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

Genetically Engineered Humans

Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 12:47:52 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Is anyone else hyped about CRISPR?

If you haven't heard, CRISPR is a highly precise gene editing tool that has the scientific significance on the level of the invention of the wheel. It's a really, really big thing. Being able to make fine edits to DNA would allow geneticists to repair any genetic defect that can be identified. Not only this, but the immune system can also be reprogrammed to fight any disease, including cancer. Scientists of course were ecstatic about the idea of a universal solution to disease, and it appears to be accessible to our generation thanks to this technology. Now enough of the good stuff and onto the controversy.

The moment this technology became available, Chinese scientists started using it to genetically engineer human embryos. Their stated intent was to create humans that were resistant to disease and had no genetic defects. Naturally the western world panicked and condemned the research, like we would, however I'd like to argue that the best thing we could possibly do is actually to lead this research ourselves.

Making a fuss about what Chinese scientists do with their time ultimately does not prevent them from researching Human Genetic Engineering (HGE), we can expect their research to continue all the more in the future. What needs to be noted is that this research is paying dividends in terms of discovery and development. The Chinese are actually learning to refine CRISPR and perform more accurate edits on humans. These techniques and developments are all things which the Western world is missing out on. Now before you say that we can do without them, please consider what naturally occurs in the capitalist world market:

China, being the only country to research HGE is the only country who develops cures for common genetic defects. Citizens of Western nations who want to remove defects or prevent their unborn children from developing them are naturally going to desire this. China has the supply, and we provide the demand, so the future is inevitably going to put China as being the sole supplier for HGE services.

The fact that we prohibited this research backfired spectacularly in that China now has a monopoly on such services. Every year of R&D puts their HGE capabilities further ahead of our own. Essentially, a ban on research into HGE achieves nothing. China is going to do it if we don't, and we really don't want China to be the only country able to do HGE. Therefore it is in our best interests to compete with them scientifically, and not prohibit our own scientists from researching HGE.

Designer babies are not something that can be prevented, therefore we need to be the ones who have the technology such that we are in the best possible place to control the market, impose regulations and project our own moral positions into world trade. If we don't do this, we are simply giving the green light to a future where China is the country who decides what is acceptable or not in terms of HGE.

TL;DR: In order to stop China creating a market for human genetic engineering and monopolising it, it is very important that Western nations are able to meet the demands for this technology on their own. This future will not be realised with the current research restrictions in place.
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 5:03:49 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
I am honestly excited for human genetic engineering. Since I'm already born, the best thing I'll have is robotic augmentation.
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,730
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 5:29:09 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Most any new technology is going to have unforseen, undesireable consequences. I would fully expect that genetic engineering is going to cause all sorts of problems in the children being born, and there will be moral backlash. Engineered children may find themselves not only biologically non-viable but also socially outcast. If they require medical maintenance, we could be forced into some pretty tough decisions :(
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
Annnaxim
Posts: 222
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2016 5:37:36 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
Of course there will be unforseen problems. But do you think that will stop the researchers?
(Scientists love problems, because they mean work and -ultimately- pay.)
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2016 11:27:18 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/26/2016 5:29:09 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Most any new technology is going to have unforseen, undesireable consequences. I would fully expect that genetic engineering is going to cause all sorts of problems in the children being born, and there will be moral backlash. Engineered children may find themselves not only biologically non-viable but also socially outcast. If they require medical maintenance, we could be forced into some pretty tough decisions :(

Genetically engineered children would be far superior to normal kids if they are born.
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2016 11:45:01 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/26/2016 12:47:52 PM, Smithereens wrote:
Is anyone else hyped about CRISPR?

If you haven't heard, CRISPR is a highly precise gene editing tool that has the scientific significance on the level of the invention of the wheel. It's a really, really big thing. Being able to make fine edits to DNA would allow geneticists to repair any genetic defect that can be identified. Not only this, but the immune system can also be reprogrammed to fight any disease, including cancer. Scientists of course were ecstatic about the idea of a universal solution to disease, and it appears to be accessible to our generation thanks to this technology. Now enough of the good stuff and onto the controversy.

The moment this technology became available, Chinese scientists started using it to genetically engineer human embryos. Their stated intent was to create humans that were resistant to disease and had no genetic defects. Naturally the western world panicked and condemned the research, like we would, however I'd like to argue that the best thing we could possibly do is actually to lead this research ourselves.

