Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: leonid on October 20, 2000, 03:14:00 AM
-
Let's talk about genetic engineering, eugenics. And let's put in a helping of nanotechnology. These things are all becoming less science fiction, and more reality. Personally, I'm cautiously optimistic about it all. It can (and will) be used for military purposes (place your worst nightmare here), but genetic engineering could also be an evolutionary process for humanity as well. It's just a matter of if we have the vision for it at this point in time.
-
It can do (and will do) a lot of good for the human being.
It can do (and WILL do) a lot of harm to the human being.
Being as we are, humans soon will start experimenting with other human beings. CLonation will happen, no matter how questionable is ethically. Genetical manipulation wil happen, no matter that people say it is monstruous.
I'd rather not imagine how will this affect in the military. Experiments will happen. Experiments with alive humans. I'd rather not be one of them.
And I don't want to see the day when parents choose the sex, hair color, eye color, intelligence, etc of their sons. Human race is so wonderful because variety and lack of perfection that makes us try to go beyond our capabilities...
Genetical manipulating will be like "cheating". And I dont like it.
I have the feelings that the bad side of it far outweight the good side...but if someday I have (I pray it never happens) a son or a daughter,or a relative, with a genetic illness ,then I am sure that for me the good side would outweight the bad one.
Anyway, for the human race as a whole it will be bad (by today's ethical codes, that as everything, changes with time).Natural Evolution has proven a good way to improve our race...
I'm not that sure that a genetically induced "boost" will do any good to us.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 10-20-2000).]
-
Yes, there are very strong ethical, religious, and even scientific reasons against genetic engineering. But like you, I think it's going to happen anyway. For Humans, if it can be done, it will be done. That's just the way we are.
-
Cool. Soon, there shall be no ugly stupid people in the world.
Then one century later, something te human race hadn't foreseen about genes kicks in.
Mother nature decides to show who's the boss.
The only human survivors will be the gun toting lunatics that have resisted assimlation in Montana.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
No, seriously, great potential both ways. I guess I'm just jealous that some future kids will have way better genes than I have. Diversity might become an issue if every human on earth took part in such a thing, but that is not likely to happen.
Then we have the true problem of "new" vs "old" humans. I don't need to mention where such arguments have led us in the past.
I.e we need to tightly control this if we don't want it to go sour on us. And I think we will be able to do so. Unless, of course, the knowledge is patentet by private companies expoliting the human genome and so forth for its own materialistic purposes.
Don't f*ck with evolution. It'll bite back, and bite back hard. Almost all human attempts to "fix" something has led eto total failure. Just look at what happened with the "killer bees" and the Australian eco systems. And that's on a very small scale compared to the potential of genetic engineering.
So, caution and care is definitely the way to go. But, we are going there, so we might as well make damned sure we don't take a wrong turn.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
What? No more gun discussions? But I just can't get enough of those gun issues!!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I've wanted to talk about this for a while, ever since the case in the States, where that family was allowed to create a foetus which would have the correct bone type for their dying daughter. I personally agree with what they did; the child that was created will have a very special place in that family.
We've had our fair share of genetic engineering issues arising over here in the last few years. 'Dolly' the sheep, genetically engineered crops being destroyed by protestors and now a new case. A family in Scotland wanted to have a girl to replace the daughter who died in a bonfire accident. The chances of having a girl 'naturally' were very slim; they already had four sons. In the end, the High Court refused their request and forbid the treatment which would allow them to conceive in this way.
The controls in place have to be religiously adhered to and discussion has to take place on any ammendments.
I don't like reactionary attitudes to anything, but I believe we have to be careful with this 'Brave New World' we seem to be creating. We've indirectly interfering with evolution for millenia - the fact that we can control our environment, and not be controled it is testament to this fact. We now have the foundations of the ability to alter the makeup of our very beings. It may be some time off, but one day every characteristic will alterable.
I personally have no problem, per se, with altering physical characteristics. However, the sex of a child should not be toyed with; this would have devastating effects on the demographics of a society where this procedure was routine.
The thing is, these expensive procedures will not be able to all - just to the most wealthy. As Santa says, there will be an underclass of 'imperfect' people and I can't see how descrimination would not develop. Has anyone seen 'Gattaca'?
Gene therapy to eliminate diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimar's is something which I would support. Perhaps there is something to be said for eliminating all diseases like Down's Syndrome, I don't know.
