Gene Editing and the Rise of Khan

iannis

Chairman Meow
25,254
18,389
35d 23h 41m
Honestly? Utter lack of faith in chinese quackery. And I wouldn't inoculate against aids at present either, honestly. It's a bad risk ratio. Low:undefined. It's hard to make an educated guess about that.

lots of people would though.

the advantage you're thinking of is largely theoretical. Sickle cell is an evolutionary advantage, too.

I'm not saying that idea is wrong. I'm saying that is a leap of faith. It may be a justifiable one.

I'm not even sure if the treatment is her editary. Zz or uker might.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

TBT-TheBigToe

The New Evil
<Gold Donor>
3,196
11,778
51d 3h 40m
I support this.

Not because I agree with it but because it is inevitable. I also look forward to the unforeseen consequences like genetically altered viruses mutating in unexpected ways in genetically altered humans/animals. New super cancers developing due to altered cells still behaving the same way as regular ones when exposed to cancer enduring elements.

Also, cat girls.
 

Grim1

Vyemm Raider
2,872
3,116
6d 2h 30m
I support this.

Not because I agree with it but because it is inevitable. I also look forward to the unforeseen consequences like genetically altered viruses mutating in unexpected ways in genetically altered humans/animals. New super cancers developing due to altered cells still behaving the same way as regular ones when exposed to cancer enduring elements.

Also, cat girls.
Most parents want what's best for their kids and will try to give those kids whatever advantages they can to succeed. If you have the opportunity to make your kid more intelligent, stronger, etc with a couple of changes in the womb, then who is going to say no? Especially if all the other parents are doing it.

So like you say, inevitable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

Hateyou

Boners Crew
<Bronze Donator>
3,608
9,650
34d 14h 21m
Is this because of what he did or because it garnered so much attention? I don't really understand China's motives at any point.
Yeah I’m the same. I never really understand why their government goes after certain people and not others. I think they do have a problem understanding how things are actually perceived vs. how they think things are perceived.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

zzeris

Vermin Supreme
<Bronze Donator>
8,242
15,006
44d 23h 6m
I support this.

Not because I agree with it but because it is inevitable. I also look forward to the unforeseen consequences like genetically altered viruses mutating in unexpected ways in genetically altered humans/animals. New super cancers developing due to altered cells still behaving the same way as regular ones when exposed to cancer enduring elements.

Also, cat girls.
That's the worry I have but the possible benefits are so extreme that, as you said, it's inevitable. I'll be long dead before I see the long-term effects but some of these diseases are brutal. It will be interesting to see how society adjusts, and how quickly overpopulation becomes a problem. We have Africa massively over populated today just with the fixes we've made so far, so how will the world adjust? I think very poorly as one variation of the dystopias written about will happen. Mankind never learns but can we move to our next home fast enough?
 
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

Aldarion

Vyemm Raider
1,657
3,339
13d 13h 13m
Sorry but the "its inevitable" argument is complete bullshit.

We don't as a general rule accept that when a thing becomes possible, through technological advances, and is predicted by sci fi writers and futurists, that it is therefore inevitable and should be therefore embraced by Western society.

For example, we've had organ transplant technology for decades and organ farms have been a staple of dystopian stories for just as long. "Its inevitable!" So where are the organ farms? Where are the think pieces saying "parents just want whats best for their kids, so its natural I'd invest in a batch of third world children to provide spare parts for little Timmy"

Gene editing is possible* just like organ transplants are possible. That doesnt mean either Gattaca or organ farms are inevitable. Human societies still get to decide whether they *should* do these things. In this case, the societies that wisely refrain from messing with their genomes get to remain human, and one day do battle with the filthy Tleilaxu

(*CRISPR causes widespread offtarget changes, and we don't know enough about any traits worth altering to explain more than ~5% of variation in the trait with genetic markers, but its "possible")
 

zzeris

Vermin Supreme
<Bronze Donator>
8,242
15,006
44d 23h 6m
Sorry but the "its inevitable" argument is complete bullshit.

We don't as a general rule accept that when a thing becomes possible, through technological advances, and is predicted by sci fi writers and futurists, that it is therefore inevitable and should be therefore embraced by Western society.

For example, we've had organ transplant technology for decades and organ farms have been a staple of dystopian stories for just as long. "Its inevitable!" So where are the organ farms? Where are the think pieces saying "parents just want whats best for their kids, so its natural I'd invest in a batch of third world children to provide spare parts for little Timmy"

Gene editing is possible* just like organ transplants are possible. That doesnt mean either Gattaca or organ farms are inevitable. Human societies still get to decide whether they *should* do these things. In this case, the societies that wisely refrain from messing with their genomes get to remain human, and one day do battle with the filthy Tleilaxu

(*CRISPR causes widespread offtarget changes, and we don't know enough about any traits worth altering to explain more than ~5% of variation in the trait with genetic markers, but its "possible")
Organ transplant is in no way perfected or easy to accomplish at this point. The best solution is a cloned organ which is still far above our abilities today. The human body rejects foreign objects which means ongoing and extremely expensive immuno-suppressant therapy. The average transplant lasts 12 years and the list of need is still fairly still. Organ Donation Statistics.

As technology improves, it is almost always implemented. Many gholas of Duncan Idaho were created and he did save humanity in the end. That's what happens when Herbert dies without his own clone and his son takes over. He should have been better prepared.

