Author: ceciliazhang

Is it moral to create genetically modified babies?   [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-11-28 00:10:17 |Display all floors
GhostBuster Post time: 2018-11-27 12:43
Elitism is ultimatum! Human beings have been striving for!
There is nothing incorrect to have geneti ...

Uhuh! SMH
Stupid people are like Glowsticks. You want to snap them in half and shake the crap out of them until they see the light.
I love sarcasm. It's like punching someone in the head ... only with words

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-11-28 10:42:37 |Display all floors
cmknight Post time: 2018-11-28 00:06
Is it moral to attempt producing a baby when one, or both, of the parents involved knowingly have  ...

No, it isn't.

Allowering same sex marriages in my opinion is the most unmoral behavior from ANY government...

   

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-11-28 11:43:43 |Display all floors
This post was edited by wchao37 at 2018-11-29 08:36

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-11-28 12:00:28 |Display all floors
This post was edited by wchao37 at 2018-11-28 13:30

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-11-28 12:03:15 |Display all floors
The illustrations are relevant and excellent in quality.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-11-28 13:23:44 |Display all floors
This post was edited by wchao37 at 2018-11-29 08:40
ceciliazhang Post time: 2018-11-27 11:11
I can understand gene editing technique is used to prevent genetic disease, but shouldn't we figur ...

Curing a disease by delving into genome therapy should be the ultimate goal and not a transitory one.  Preventing the disease by genetic manipulation is too dangerous to consider at this point in time.

Gene manipulation to prevent an entirely treatable disease like HIV is controversial because no one really knows the long-term consequences at the molecular level.

For example, a genome with a DNA base sequence AGTACGTAGATGCTA, if changed to AGTACGTAGATGTA by deleting the third base from the right (a cytosine) would end up with an entirely different setup after mRNA translation into proteins, which might lead to some form of a new disease.

That's why Western molecular-biology laboratories which already possess this technology have hesitated to conduct similar in-vivo experiments.

The notable difference in this case -- as far as we can tell with the limited amount of information that has become available so far -- is that the scientist suggests that his team has already taken into consideration the effects of the artificially-induced point mutation.

If that's not the case and the scientist has lied to the public, then he is in an ethically dangerous zone and according to Chinese law he can be found guilty and incarcerated.

The present law says that any in-vitro biological material from gene therapy experiments has to be discarded within 14 days and cannot be re-introduced in-vivo into the human body.

I have a hunch that the scientist is and will be in the center of a hot controversial debate, and not much will come of his achievement until relevant laws have been changed.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-11-28 15:07:46 |Display all floors
Genetic editing is a yes and no proposition simultaneously.

Yes because we cannot let natural selection take its course at a snail’s pace because that just unnecessarily prolongs the suffering as is happening in the case of Sickle Cell Disease, Thalassemia Major etc.  So disease cure is the only area that we should explore for the time being until more security assurance is available.

Mitochondrial DNA is a case in point in illustrating the issue of uncertainty in our discussion here -- it used to be considered the sole weapon anthropologists need to decipher genetic population migration patterns because of its presumed maternal transmission.  Now we know this is hardly the case and paternal transmission can occur, so much so that the previous version of Homo sapiens' origin might have to be modified extensively.

No because if we go precipitously and approve genetic editing for cosmetic reasons -- like splicing a gene for unsightly hairiness (hirsuitism) in Western males -- then we are asking for big trouble like in the case of Monsanto's genetically-modified soybeans which cannot be used in China because they would create unacceptable food dependence on the genetically-modified specimens -- the land cannot be used to grow any other species.
Curing a disease by delving into genome therapy should be the ultimate goal and not a transitory one.  Preventing the disease by genetic manipulation is too dangerous to consider at this point in time.

Gene manipulation to prevent an entirely treatable disease like HIV is controversial because no one really knows the long-term consequences at the molecular level.

For example, a genome with a DNA base sequence AGTACGTAGATGCTA, if changed to AGTACGTAGATGTA by deleting the third base from the right (a cytosine) would end up with an entirely different setup after mRNA translation into proteins, which might lead to some form of a new disease.

That's why Western molecular-biology laboratories which already possess this technology have hesitated to conduct similar in-vivo experiments.

The notable difference in this case -- as far as we can tell with the limited amount of information that has become available so far -- is that the scientist suggests that his team has already taken into consideration the effects of the artificially-induced point mutation.

If that's not the case and the scientist has lied to the public, then he is in an ethically dangerous zone and according to Chinese law he can be found guilty and incarcerated.

The present law says that any in-vitro biological material from gene therapy experiments has to be discarded within 14 days and cannot be re-introduced in-vivo into the human body.

I have a hunch that the scientist is and will be in the center of a hot controversial debate, and not much will come of his achievement until relevant laws have been changed.

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.