Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Is this a good idea or a bad one??

Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2012 8:23:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/24/2012 8:10:04 PM, medic0506 wrote:
We've known that procedures like this would begin soon, but is this a good thing or bad??

http://www.myfoxny.com...

Depends on what it's used for.
emospongebob527
Posts: 790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2012 8:29:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/24/2012 8:10:04 PM, medic0506 wrote:
We've known that procedures like this would begin soon, but is this a good thing or bad??

http://www.myfoxny.com...

It lowers the risk of diseases at birth.
"not to toot my own horn (it aint need no tooin if u know what im saying), but my writings on "viciousness: the one true viture (fancy spelling for virtue)" and my poem "A poem I wrote about DDO" put me in a class of my damn own. im just an UNRECONGIZED geniuse" -bananafana
Dogknox
Posts: 5,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2012 8:52:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/24/2012 8:10:04 PM, medic0506 wrote:
We've known that procedures like this would begin soon, but is this a good thing or bad??

http://www.myfoxny.com...
To make it clear: It is the act of procreation >LOVE between a husband and wife< that forms life!

The sex act produces LIFE! God is LOVE and it is LOVE that created the world including us!!

If these new procedures remove the Love between a man and a woman from the creation of new life then the Holy Catholic Church would tell you it is WRONG!!

Test tube babies are against God and LOVE! NOT the baby, but any procedure taking LOVE and God out of the creation of new life is wrong wrong wrong!

God made man in the image of himself.. "LOVE"!
Pigs dogs sheep snails etc.. can't love... Any procedure used without "LOVE" lowers man to that of animals!
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2012 9:13:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This will certainly make custody battles more interesting.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2012 11:31:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/24/2012 8:10:04 PM, medic0506 wrote:
We've known that procedures like this would begin soon, but is this a good thing or bad??

http://www.myfoxny.com...

It"s a very good thing.

Let"s recognize what they have done here, they are only replacing defective mitochondrial genes; it is not a process that can lead to designer babies or engineered human beings. They are only addressing and eliminating a broad range of genetic diseases that result from defective mitochondria.

Mitochondria are organelles, they do not occur in the nucleus of cells, and they don"t carry any of the characteristics that are passed on such as blue eyes or hair color, or in my case for instance, incredible good looks. They are found outside of the nucleus, in the plasma of the cell, and they are the engines that make animal life possible, the main thing they do is convert oxygen into energy the cell can use.

Chloroplasts and mitochondria are the two most important creatures on earth; chloroplasts make oxygen and fuel plant life, and mitochondria use the oxygen and fuel animal life. The evidence is strong and direct that they are separate creatures, primitive bacteria that swam into ancestral precursors of our eukaryotic cells (nucleated cells) and stayed there and if that hadn"t happened around a billion years ago, animal life could never have evolved beyond single celled creatures. The same goes for the chloroplasts in the plant kingdom, together they are responsible for the proliferation of life on this planet. So mitochondria are actually endosymbionts, autonomous creatures living in the cell, they do not arise new in the cell, they are just always there, living in the plasma, replicating on their own, independent of the replication of the cell, merely fortuitous passengers that swam into an ancient cell and came along for the ride and in the process, provide the energy necessary for animal life to evolve into human beings. They travel down from the egg to newborn, a few come from the sperm, but the vast majority are maternal passengers and they are much more closely related to each other than they are to us. I like that by the way, it makes me feel connected, closely related to all of life, so to speak.

The resultant concerns that this process could lead to moral issues around engineering the characteristics of human beings is unwarranted, this process of replacing defective mitochondria can eliminate mitochondrial diseases and enhance the heath of the human being, but it cannot be used to alter the characteristics of a human being that are encoded in the nucleus, and that is what makes us who we are.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 11:10:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Being in the medical field, it's difficult for me to argue against improvements in our ability to avoid genetic causes of disease. My only concern is that, if this shows to be safe and effective, it could spiral into trying more and more genetically invasive procedures.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 7:14:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/25/2012 11:10:52 AM, medic0506 wrote:
Being in the medical field, it's difficult for me to argue against improvements in our ability to avoid genetic causes of disease. My only concern is that, if this shows to be safe and effective, it could spiral into trying more and more genetically invasive procedures.

True, but I don't think genetically invasive procedures are morally wrong per se, the research is going to happen, can't stop that, but the time will come when there will have to be ethical lines drawn I think. Problem is, the lines are going to be fuzzy and somewhat arbitrary.

As a proud father, I'll tell you it's my son's line of business, he's a biochemist doing cancer research, right now focused on the potential of nanomedicine, primarily to extend the limits of molecular diagnostics and provide more focused delivery of molecular targeted cancer therapy. It doesn't sound like it would be, but I understand they are all over the place with genetically invasive procedures in an effort to deliver personalized cancer therapeutic treatments. Aside from proud father, the point is, this is certainly innocent enough work, and it's my understanding that a large amount of valuable and quite valid research on a broad range of quite valid areas of study go pretty deep into genetic invasive processes, it's going to be hard to determine when and where these lines can be drawn without important medical research suffering.

