• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Britain Plans World's First go-ahead for '3-Parent' IVF Babies.....

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Britain is planning to become the first country in the world to offer controversial "three-parent" fertility treatments to families who want to avoid passing on incurable diseases to their children.

The methods, currently only at the research stage in laboratories in Britain and the United States, would for the first time involve implanting genetically modified embryos into women, and raise serious ethical questions.

The techniques involve intervening in the fertilisation process to remove faulty mitochondrial DNA, which can cause inherited conditions such as fatal heart problems, liver failure, brain disorders, blindness and muscular dystrophy.

They are designed to help families with mitochondrial diseases - incurable conditions passed down the maternal line that affect around one in 6,500 children worldwide. Mitochondria act as tiny energy-generating batteries inside cells,

The controversial potential treatment is known as three-parent in vitro fertilisation (IVF) because the offspring would have genes from a mother, a father and from a female donor.

Davies said the government's health department is drafting regulations to cover the new treatments, and plans to publish them later this year. The move would make Britain the first country in the world to give patients to option of using so-called mitochondrial DNA transfer to avoid passing the diseases on to their children.

Because Britain is in the vanguard of this research, ethical concerns, political decisions and scientific advances here are closely watched around the world - particularly in the United States where scientists are also working on DNA swap techniques.

Some pro-life campaigners have criticised the scientific research, saying that creating embryonic children in a lab abuses them by subjecting them to unnatural processes.

Critics also worry that modifying embryos to avoid disease could be the first step towards the creation of "designer babies", whose genetic makeup could be modified as embryos to ensure certain traits such as height or hair colour.

Any final decision on putting the regulations in place to allow the new treatments to be offered will be subject to a vote in parliament, but Davies said she hoped the first patients may be able to get the new treatments within the next two years.....snip~

Britain plans world's first go-ahead for '3-parent' IVF babies

The Brits support this.....what do you think? Cure diseases that get passed on while at the same time be able to create designer babies. They also know the US is working on DNA Swaps. Then what.....Super Soldier, Star Athlete, Entertainer? 3 Donors.....could even be 3 Parents. How does that work out? Anyone for or against. Why?
 

RabidAlpaca

Engineer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
22,185
Reaction score
28,811
Location
American Refugee in Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I think if we can use science to eliminate all disease and improve our genetics, I say we should. I'm just a little sad that it's not retroactive so I missed the boat.
 

Rainman05

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
10,032
Reaction score
4,964
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
All animals that exist within the animal kingdom, if they are born with defects, their chances of dying are greater than those without defects. If a animal has a certain weakness that is fatal for its species, then it will die one way or the other, and chances are, the bigger the defect, the earlier. A slow zebra will always be killed by predators so that the genetics that have produced a slow zebra won't be passed on. This is nature's purgatory. It's means of clensing itself.

Humanity is the first that can ignore this. If a human is born with a weak imune system, we can artificially increase a humans' imune system with drugs. Alternatively, we can cure almost any disease a human can be afflicted from. If a man is born with weak upper body strength or a pre-disposition to obesity or anything that is considered "bad", society has found ways to ignore this or go around it. A programmer doesn't need a lot of upper body strength to survive today. You can be so weak as to not even have the strength to lift 30kg and you're still going to survive because you can get jobs that don't require you to be strong. Or fast. You can survive and multiply even if you aren't particularly smart, and the brain is the most potent human feature. It's what we're best at, having big brains that can do complex thought processes. Yet there are plenty of idiots out there living and multiplying.

That's because the natural process is null and void. Or rather, it has been replaced for the most part with an artificial process of elimination since humanity's main predator is humanity.

So if there is a way to correct this, a way for humanity to promote proper healthier, better human beings, with less flaws and less defects, since we have abandoned the natural selection process, then lets go for it. However, the question is not: do we want people with less defects; the question is: How do we wish to go about this?; The current options are:
-genetic manipulation, as presented in the article
-reforming our cultural society to a more brutal one. Have a cultural paradigm in which the weak and the stupid are despised and culled and the strong and intelligent survive and thrive. I don't think we want to exist in such a society.
-don't do anything.
 

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
No, FFS.

Cure disease, fine, but they're talking about completely messing with the creation of humans. Nothing good can come of this.....

(yes, knee jerk reaction, which I don't normally do)
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,336
Reaction score
33,479
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If genetic disease can be prevented, why not?

As for the "designer babies," that one does have some pitfalls, but think about this:

Evolution is geared to the survival of the species, period. It doesn't care how intelligent the species becomes, only in how well the individuals pass on their DNA.

The more intelligent may not be so good at having lots of babies, being involved in careers and so on, which bodes ill for the collective future intelligence of the human race.

But, if we could control out own evolution, perhaps we just might eventually become a species worthy of the name homo sapiens sapiens.