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
I've wanted to talk about this for a while, ever since the case in the States, where that family was allowed to create a foetus which would have the correct bone type for their dying daughter. I personally agree with what they did; the child that was created will have a very special place in that family.
They not only "created a foetus". The daughter now has life when she was going to die.
And she has a new little brother (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)...you can bet that this family can be glad about both things (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
This is perfectly ethic. Those parents have saved a live and brought another to this world.
Another thing would've been to "cultive" the foetus, get the part they need, and then destroy it. That is NOT ethic, is to "use" the power to give life to our own interests, only to destroy it after we ended needing it.
Another thing would be, too, to "select" the genes of a son not to save your daughter's live but because interest only (hey doc, I want a blue eyed blonde, intelligent male. Please select the correct ingredients and lets go with it!)--------->Sux.
There is a very thin line between "right" and "wrong", between "acceptable" and "unacceptable". I think that this family's case is clearly an example of "right" and "acceptable". And a good example of what I mean when I say that It can be good (It WILL be good).
Lets hope we see no examples of "it can be bad (It WILL be bad). Sadly I am quite sure that we will see it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 10-20-2000).]
-
I'm very excited about this fascinating technology. It's incredible to think that it's actually possible to do these things on that level. There are many spin-offs from this technology that do not raise ethical questions.... I'm betting this is going to take off and make a lot of money for the astute investors.
---------------------------------------------
Confucious say: "Person who fly upside down have crack-up."
Confucious also say: "Person who ditch airclaft in strawberry patch in big jam."
-
I have a fetus in a lab right now, a clone of me.
Will use it to repair worn parts of me as I grow older.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Me too. You will find out when you get a bit older that the back up sexual organ comes in handy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
They combined 10 rabbit's genes (still eggs) with the gene that produces the green translucent glow in some jellyfish in the atlantic ocean. I've seen the jellyfish, was walking a beach shrimping with some people when the water literally lit up around us. It was the coolest natural thing I've ever seen.
Now we have animals that glow in the dark under black light(green). Doooooodddd that is so f'in cool!!!!!
So long as we don't create a race of super humans that set out to genocide the current crop of real humans, I'm all for seeing how far we can go.
As far as cloning humans, I can only wonder. Why bother, other than to say "yeah we did it". I think that's about as far as it will go. You can't extend YOUR life any further by cloning yourself and believe me.. there's enough of each of us in this world, we don't need duplicates!!! ;-)
One thing that could be good about identifying what particular genes do is finding out the unborn person's mental state. Imagine if we could do away with murders, psychopaths and just general gun toting wierdos(like those kids at columbine....................).
Morals.. What good are morals if your dead because one of those things was allowed to live? ;-)
Just my opinion anyway.
-SW
-
What was that book? 1984 I think it was... where they had the Alphas and Betas, the genetically perfect people, and the gammas were like worker bees. everything was genetically altered and people were harvested....... I think this guy was on to something, just about 100 years off. and if I remember correctly, there wasn't a happy ending.
------------------
Nathan "NATEDOG" Mathieu
Art Director
HiTech Creations
-=HELLFIRE SQUAD=-
".... And on the eighth day, God created beer. "
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
I have a fetus in a lab right now, a clone of me.
Will use it to repair worn parts of me as I grow older.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
LOL Santa, by the time your clone is 20 years old, it'll beat the toejam out of you and use YOU for the parts!
-
What was that book? 1984 I think it was... where they had the Alphas and Betas, the genetically perfect people, and the gammas were like worker bees. everything was genetically altered and people were harvested.......
Don't remember that from 1984... sounds suspiciously like the movie "Gatica" (though I never saw it).
AKDejaVu
-
Don't think that is '1984'. I think it might be 'Brave New World', not sure though. 'Gatica' is about the guy who wants to be an astronaut, but they only accept people who born 'artificially' and he is a 'natural' with a heart defect. Great film.
I like the idea of being able to grow replacement body parts - useful if you have cancer or are involved in a bad accident.
The only problem with that Nash family (who created the kid to save their daughter) was that they had to reject the foeti that did not have the correct bone characteristics. Anti-abortionists would disagree with that, although I persoanlly beleive it was justified to save the life of the little girl.
Adds a whole new spin to the abortion debate.
[This message has been edited by Dowding (edited 10-20-2000).]