It is extremely concerning and we both know they won't research nearly enough(probably couldn't). If we have science already pushing climate change narratives and following the pan-sexual agenda, we will definitely find scientists who will say gene editing saves lives without severe health consequences. Most people only need the slightest nudge to follow the herd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

Cybsled

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
8,631
3,531
14d 8h 6m
The larger concern with editing human DNA / genes is this impacts things on a hereditary level. Effects, both good and bad, are now suddenly introduced into the population at large. The Chinese government is probably angry because without vetting what those positive and negative changes are, you stand to have potential negative impacts on your society and they view that as a national security threat, especially in the lens of them already sitting on a population time bomb due to the decades of 1 child and the male/female ratio getting massively thrown out of whack due to cultural gender preferences.
 

yerm

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
2,867
5,367
32d 3h 41m
What we really need is to ditch the modern merciful societal expectations that it's not ok for people to be downtrodden. Why does the orient have the highest IQ on earth, followed by the non-muslim'd core of the Roman empire? Brutal meritocratic practices work.

Forget gene editing, just give universal healthcare but require sterilization before receiving treatment for chronic illness. Forget expunged juvenile criminal records; castrate child felons and any that can't graduate. Cut off welfare for single parents; you HAVE to be willing (and socially able) to marry to support kids.

Until then we live in a society dominated by have-nots abusing the now-self-loathing haves, and gene editing is as likely to strip advantages as fix problems. My lactose tolerance will get removed before those retards concern trolling the politics thread see an IQ bump. Fuck that. Gene editing is good, but our society isn't ready.
 

Ritley

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
9,741
16,407
34d 15h 7m
Sorry but the "its inevitable" argument is complete bullshit.

We don't as a general rule accept that when a thing becomes possible, through technological advances, and is predicted by sci fi writers and futurists, that it is therefore inevitable and should be therefore embraced by Western society.

For example, we've had organ transplant technology for decades and organ farms have been a staple of dystopian stories for just as long. "Its inevitable!" So where are the organ farms? Where are the think pieces saying "parents just want whats best for their kids, so its natural I'd invest in a batch of third world children to provide spare parts for little Timmy"

Gene editing is possible* just like organ transplants are possible. That doesnt mean either Gattaca or organ farms are inevitable. Human societies still get to decide whether they *should* do these things. In this case, the societies that wisely refrain from messing with their genomes get to remain human, and one day do battle with the filthy Tleilaxu

(*CRISPR causes widespread offtarget changes, and we don't know enough about any traits worth altering to explain more than ~5% of variation in the trait with genetic markers, but its "possible")
I’m sorry, but using organ farming as your counterargument is one of the stupidest I’ve seen. Those organs have to be taken from someone else, either by force or through coercion. If we were at the point of being able to economically clone or grow organs you bet your ass there would be organ grow centers. It’s the same thing for gene editing, you don’t have to “remove” genes from another person. There’s no perceived victim in the whole process (unlike organ harvesting).

As it stands though we are nowhere near being able to do what people are talking about here, so using today’s morals to discuss something that could be a century away is kind of pointless.
 

Guurn

Lord Nagafen Raider
366
737
30d 11h 39m
Using lab grown body parts is already pretty normal. They have implanted grown bladders, vaginas etc. It is only going to expand in the future. Even things like hearts aren't that far off. The main question is weather it will be more cost effective to grow a human heart in a pig or to grow it in a lab. Either way it will solve rejection issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

Control

Bronze Knight of the Realm
191
179
16d 18h 55m
Last edited:
  • Worf
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

Aldarion

Vyemm Raider
1,657
3,339
13d 13h 13m
I’m sorry, but using organ farming as your counterargument is one of the stupidest I’ve seen. Those organs have to be taken from someone else, either by force or through coercion. If we were at the point of being able to economically clone or grow organs you bet your ass there would be organ grow centers. It’s the same thing for gene editing, you don’t have to “remove” genes from another person. There’s no perceived victim in the whole process (unlike organ harvesting).

As it stands though we are nowhere near being able to do what people are talking about here, so using today’s morals to discuss something that could be a century away is kind of pointless.
I'm sorry, but you miss the point of the comparison. No one ever suggested organ farms and gene editing were moral equivalents.

the point is that arguing we should do it because its inevitable because the tech allows it, is a stupid argument. Because there are countless examples of things dystopian writers predicted, that technology now allows, that we dont actually do. "inevitability" pretends humans dont get to make any decisions in the matter.

And anyone who thinks we cant do this today isnt following the literature. It would kill large numbers of humans at early developmental stages, and it would lead to countless unpredicted side effects in the few that survived, and it would not have large effects on their phenotypes, but without any question whatsoever we can do it today. Humans arent all that different from mice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos

iannis

Chairman Meow
25,254
18,389
35d 23h 41m
Maybe almost all of them. LOL. I like that.

If nothing else evolution is an efficiency engine. I think you can safely assume that cells do indeed require all the genes. We may not like what some of those genes do, and there may be alternative which we find more palatable, but they're there because they do something needful. It may not be the BEST way to do it, but it is an effective way to do it at the lowest cost.

And once we can get the methods down we for sure will have organ farms. Which is a very good thing. It's not dystopian in my view. If we can effectively clone organs... I mean god damn. It's not clinical immortality (which is the sci-fi version and largely bupkiss) but it's a real advancement in medicine. You'll beat cancer with that method. You'll just make the issue trivial.

The next step would be artificial wombs. If anyone ever manages to perfect one the society that comes out the other side of that invention will only bear a shallow resemblance to ours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chthonic-anemos