If we can avoid some of those pitfalls along the way, that is.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
As far as I am concerned there is no moral difference between genetic modification to prevent a disease and GM to pick gender, hair color, or whatever. People should be required to have "Genetically Modified" tattooed on their forehead so consumers have informed choice as whether or not to mate with them.
 

Joechilli

Active member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
459
Reaction score
174
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Imagine one day it will be like the movie Gattacca ;)

But given the choice wouldn't you take measures to stop your child developing cancer,autism,huntingtons disease etc if you had the power? It's not much different to giving someone a vaccine just this ones for hereditary diseases.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
If genetic disease can be prevented, why not?

As for the "designer babies," that one does have some pitfalls, but think about this:

Evolution is geared to the survival of the species, period. It doesn't care how intelligent the species becomes, only in how well the individuals pass on their DNA.

The more intelligent may not be so good at having lots of babies, being involved in careers and so on, which bodes ill for the collective future intelligence of the human race.

But, if we could control out own evolution, perhaps we just might eventually become a species worthy of the name homo sapiens sapiens.

If we can avoid some of those pitfalls along the way, that is.

Heya DH? :2wave: So then what about the creation of Breeding stock? What other Ethical concerns do you see?
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,336
Reaction score
33,479
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Heya DH? :2wave: So then what about the creation of Breeding stock? What other Ethical concerns do you see?

Oh, there are lots of them. Whenever humans try to play god, they generally mess it up royally.

Producing a "breeding stock", ala Brave New World,
Producing an army of super soldiers,
Producing people bred to be servants,

Lots of things can go wrong, and probably would.

Even so, if we did it right, couldn't we tweak evolution just a bit and produce smarter people, perhaps some less apt to fall into the pitfalls?

or is that just too Polyannish?
 

penn1954

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 30, 2013
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
844
Location
Ft.Wayne In
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
No, FFS.

Cure disease, fine, but they're talking about completely messing with the creation of humans. Nothing good can come of this.....

(yes, knee jerk reaction, which I don't normally do)

I agree with you!I can see unintended consequences over this.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Oh, there are lots of them. Whenever humans try to play god, they generally mess it up royally.

Producing a "breeding stock", ala Brave New World,
Producing an army of super soldiers,
Producing people bred to be servants,

Lots of things can go wrong, and probably would.

Even so, if we did it right, couldn't we tweak evolution just a bit and produce smarter people, perhaps some less apt to fall into the pitfalls?

or is that just too Polyannish?

I think Mans nature then steps in.....like you said. Thinking he can play God. We have been down this road before with Super Soldier. Then it will be throw caution to the 4 winds.

Create that Human that is faster, stronger, smarter, and we could be looking at the Ole Star Trek Scenario with Khan. The Superior Human Being. Wherein one possibility would be they would know being Superior to all. Would leave them not looking at to much of a Democracy.

Moreover what does this then leave open for disputes between not two parents. But 3!
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,336
Reaction score
33,479
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I think Mans nature then steps in.....like you said. Thinking he can play God. We have been down this road before with Super Soldier. Then it will be throw caution to the 4 winds.

Create that Human that is faster, stronger, smarter, and we could be looking at the Ole Star Trek Scenario with Khan. The Superior Human Being. Wherein one possibility would be they would know being Superior to all. Would leave them not looking at to much of a Democracy.

Moreover what does this then leave open for disputes between not two parents. But 3!

I hadn't thought of that.
What might the divorce rate be if three people had to get along? Imagine the custody battles, particularly if the kids really are smarter than the parents. We could have emancipated 12 year olds.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
I hadn't thought of that.
What might the divorce rate be if three people had to get along? Imagine the custody battles, particularly if the kids really are smarter than the parents. We could have emancipated 12 year olds.

Yeah, I could see the Courts getting bogged down even more. 3 parents going for Custody and making decisions for the Child. Moreover then what happens if these genetically engineered kids cause some incurable disease to come about. Maybe that just affects others stemming from them.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,336
Reaction score
33,479
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Yeah, I could see the Courts getting bogged down even more. 3 parents going for Custody and making decisions for the Child. Moreover then what happens if these genetically engineered kids cause some incurable disease to come about. Maybe that just affects others stemming from them.

Sounds like a plot for a bad science fiction movie: Create super humans, who then invent a disease that doesn't affect them and wipe out the rest of humanity. Too late, they discover a fatal flaw in the improved DNA, and then regress to the level of Australopithecus and start the whole evolution of the human race over again.

Yes, a very bad science fiction movie.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Sounds like a plot for a bad science fiction movie: Create super humans, who then invent a disease that doesn't affect them and wipe out the rest of humanity. Too late, they discover a fatal flaw in the improved DNA, and then regress to the level of Australopithecus and start the whole evolution of the human race over again.