-
There is already some application of genetic enginering, in the agriculture.
The ability to manipulate nature and genetics is fascinating and will be a real good think.
But, as an example, a big corporation (Novartis) have produced:
1. A breveted(sp?) plant resistant to a special chemical atomicbomb-like product, and, you guess who is the producer of the chemical? (sort of hitting you in the balls and then sell the medicament)
2. A breveted(sp?) plant resistent to most of the insects, but they produced voluntarily a mule, not capable to reproduce, so each year you have to buy again the seeds.
And you guess where they start to made special free-like offers? in third world countryes.
A couple of years and this people wiil be no more capable to feed themselves without buying this products. (meanwhile the original plant will be extinct)
Powerful tool in the hands of profit, bad news for humankind.
-
Genetic manipulation, like any tool can be used positively or negatively. What worries me is not the tool but the person using it.
As any Buddhist, Hindu, New Ager, etc. will tell you, true intelligence and wisdom only comes about when both mind and heart are balanced.
I work for a biotech company and I've never seen these qualities in any PHD or research scientist. All the ones I've seen potato themselves for money and stock options. I suppose they really aren't true scientists at all.
If an animal researcher were suddenly filled with love and compassion they'd recoil in horror at the pain and suffering they were inflicting on living creatures. A scientist only operating on his intellectual side is like an unguided missile capable of great mischief.
The couple that genetically engineered a fetus so that it could be used to supply bodily material for it's sick older sister committed a direct violation of life itself, an abomination, worse than the Frankenstein story in my opinion.
A child is supposed to be the physical manifestation of the love of two people. A human being is NOT to be treated as a machine to serve others. I really find this horrifying and a good example of science gone bad.
-
Technological advance does not necessarily imply the social, moral or even material progress of human society.
Things are not getting better.
On the other hand, I'm sick of people and politicians making decisions based on the fear of something they don't understand.
(though genetically engineered crops could help out considerably with world starvation, that's not always how it works out).
-
I'm not so sure genetic engineering isn't itself a product of evolution. How else is nature going to send its DNA packages off this rock (Earth) and spread around the universe unless it produces a species that is capable of spaceflight. Humans may not be the species for this but we may be the ones who create it. That's one take on it.
Another is that GE may be the stepping stone to crack the totipotency problem (the process whereby undifferentiated cells become specialized - i.e. eyes, skin, heart cells, etc). If we can solve this then we'll be able to grow organs rather than clones and avoid alot of the moral and ethical issues.
-sudz-
-
Interesting thoughts and perspective, sudz. <S>
What follows is the latest work done on the human genome:
"DNA: C code
For many years molecular biologists have been mystified by the fact that very little of an organism's DNA seems to serve any useful function.
I have solved the mystery.
The reason why only 30% of human DNA performs any useful function is that the rest of it is comments.
Once we decode a typical human genome, we see that the contents begin as follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/* HUMAN_DNA.H
*
* Human Genome
* Version 2.1
*
* (C) God
*/
/* Revision history:
*
* 0000-00-01 00:00 1.0 Adam.
* 0000-00-02 10:00 1.1 Eve.
* 0000-00-03 02:11 1.2 Added noodle code to male version. A bit messy --
* will require a rewrite later on to make it neater.
* 0017-03-12 03:14 1.3 Added extra sex drive to male.h; took code from
* elephant-dna.c
* 0145-10-03 16:33 1.4 Removed tail.
* 1115-00-31 17:20 1.5 Shortened forearms, expanded brain case.
* 2091-08-20 13:56 1.6 Opposable thumbs added to hand() routine.
* 2501-04-09 14:04 1.7 Minor cosmetic improvements -- skin colour made
* darker to match my own image.
* 2909-07-12 02:21 1.8 Dentition inadequate; added extra 'wisdom' teeth.
* Must remember to make mouth bigger to compensate.
* 4501-12-31 14:18 1.9 Increase average height.
* 5533-02-12 17:09 2.0 Added gay option, triggered by high population
* density, to try and slow the overpopulation problem.
* 6004-11-04 16:11 2.1 Made forefinger narrower to fit hole in centre of
* CD.
*/
/* Standard definitions
*/
#define SEX male
#define HEIGHT 1.84
#define MASS 68
#define RACE caucasian
/* Include inherited traits from parent DNA files.
