria that was for a time presented as fact.
Also I don't think we would see cause and effect in a single lifetime. If you mess with the code, the scary shit might not even manifest itself for three or four generations, after all your kids and grandkids aren't guaranteed to have the same eye color as you even though the gene is present.
I think I'd want to be in the control group for as long as possible. If it condemns me to a natural life span with the current health risks, I still think that is the safer bet.
If you get somebody with less than noble ideas, the dark path goes on forever. I'm all for modern science and medicine, and this is something that certainly needs to be looked at, but with a lot of oversight and caution. We have a tendency to engage in things that get away from us.
This is kind of concern. I mean, I'll be the first to go that gene splicing or manipulation are going to happen on a larger scale sooner or later, but the thought I have is to do so in a way that they don't get used in ways that will be used to harm, kill, or oppress. Because, even if you go, "well all we want to do is to help mankind." Well the road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that, and before long that pill that rewrites cells from causing cancer goes from a one time pill to a weekly pill because the drug company needs to keep profits up. Not saying that is how drug companies work, but I inherently distrust mankind, an well greed. Sorry.
There is also the lovely paper on the study of how to rebuild the Defense infrastructure I read a number of years back that had the lovely line in it, "advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool." If that doesn't scare you to some degree then I don't know man.
With thoughts like that coming from people, I would be inherently hesitant from going mad rush into any science like this. Not saying not to explore it, but do so morally with checks and balances. Like I said, I fully expect this, or cyborgs to become a thing in the future, where we are either engineering the genome to allow people to do things that are beyond the scope of today, or literally engineering/augmenting them to give them more abilities. I don't see that not happening short of a extinction level event. But, putting tools in the hands of people who may will to wipe out large swaths of humans for no particular good reason gives me the willies, not taking into account the possibility of a weapon that might be designed to wipe out one group, backfiring and wiping out everyone. Or, as others stated Zombies, because there are legit books that some next gen miracle cure for cancer being invented, the US Gov, or world Gov going, wait we need to better study it, and some scientist going, "**** that noise, we will save people." And releasing the stuff to the public, and curing cancer, and then it have a nasty side effect that ends up literally killing millions. Yes fiction, but.....
Myself, I just want Wolverine's healing factor. I'll take the built in cutlery too, but now I just getting off topic.
There is no question in my mind that gene manipulation and splicing will be technically feasible and potentially widespread within 10 years. Whether it comes into widespread use remains to be seen due to the obvious moral and ethical questions.
I don't believe the scientific and medical communities will sufficiently understand how to apply this technology without causing unforeseen mutations, cancers, etc. There is still so much we do not understand re: controlling genes, downstream effects, etc. I believe it will be far longer than 10 years before this is applied clinically.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-26-17, 19:39
Genes are not expression. Genes are the blueprint and cell structure are the building. There are about 5 levels of telephone and the impact of 'building site' between the two. Lots of chances for non-obvious or intended out comes. Then you get to 'zoning' of those cells.
We can't even make sure the right kind of cladding gets on buildings...
I don't believe the scientific and medical communities will sufficiently understand how to apply this technology without causing unforeseen mutations, cancers, etc. There is still so much we do not understand re: controlling genes, downstream effects, etc. I believe it will be far longer than 10 years before this is applied clinically.
Ah grasshopper.....
Edit
Interesting stuff, definitely not an apocalypse, but a lot of potential, which is good.
Technology and AI will make the vast majority of Homo sapiens obsolete.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-26-17, 23:17
Technology and AI will make the vast majority of Homo sapiens obsolete.
Vast majority already are? I watched a dude in India sweeping up a construction site with a twig broom...
I hate to say it but your pro is actually a con. Super humans will get tired of their inferior brethren and wipe them out. Wait until humans with literally superhuman powers decide the rest of us are "in the way" or "consuming their resources."
NOTHING good comes of this.
"...ridding themselves of the herd mentality." If I remember my philosophy from years ago, this was already considered by Nietzsche - the "Übermensch" or supermen.
Current medical advances to date have stymied evolution. If we are to evolve further, or even prevent de-volving, gene manipulation is going to be how that happens. The way I figure it, we've only got a relatively short amount of geologic time before the usual species-killing event takes us out. We'd better get crackin'.
Moose-Knuckle
06-27-17, 05:44
If this technology fixes all medical maladies and the population explodes, how does the planet support the masses?
It won't.
Healthy people do not generate profit for Big Pharma and Big Insurance.
Oh I'm sure the elite class will get all the latest greatest med tech but it will be priced out the plebs grasps. Watch / read any 20th century dystopian work to see where this will lead as previously eluded to by some other members.
1) They will splice animal characteristics into the human genome.
Every people group from all corners of the planet have a flood myth. This is precisely why the God of the Old Testament sent "Noah's flood" according to the text.
Technology and AI will make the vast majority of Homo sapiens obsolete.
Gray goo theory is a very possible reality.
I watched a dude in India sweeping up a construction site with a twig broom...
That has more purpose than many others I can think of . . .
I have a friend alive now due to medication produced by genetically modified call lines. The odds are you do as well.
Most insulin is now produced via genetically modified organisms, and many of the hormones & antibodies went from high risk production techniques (hepatitis, etc from cadivers) to low risk GMO cell lines free of disease.