Yes, a very bad science fiction movie.

Kinda like the Spanish Flu huh.....here one day and gone in a year. Didn't wipe out Humanity. But it did manage to wipe out over a few million....huh? So not as far fetched as it seems. As like with the Spanish Flu. They really have no idea where it came from. Other than to say possibly from Space.

Still the Pro Life does have a point.....especially about any lab testing.
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,336
Reaction score
33,479
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

GottaGo

Rock and a hard place
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
4,910
Location
Miles to go before I sleep
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Transgenic mice are already used for research, some with human genes inserted into their DNA.

Transgenic Animals

Is a human/non human combination possible? probably. Will someone create one? Wait and see.

There will always be someone who thinks that can create a superior being... what was that movie? Island of Dr. Moreau?
 

Dittohead not!

master political analyst
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
51,336
Reaction score
33,479
Location
The Golden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There will always be someone who thinks that can create a superior being... what was that movie? Island of Dr. Moreau?

The idea has been around a long time.
The capability is rather new.
 

MoSurveyor

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
10,016
Reaction score
3,900
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Imagine one day it will be like the movie Gattacca ;)

But given the choice wouldn't you take measures to stop your child developing cancer,autism,huntingtons disease etc if you had the power? It's not much different to giving someone a vaccine just this ones for hereditary diseases.
Kiddos for the Gattaca reference - you beat me to it! :)
 

MoSurveyor

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
10,016
Reaction score
3,900
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sounds like a plot for a bad science fiction movie: Create super humans, who then invent a disease that doesn't affect them and wipe out the rest of humanity. Too late, they discover a fatal flaw in the improved DNA, and then regress to the level of Australopithecus and start the whole evolution of the human race over again.

Yes, a very bad science fiction movie.
Already kinda' sorta' done in the Star Trek: Next Generation episode Unnatural Selection (see below). The genetic engineering was done on an isolated world with just a research colony, so no local population or scary mass deaths involved. Just a typical Star Trek "What If?" You've got to love their morality plays! :D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unnatural_Selection_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation)
 

MoSurveyor

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
10,016
Reaction score
3,900
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Britain is planning to become the first country in the world to offer controversial "three-parent" fertility treatments to families who want to avoid passing on incurable diseases to their children.
That's fitting since they also created Dolly. :)


I think the gene-E (LOL!) is already out of the bottle, though this could help make up for the centuries of non-natural selection we've undergone. My main concern is with the immune system. There are so many ways we can screw the pooch on that one it does concern me a lot. Many genetic diseases, like sickle cell and diabetes, also have their positive sides in various environments, which is obvious or they wouldn't be as predominant as they are. People with only one "sickle cell" gene are basically immune to malaria. Diabetics tend to survive famines.

The other thing that concerns me is our current understanding of genetics and the human genome. We really don't know what's going on there as yet. We've got several theories, and some relatively new ones that have been found wrong, so I can only hope we investigate and take it slow instead of just jumping into the deep end as we so often do.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
That's fitting since they also created Dolly. :)


I think the gene-E (LOL!) is already out of the bottle, though this could help make up for the centuries of non-natural selection we've undergone. My main concern is with the immune system. There are so many ways we can screw the pooch on that one it does concern me a lot. Many genetic diseases, like sickle cell and diabetes, also have their positive sides in various environments, which is obvious or they wouldn't be as predominant as they are. People with only one "sickle cell" gene are basically immune to malaria. Diabetics tend to survive famines.

The other thing that concerns me is our current understanding of genetics and the human genome. We really don't know what's going on there as yet. We've got several theories, and some relatively new ones that have been found wrong, so I can only hope we investigate and take it slow instead of just jumping into the deep end as we so often do.

Heya MOS. :2wave: I agree with all you said there. Also they will have to look at how this plays out legally for all 3 parents. Especially if disputes arise.
 

MoSurveyor

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
10,016
Reaction score
3,900
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Heya MOS. :2wave: I agree with all you said there. Also they will have to look at how this plays out legally for all 3 parents. Especially if disputes arise.
:2wave: MMC.

I don't think that will be any kind of issue for quite some time. The majority of the DNA still comes from two people and I don't expect that to change in the near future. Do sperm donors have parental rights? Nope! DNA donors won't either, though they might make some big bucks for their high-class DNA. ;)
 

Fiddytree

Neocon Elitist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
29,886
Reaction score
17,287
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Imagine one day it will be like the movie Gattacca ;)

But given the choice wouldn't you take measures to stop your child developing cancer,autism,huntingtons disease etc if you had the power? It's not much different to giving someone a vaccine just this ones for hereditary diseases.

I wouldn't stop my child from having autism or regret that my child had autism.
 
Top Bottom