Making a fuss about what Chinese scientists do with their time ultimately does not prevent them from researching Human Genetic Engineering (HGE), we can expect their research to continue all the more in the future. What needs to be noted is that this research is paying dividends in terms of discovery and development. The Chinese are actually learning to refine CRISPR and perform more accurate edits on humans. These techniques and developments are all things which the Western world is missing out on. Now before you say that we can do without them, please consider what naturally occurs in the capitalist world market:

China, being the only country to research HGE is the only country who develops cures for common genetic defects. Citizens of Western nations who want to remove defects or prevent their unborn children from developing them are naturally going to desire this. China has the supply, and we provide the demand, so the future is inevitably going to put China as being the sole supplier for HGE services.

The fact that we prohibited this research backfired spectacularly in that China now has a monopoly on such services. Every year of R&D puts their HGE capabilities further ahead of our own. Essentially, a ban on research into HGE achieves nothing. China is going to do it if we don't, and we really don't want China to be the only country able to do HGE. Therefore it is in our best interests to compete with them scientifically, and not prohibit our own scientists from researching HGE.

Designer babies are not something that can be prevented, therefore we need to be the ones who have the technology such that we are in the best possible place to control the market, impose regulations and project our own moral positions into world trade. If we don't do this, we are simply giving the green light to a future where China is the country who decides what is acceptable or not in terms of HGE.

TL;DR: In order to stop China creating a market for human genetic engineering and monopolising it, it is very important that Western nations are able to meet the demands for this technology on their own. This future will not be realised with the current research restrictions in place.

You are supporting an arms race on human genetic engineering and you don't see that as a problem? I suggest you watch a few more dystopian future movies.

As a professed Christian on your profile, I'm surprised you have no issue with man dabbling at playing God.

Btw, Go the Swans. :-)
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2016 11:53:06 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/27/2016 11:45:01 PM, dee-em wrote:
You are supporting an arms race on human genetic engineering and you don't see that as a problem? I suggest you watch a few more dystopian future movies.
We have to recognise that science is not going to stop to observe our feelings. And china certainly isn't. Dystopian movies furthermore can be used to shut down any sort of technology, including our current level of advancement, so there's no point discussing it.

As a professed Christian on your profile, I'm surprised you have no issue with man dabbling at playing God.
Engineering life is not playing God, and it's not forbidden. Even if it were, Christian theology doesn't have an issue with it. That's more our culture which says that people should not attempt to be like the thing they worship. In actual fact that's utter nonsense.

Btw, Go the Swans. :-)
fvck the swans, they can be in a grand final whenever they want. The Bulldogs is a Melbourne team that actually deserves a payout for their work imho.
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2016 12:02:55 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/27/2016 11:53:06 PM, Smithereens wrote:
At 9/27/2016 11:45:01 PM, dee-em wrote:

You are supporting an arms race on human genetic engineering and you don't see that as a problem? I suggest you watch a few more dystopian future movies.

We have to recognise that science is not going to stop to observe our feelings. And china certainly isn't. Dystopian movies furthermore can be used to shut down any sort of technology, including our current level of advancement, so there's no point discussing it.

Those who do not learn from the future are doomed to experience it, or something like that. :-)

As a professed Christian on your profile, I'm surprised you have no issue with man dabbling at playing God.

Engineering life is not playing God, and it's not forbidden. Even if it were, Christian theology doesn't have an issue with it.

I find that difficult to believe. Christians strongly opposed stem cell research. There are plenty who oppose HGE:

http://www.patheos.com...

That's more our culture which says that people should not attempt to be like the thing they worship. In actual fact that's utter nonsense.

Btw, Go the Swans. :-)

fvck the swans, they can be in a grand final whenever they want. The Bulldogs is a Melbourne team that actually deserves a payout for their work imho.

I expected no other response. :-)
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2016 12:11:53 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/28/2016 12:02:55 AM, dee-em wrote:
Those who do not learn from the future are doomed to experience it, or something like that. :-)

lol wtf XD you live by some extraordinary principles imo.