Science is ethically neutral, it what we do with the results of science that can become ethically problematic. I doubt we can ever draw the lines in the area of scientific research without hindering progress.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 7:16:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/24/2012 8:23:33 PM, Enji wrote:
At 10/24/2012 8:10:04 PM, medic0506 wrote:
We've known that procedures like this would begin soon, but is this a good thing or bad??

http://www.myfoxny.com...

Depends on what it's used for.

This looks suspicious.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 8:44:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/25/2012 7:16:26 PM, inferno wrote:
At 10/24/2012 8:23:33 PM, Enji wrote:
At 10/24/2012 8:10:04 PM, medic0506 wrote:
We've known that procedures like this would begin soon, but is this a good thing or bad??

http://www.myfoxny.com...

Depends on what it's used for.

This looks suspicious.

It's not suspicious at all, nobody is anywhere close to altering genetic DNA in the nucleus, and that is what defines the characteristics of the human being. They are just working with defective organelles, and only able to address mitochondrial diseases with the technique, it has nothing to do with altering human characteristics.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 6:27:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/24/2012 8:52:01 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 10/24/2012 8:10:04 PM, medic0506 wrote:
We've known that procedures like this would begin soon, but is this a good thing or bad??

http://www.myfoxny.com...
To make it clear: It is the act of procreation >LOVE between a husband and wife< that forms life!

The sex act produces LIFE! God is LOVE and it is LOVE that created the world including us!!

If these new procedures remove the Love between a man and a woman from the creation of new life then the Holy Catholic Church would tell you it is WRONG!!

Test tube babies are against God and LOVE! NOT the baby, but any procedure taking LOVE and God out of the creation of new life is wrong wrong wrong!

God made man in the image of himself.. "LOVE"!
Pigs dogs sheep snails etc.. can't love... Any procedure used without "LOVE" lowers man to that of animals!

Me Composer the ongoing successful Cult buster: Story book jebus loved & extolled the virtues & attributes of animals, e.g. The Serpent was wiser than jebus, wiser than its Story book god & wiser than the trinitarian alleged holy-spirit -

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. {harmless: or, simple} (Matt. 10:16) KJV Story book

Obviously also Story book jebus believed the Serpent was also incredibly ' loving ', else it would make no sense that a ' loving jebus ' would command its disciples to preach the supreme wisdom of a non-loving Serpent?

Obviously the Serpent is the wisest and most loving of all again and above Story book jebus, its god & trinitarian alleged holy-spirit and that's why it commanded its disciples to behave like it!

Your Saviour moi!
Heineken
Posts: 1,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 6:54:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
In the ethical sense, this technique needs to be regulated, but not outlawed.
If medical science can use this technique to eliminate congenital defects, then it should be allowed.
However, the third party donor needs to be anonymous and pre-screened. Otherwise you venture into a custody triangle.
The third party donor should waive all custody rights, donating healthy genes in the same manner that people donate blood.
Parents with a compromised gene pool should have the option to prevent genetic disease.
Vidi, vici, veni.
(I saw, I conquered, I came.)
Heineken
Posts: 1,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 6:56:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
And we should not venture into religious speculation where scripture is silent.
Marriage is the union of the flesh, it does not make any mention about proxy parenting.
I would consider this an act of mercy in the same manner that organ donation is an act of mercy. It's called "common grace".
Vidi, vici, veni.
(I saw, I conquered, I came.)
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 7:40:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/26/2012 6:54:15 AM, Heineken wrote:
In the ethical sense, this technique needs to be regulated, but not outlawed.
If medical science can use this technique to eliminate congenital defects, then it should be allowed.
However, the third party donor needs to be anonymous and pre-screened. Otherwise you venture into a custody triangle.
The third party donor should waive all custody rights, donating healthy genes in the same manner that people donate blood.
Parents with a compromised gene pool should have the option to prevent genetic disease.

That certainly makes sense, even though a custody case would be nuts, but there are a lot of nuts out there, and the legal profession makes a lot of money off nuts.

A better case could be made that the mitochondria have a right to custody of the human being.

A strong case can be made that mitochondria and chloroplasts are the parents of all life on this planet. From a certain perspective, we could be seen as a large motile colony of mitochondria operating a complex system of bones, tissues and neurons in order to replicate and provide a good home for thier offspring.

Mitochondria and Chloroplasts are ancient bacteria that conspired to make the planet inhabitable, by working together they created an oxegenated atmosphere and then set about building complex colonies of plant and animal life that eventually evolved into what we are today, but underneath it all, within the plasma of living cells, they remained the same, replicating and fueling the advance of all higher forms of life.

They are the true custodians of all life on this planet.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater