Super Human gene splicing program
 

Science panel okays one day editing human embryos
http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/14/14...babies-science


Question: is it ok to use technology to take and modify human genetic code to make a designer baby? As long as it is you and your spouse's decision, and your offspring, it should be ok, right?

Tricky, on a base level, so long as the two parents are consenting then there's no problem. The problems start with the consequences, depending obviously on the kinds of modifications that have been made. As advances continue you are going to get an entirely new species of human, many people call this 'Homo Superior' and this new species will eventually dominate us, and Homo Sapiens itself may well die out over the next millennia.
That's why there's so many rules and regulations and ethical dilemmas on this subject, and we're going to face a very similar scenario when it comes to Artificial Intelligence and bio-mechanical enhancement over the next couple of generations. I think one way or another we are in the closing days of Homo Sapiens as a species, unless an event happens which reduces our numbers and technological levels back several generations (ie asteroid impact, nuclear exchange, epidemic, etc).
I don't think there's any way to stop this from happening, and to be honest, it's questionable whether it should be stopped, this can be looked upon as just another part of the progression that started with the common ancestor many thousands of years ago and lead to evolutionary offshoots like the Neanderthal which eventually disappeared to leave us. Our last major competitor was the Neanderthal, and we helped to get rid of them and Superior will no doubt help to get rid of us.
After that...who can say. :hmmm: Some level of technological and biological convergence? A transcendence beyond physical form? That's all real sci-fi stuff...but then again, so was a lot of the stuff around us right now. :03:

Might as well be ok because someones gonna do it eventually and it will really magnify their advantage if they're the only ones doing it.

Absolutely, it's like nuclear physics, you can't put the genie back in the bottle.
I reckon the PRC might wind up being one of the first, they've got less regulations on it, so if anyone is going to make the first step it'll be them.
Of course, when I was making my ramble above, I did forget to factor in one thing...nations. If genetic enhancement begins giving people of a certain nation advantages over another, it may well spark a genetic arms race. I mean, imagine if in a years time someone in the PRC made a breakthrough that enhanced the intelligence of people. The state would immediately classify it, and only allow it to the 'right' kind of people, which in a generation would give them an intellectual edge over every other nation, so the US would have to investigate it and then release it somehow to the public and...well the domino effect could be crazy.
Sooner or later I could foresee it being outlawed, but it'd just go underground.
It's hard to say, it really is, there's going to be a lot of fear-mongering about it, and some of it will really be justified.
Although by this point you will both be dead, and I will be ready for being made into Soylent Green. :yeah:

I should've been in that program!!:hmmm:

Should be fine as far as it does not harm the future child. Ie introducing modifications that increase likelyhood of ilness should be criminal.

It will be done eventually. The real question that should worry man is whether he really has reaosn to assume that he is ripe and wise enough to not use this for his own demise. The power in this science leaves you breathless. I have my doubts. Already now man's technical capabilities are far ahead of his mental and ethical evolution.

As so often I am not against the technology itself. I just do not trust mankind, it does by far not learn historic lessons fast enough. And I think that it is never a good idea to let little children play with open fire inside the armoury.

If it helps prevent babies from being born with diseases or disabilities then why not.

I have mixed feelings with this. I personally have several illnesses and disabilities which I wouldn't mind to disappear. Problem is that I'm not so convinced that doctors will be able to gain sufficient understanding in near future to avoid unintended consequences.

For example doctors had fine, research based theory on mechanism how certain migraine medicine works. However further research has proven this theory (which details I no longer remember) to be false. So at the moment there is medicine which usually terminates migraine attack but doctors don't know why it does so.

As disease is genetic in nature it could in theory be cured with genetic engineering but what happens if their theory after all isn't correct? Disease is not hereditarily dominant in nature, instead there are likely to be combination of genes affecting properties of disease and that disease only appears when correct combination received from both parents is present. There is risk that change that appears to be "curing" disease is merely plastering it under wraps or in worst case also altering it be more severe.

When you open wraps around your Christmas gift you don't always like what you get and I'm afraid that this won't be any different. Somewhere down the road there may be day when Homo-you-tell-me-what will curse us over our decisions.

I'm not saying using genetic engineering is automatically bad thing but there should be great caution on how it is done.

Because a father does not want to end up having to explain his younger son one day that he only got born to serve as an organ donor for his older brother. Because you do not want to explain a huge part of the population why within one generation they started to eat bad stuff they did not eat before, and do not eat anymore what before they ate. Because you do not want to deal with super soldiers from the tank whose inhibitions have been reduced by genetically designing them out. Becasue you do not want to tell your daughters they should stop fighting over their likes of hair colours and eye colours because in the end the choosen colours have been your choice anyway. Because you do not want to see natural mankind being subjugated by genetically designed superhumans, and the decision of becoming a super human or just a deficitary normal human should not be one of family income and money. Because you do not want the genetical foundation of a society rooting in establishing new castes of slaves. Becasue we have no clue on how genetically altering the gene pool will produce fallout on man'S biological ability to naturally adapt to changing environment stimuli and diseases, if his imune system no longer gets challenged and adaptation to challenges no longer get naturally carried over from generaiton to generation. Because - you know what? Start to use your imagination yourself. BTW, genetic doping is said to be already done by the Chinese. You cannot identify it anymore. You have been with the police, I understood. But you should not trust the power of laws here. And laws - are man-made as well. One day they might be made by genetically latered super humans. Are you really feeling well with this, considering your son is just a subordinate naturally born? - Its pandora's box. And I doubt we are wise enough to handle the consequences, I just need to look around in the world. Genetic alteration on this level - is more dangerous than fooling around with hydrogene bombs. Kids should not try this at home. And we are in principle still driven by instincts and drives form the earliest stone age.

That is the problem, it's a Pandoras box and once it begins it will be very hard to stop it...however, I think that it is an inevitability, just the same as machine intelligence, and either which way you frame it, Homo Sapiens becomes out-dated.

As the great philosopher David Bowie put it:

Look at your children
See their faces in golden rays
Don't kid yourself they belong to you
They're the start of a coming race
The earth is a bitch
We've finished our news
Homo Sapiens have outgrown their use

In my opinion 'Homo sapiens' is misnormer and 'Homo idiota' would be much more descriptive. Our track record of destruction and horror is indeed impressive, but in my opinion it doesn't justify calling us "wise men."

We have outgrown our use maybe, but don't think our kids are better or "the start of a coming race". They repeat all the failures of the past.
Mankind learns nothing, it just improves its technology without developing itself.
Brexit and Trump are the best examples. :haha:

I dunno, if you look at voting choices by age you might be surprised, but yeah, they'll make mistakes too, but maybe some will learn from our mistakes, if we give them the chance to.

The brave new world. :hmmm:
Thanks, but no thanks.