*
* Files must be pre-processed with MENDEL program to provide proper
* inheritance features.
*/
#include "mother.h"
#include "father.h"
#infndef FATHER
#warn("Father unknown -- guessing\n")
#include "bastard.h"
#endif
/* Set up sex-specific functions and variables
*/
#include <sex.h>
/* Kludged code -- I'll re-design this lot and re-write it as a proper
* library sometime soon.
*/
struct genitals
{
#ifdef MALE
noodle *jt;
#endif
/* G_spot *g; Removed for debugging purposes */
#ifdef FEMALE
Vagina *p;
#endif
}
/* Initialization bootstrap routine -- called before DNA duplication.
* Allocates buffers and sets up protein file pointers
*/
DNA *zygote_initialize(Sperm *, Ovum *);
/* MAIN INITIALIZATION CODE
*
* Returns structures containing pre-processed phenotypes for the organism
* to display at birth.
*
* Will be improved later to make output less ugly.
*/
Characteristic *lookup_phenotype(Identifier *i);
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...and so on.
[ Note that God uses three-space tabs ] "
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
I have a fetus in a lab right now, a clone of me.
Will use it to repair worn parts of me as I grow older.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
But what do you use to replace the mouth on your clone? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
j/k (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Udie
-
LOL gunthr
I one tab, btw (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Udie (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) PTFFFH! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Just a thought here. I figure everything we eat as well as all of the domesticated animals around are a product of genetic engineering. It started when people started to breed plants and animals for desired traits.
In a mild form it applies to people as well. Look at some of the photos and traits from the "old times". People were smaller, less inclined to worry about "personal beauty" and more interested in if they can help support their mate and survive. Now we look to personal appearance first and actual traits later.
Finally I thought I heard that Gore invented genes or his dog had buried Al's in the yard somewhere. Perhaps a book on genes was modeled after Al and Tipper. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
Mav
[This message has been edited by Maverick (edited 10-22-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Maverick:
Just a thought here. I figure everything we eat as well as all of the domesticated animals around are a product of genetic engineering. It started when people started to breed plants and animals for desired traits.
<snip>
Glad you brought this up as this is the argument used by scientists to defend genetic engineering. Yes, horses cattle, dogs and people have been genetically altered over the years. The difference is that this was done "externally" through mating. Done in this way the two genetic "blueprints" would determine compatibility through combining or not. In genetic engineering it's the blueprint itself that's being altered, BIG difference.
Quite frankly there's only one person I want messing with my "blueprint" and that's the original designer. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
WRT nanotechnology, I heard that they've already made a molecular-sized engine prototype, saw the article in Scientific American. Very basic, but at this point it works.
-
I'm totally for the engineering of human parts for medical purposes. Growing a heart, for example, so a man can have a transplant.
What I am not for, is genetically engineering people for medical purposes. In my opinion, this is absolutly the same as slavery. And the sad thing is that people are actually debating whether or not this is ethical.
Cloning, no problem with it as long as that "clone" is given all the rights any other human being has. It is only a physical clone, what makes up the person inside is not genetic. Sure, genetic tendencies may be there, but they still retain their individuality. Genetic clones are no different than identical twins.
The only problem with this is when people feed their egos into believing that "non-clones" have less rights and that clones should be used in service of "real people". Of course, ignorance is always involved in these circumstances, so education is key.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
I'm totally for the engineering of human parts for medical purposes. Growing a heart, for example, so a man can have a transplant.
I have no problem with this. My father might have lived past my 7th bday if this had been available. Plenty of people who need parts now to survive.
What I am not for, is genetically engineering people for medical purposes. In my opinion, this is absolutely the same as slavery. And the sad thing is that people are actually debating whether or not this is ethical.
[/QUOTE]
I don't understand this one. What is meant by medical purposes? If you mean that making "repairs" genetically to stop people from suffering from things like cancer or arthritis is not good, I definitely have a problem with this. I think that people should be able to regrow nerves, limbs and overcome disabilities through the use of gene work.
I disagree that you should be able to "pick" traits for children like gender, hair / eye color. You should be able to help change things like mental retardation and mongoloidism(sp?) is at all possible. No one should have to be trapped in a dysfunctional body / mind only because of a faulty gene that could have been fixed.
Mav
-
Mav - Mongoloidism is Down's Syndrome (I think).
Alot of people are against eliminating this disease - I can't understand them at all. We eliminated small pox from most of the world, but genetic diseases are somehow seen as 'God's will', and as such should not be interfered with.
What happens if you don't believe in God?
-
I bet in a ew years yer gonna be considered an old fart for not accepting parents right to choose the colour of eyes, hair etc of their offspring.
Hell, they're their belongings (or at least are treated as such even now until they reach adult age) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Just an observation based on previous breakthroughs.
Me, I'm just in it for the ride, baby. Whatever comes along, comes along. Won't make me dumber or smarter (in the case of parents getting ultra smart blue eyed blonde babies) and probably won't make me sad.
What worries me is the division such a thing might create. Between natural humans, which by the ruling genetically enhanced population is considered dumb, obsolete, flawed and generally inferior, and the new genetically enhanced ones.
I've read tons of books on the subject, mostly fiction. Pretty cool stuff. If any of it has any possibility of happening, the yanks are pretty damned smart when they wanna keep their guns.
Fight the GenUmans! Nats unite! We shall be victorious.
And, we get to use this line:
"I created you. Now, I shall destroy you."
Wayyyy cool (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). A purpose in life too, fighting GenUmans.
<sits next to udie, rip, Toad and caveman and watches them load clips and fix weapons>
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
- Francis Bacon
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 10-22-2000).]
[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 10-22-2000).]
-
Santa,
By the time any of this really becomes a major force in world society, I'll be packing a shotgun and chasing my old labradors in the sunlit uplands of a completely different astral plane.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Toad:
LOL
Ya never know, my friend, you never know (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
You might be the first human to live forever.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Santa,
Some old wag said: "Life: No one here gets out alive"
A Navy buddy used to say: "Life! This is no drill! Repeat, This is no drill!"
I think they're right. Tear off all you can chew on your first pass and then grab another bite as you egress.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Oh God !!!
I like this thread !!!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
For those of you on the "fence" regarding GE issues and have no ethical concerns I'd like to give a brief description of some of the technical procedures involved to shed some additional light on this subject.
If you remember from biology you have a basic unit called a cell. Inside each cell are pairs of chromosomes that contain loops of DNA thread.
The basic building block of DNA is the four nucleotides (A,C,T,G) which spell out instructions on how to make any protein. Specific segments of the DNA thread are called genes. These contain instructions for a particular cell trait or process.
In the front of each gene there is a control area called the promoter. This determines what protein sequence is to be made and how much. This functions as a gene "flag".
Now we come to genetic engineering whereby DNA segments are "spliced" into an existing DNA chain. Let's say you want to insert a human gene into a pig. Our scientist runs into a problem here. Unless the incoming segment contains a code the promoter area recognizes it will not be accepted. So, instead of spending years and perhaps decades to fully understand this complex process, what does our intrepid researcher do? He piggybacks the DNA segment on a virus. Viruses contain very powerful promoters, which can break through the gene safeguards and insert their genetic information in the host DNA chain. This is called a Trojan Horse.
As we all know viruses replicate quickly and are uncontrollable. Are you getting that warm fuzzy feeling yet?
Genetic engineering is still an experimental "test-tube" science. It demonstrates a wanton disregard for the inherent intelligence and beauty of the building blocks of life. In computer terms genetic engineering is not engineering at all, it's "hacking".
I can just see it now. We have a young couple looking into the pained eyes of their eight month old genetically modified child because the piggy-back virus is replicating it's code sequence in random areas of the DNA chain and the child is now literally unraveling from the inside out. But hey, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet right?
At the rate things are going we should expect to have our first genetic "Chernobyl" within 20 years, maybe 10.
[This message has been edited by blur (edited 10-24-2000).]
-
It seems to me you have a problem with GE partly because 'accidents' might happen or that its application might not bring the 'right' results.
By implication, surely you have a problem with conventional medicine or biological science in general? Look at Thalidimide or the widespread use of 'bleeding' in the 19th century - both of these things were developed in the belief that their use might alleviate some ailment. They didn't and there are many examples of a similar nature.
In my opinion, the issue isn't that side-effects might be bad - all medical operations can go wrong, from anesthesia to key-hole surgery; accidents do happen. The issue is in who's hand the power is. An independent, regulatory body with very strict powers is what's needed - the ethical issues have to be decided through DISCUSSION without reactionary bias.
I have absolutely no problem with the use of GE technology to eliminate heriditory disease - I don't agree with its use in cosmetic applications, however. I have a similar view on vivesection.
-
No one should have to be trapped in a dysfunctional body / mind only because of a faulty gene that could have been fixed.
Ahh, but then you get into the side of the debate where spiritual beliefs take hold. Many people believe that such conditions are necessary for that soul to experience to further it's growth. And really, science cannot tell us whether or not this is true.
What I meant by medical purposes is by using gentically engineered people as a source for spare parts. I don't think it would ever come to that though because it is much easier to engineer a organ than a person.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
Anyone ever read any of the "Lazarus" books by Robert Heinlein? Interesting stuff, and probably not too far off in the distant future. Maybe not in mine or your lifetime, but eventually, dying of old age will probably be a choice.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
Ahh, but then you get into the side of the debate where spiritual beliefs take hold. Many people believe that such conditions are necessary for that soul to experience to further it's growth. And really, science cannot tell us whether or not this is true.
What I meant by medical purposes is by using gentically engineered people as a source for spare parts. I don't think it would ever come to that though because it is much easier to engineer a organ than a person.
Igloo,
You missed the point again. The key part was that no one should HAVE to live in a dysfunctional body. If they choose to out of a religous belief it is not a case of having no choice. See the difference?
Mav
-
How does the child being born make that decision?
My understanding is that the genes have to be maniuplated very early on in life.
I didn't miss the point, now you're refering to parents making that decision for the child? Still undecided if even they have that right.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
How does the child being born make that decision?
My understanding is that the genes have to be maniuplated very early on in life.
I didn't miss the point, now you're refering to parents making that decision for the child? Still undecided if even they have that right.
Igloo,
You are inferring something that I did not say. Notice, no where in that post did I use the words children or parents.
I do not share your assumption about the age of the victim being determinant in the treatment possibilities. I figure (hope) that treatments will be available to use on those who already have the physical problems and are trapped in a body that is not whole.
mav
-
Mav, I am fairly certian that genetic manipulation must be done very early in life. We do not have a chance to have it done, whereas a newborn or a child even prior to being born does.
Our body would reject any new genetic code, and I'm fairly certian an infant has a higher chance of accepting the changes. Remember, this is the manipulation of the DNA structure.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
Raubvogel, I read the Heinlein work, "Time Enough To Love" - a truly great sci fi book.
I sort of choked on his atheistic leanings, but I got such a kick out of the story of Lazarus Long that I overlooked it. Here are two of my favorite quotes from the book:
--------------------------------------------
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
- Robert A. Heinlein
---------------------------------------------
"An armed society is a polite society."
- Robert A. Heinlein
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
Mav, I am fairly certain that genetic manipulation must be done very early in life. We do not have a chance to have it done, whereas a newborn or a child even prior to being born does.
Our body would reject any new genetic code, and I'm fairly certain an infant has a higher chance of accepting the changes. Remember, this is the manipulation of the DNA structure.
Igloo,
Using this as your premise, only infants or a fetus will be able to accept a cloned organ.
I didn't say that the repair had to be based solely on a full genetic replacement. Making the repair based on the recipients gene code would avoid the rejection issues.
Then again we could be saying about the same thing from different perspectives.
Mav
-
Some people broke machines to stop a progress. Other burned books and burned those, who wrote those books.
Truth is that progress is something what is hard to stop. And because the creativity power in the humanity is stronger, than the tanatos (as the history shows us), I believe that somedays we will reach the stars.
Only bad thing is that I wont see it.
Fariz
P.S. Russian poet Voznisenski wrote (my translation, sorry).
"Even if, by a coincedent, I are harrowed by a crowd"
"Even then I believe than in average human 90% of good."
-
Mav, these are two different things. The process of genetically manipulating the DNA sequence to cure downs syndrome, for example, must be done to the fetus. It will not work on people who already have it, only on those who are developing it.
The process of genetically engineering a heart, for example, is entirely different. It is not changing the actual DNA sequence of the individual, it is only replacing an organ. This can be done at any stage in life.
Both are possible.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
Igloo - DNA manipulation to eliminate genetic diseases would have to be done when there are as few cells as possible - i.e. before the sperm and egg cells have combined.
Rejection of transplanted organs is essentially due to DNA differences between the host and the donor.