It's here, it's continuing. Yes, there are risks. But also rewards.
Just as with many, many other areas of science and medicine, the ethics will adjust to the new frontiers and new capabilities. It is absolutely commonplace throughout history that what had been previously unethical becomes completely ethical as science marches on. It is also absolutely commonplace for some people to decry the "ethics" without really even understanding the technology or its possibilities. http://creatingminds.org/quotes/by_experts.htm
But they don't, not always. I know I see docs slapping themselves on the back after delivering that 24-weeker; or, high-fiving after getting a pulse back after someone coding for an hour. It goes back to, we do it because we can, not because it's always right; it's a mindset thing, not a technology thing. I saw it in paramedics, and I see it in world-renowned neurosurgeons.
I know I am a knuckle-dragging troglodyte of the cro-magnon variety, but I have a pretty decent grasp of the evolution of medical technology/practice and ethics. To be certain, I am not anti-genetic engineering; but rather fully aware of both the good and the bad that can come from any technological evolution.
BrigandTwoFour
06-27-17, 08:10
Fears of Frankenstein's monster aside, we've been going do n this path for a long time. It was inevitable. Sure, there are very real concerns about society turning into GATTACA, and maybe a a Khan in there for good measure. But we are already st the point where someone with a masters degree, funding, and a space to work could develop a virus capable of wiping out the human race.
I know several people and kids with rare genetic disorders who would have their lives completely changed by this technology. It's here, it's not going anywhere, so let's put it to good use.
But they don't, not always. I know I see docs slapping themselves on the back after delivering that 24-weeker; or, high-fiving after getting a pulse back after someone coding for an hour. It goes back to, we do it because we can, not because it's always right; it's a mindset thing, not a technology thing. I saw it in paramedics, and I see it in world-renowned neurosurgeons.
I know I am a knuckle-dragging troglodyte of the cro-magnon variety, but I have a pretty decent grasp of the evolution of medical technology/practice and ethics. To be certain, I am not anti-genetic engineering; but rather fully aware of both the good and the bad that can come from any technological evolution.
We don't do it "because we can". We do it because it might save a life. Your willingness to give up on those 24-week old infants or those beloved fathers that coded at their son's baseball game is distressing.
Doc Safari
06-27-17, 09:11
We don't do it "because we can". We do it because it might save a life. Your willingness to give up on those 24-week old infants or those beloved fathers that coded at their son's baseball game is distressing.
Correction: we do it because the medical profession might make money on it.
We don't do it "because we can". We do it because it might save a life. Your willingness to give up on those 24-week old infants or those beloved fathers that coded at their son's baseball game is distressing.
Maybe I'm jaded. Maybe I have seen it play out for almost 30 years. Maybe I have seen too many overzealous physicians ignore the elephant in the room that ol' dad will never come off the vent and is status post asparagus after being coded for an hour and still telling the family "of course we can keep him alive." I am not going to apologize that my perceptions may distress you; it's called advocating for my patients. Likewise, you have no idea what I have gone through to save lives, nor what I am willing to do.
Correction: we do it because the medical profession might make money on it.
Most doctors I know are more than plenty busy. If money was the motivator, it would be far more cost efficient to just let those folks die so that they can go on to the next patient. Resuscitation is a huge money-loser.
Most doctors I know are more than plenty busy. If money was the motivator, it would be far more cost efficient to just let those folks die so that they can go on to the next patient. Resuscitation is a huge money-loser.
That has been my observation. My docs would make more money if they say in the Bat Cave and read films all day; the procedures they do can actually lose money.
Maybe I'm jaded. Maybe I have seen it play out for almost 30 years. Maybe I have seen too many overzealous physicians ignore the elephant in the room that ol' dad will never come off the vent and is status post asparagus after being coded for an hour and still telling the family "of course we can keep him alive." I am not going to apologize that my perceptions may distress you; it's called advocating for my patients. Likewise, you have no idea what I have gone through to save lives, nor what I am willing to do.
If I had a way to know which ones were going to fail resuscitation and end up a vegetable, I'd let them go too. As it is, I don't have the tools for making that prediction.
Doc Safari
06-27-17, 09:22
Most doctors I know are more than plenty busy. If money was the motivator, it would be far more cost efficient to just let those folks die so that they can go on to the next patient. Resuscitation is a huge money-loser.
I'm not talking about doctors. I'm talking about Big Medical Supply and Technology, Big Pharma, and multinational corporations who will own the rights to any new innovation. THOSE are the people who stand to make money. Doctors are just the retail level workers in their world.
I'm not talking about doctors. I'm talking about Big Medical Supply and Technology, Big Pharma, and multinational corporations who will own the rights to any new innovation. THOSE are the people who stand to make money. Doctors are just the retail level workers in their world.
Ah. Yes...there are some big companies out there that are looking to make big money on gene splicing and other forms of genetic manipulation. There are some companies that already are. It is really big business now, and will be more so in the future.
Gray goo theory is one reason why I don't believe in ET intelligence.
Official Kremlin Transmission
They are not even apples and oranges, more like apples and Brave New World.
Took the words out of my mouth Doc. All I could think about was Lenina Crowne and John the Savage.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.