I find that difficult to believe. Christians strongly opposed stem cell research. There are plenty who oppose HGE:
Yes, this is a contentious issue for christians. However what you'll see is that Christians become less conservative by each generation. A few generations ago Christians did not support interracial marriage. Now it's gay marriage, next generation it will be something else. Only the christians of today are going to have issues with it. My post on why Christians should support abortion should make my position a little clear in terms of the philosophy behind it:
http://www.debate.org...

http://www.patheos.com...
This link basically admits that the bible has no instructions on the matter and that we should oppose HGE for a petty cultural reason like 'Our body belongs to God.' They clearly haven't put the effort into considering that we already change and manipulate our bodies using medicines, artificial implants, prosthetics etc. Cell editings is just another type of manipulation that we don't already practice.

I expected no other response. :-)
My thoughts exactly. Any other response should be illegal.
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
imperialchimp
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2016 3:40:14 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/26/2016 12:47:52 PM, Smithereens wrote:
Is anyone else hyped about CRISPR?

If you haven't heard, CRISPR is a highly precise gene editing tool that has the scientific significance on the level of the invention of the wheel. It's a really, really big thing. Being able to make fine edits to DNA would allow geneticists to repair any genetic defect that can be identified. Not only this, but the immune system can also be reprogrammed to fight any disease, including cancer. Scientists of course were ecstatic about the idea of a universal solution to disease, and it appears to be accessible to our generation thanks to this technology. Now enough of the good stuff and onto the controversy.

The moment this technology became available, Chinese scientists started using it to genetically engineer human embryos. Their stated intent was to create humans that were resistant to disease and had no genetic defects. Naturally the western world panicked and condemned the research, like we would, however I'd like to argue that the best thing we could possibly do is actually to lead this research ourselves.

Making a fuss about what Chinese scientists do with their time ultimately does not prevent them from researching Human Genetic Engineering (HGE), we can expect their research to continue all the more in the future. What needs to be noted is that this research is paying dividends in terms of discovery and development. The Chinese are actually learning to refine CRISPR and perform more accurate edits on humans. These techniques and developments are all things which the Western world is missing out on. Now before you say that we can do without them, please consider what naturally occurs in the capitalist world market:

China, being the only country to research HGE is the only country who develops cures for common genetic defects. Citizens of Western nations who want to remove defects or prevent their unborn children from developing them are naturally going to desire this. China has the supply, and we provide the demand, so the future is inevitably going to put China as being the sole supplier for HGE services.

The fact that we prohibited this research backfired spectacularly in that China now has a monopoly on such services. Every year of R&D puts their HGE capabilities further ahead of our own. Essentially, a ban on research into HGE achieves nothing. China is going to do it if we don't, and we really don't want China to be the only country able to do HGE. Therefore it is in our best interests to compete with them scientifically, and not prohibit our own scientists from researching HGE.

Designer babies are not something that can be prevented, therefore we need to be the ones who have the technology such that we are in the best possible place to control the market, impose regulations and project our own moral positions into world trade. If we don't do this, we are simply giving the green light to a future where China is the country who decides what is acceptable or not in terms of HGE.

TL;DR: In order to stop China creating a market for human genetic engineering and monopolising it, it is very important that Western nations are able to meet the demands for this technology on their own. This future will not be realised with the current research restrictions in place.

Found a video about it

https://www.youtube.com...
Ape Lives Matter (ALM)

What if I were to tell you that humans have false logic? Prepare for confusion.

-.-- --- ..- / ... .... --- ..- .-.. -.. / .... .- ...- . / -. --- - / - .-. .- -. ... .-.. .- - . -.. / - .... .. ... .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.-
imperialchimp
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2016 3:49:23 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/26/2016 12:47:52 PM, Smithereens wrote:
Is anyone else hyped about CRISPR?

If you haven't heard, CRISPR is a highly precise gene editing tool that has the scientific significance on the level of the invention of the wheel. It's a really, really big thing. Being able to make fine edits to DNA would allow geneticists to repair any genetic defect that can be identified. Not only this, but the immune system can also be reprogrammed to fight any disease, including cancer. Scientists of course were ecstatic about the idea of a universal solution to disease, and it appears to be accessible to our generation thanks to this technology. Now enough of the good stuff and onto the controversy.

The moment this technology became available, Chinese scientists started using it to genetically engineer human embryos. Their stated intent was to create humans that were resistant to disease and had no genetic defects. Naturally the western world panicked and condemned the research, like we would, however I'd like to argue that the best thing we could possibly do is actually to lead this research ourselves.

Making a fuss about what Chinese scientists do with their time ultimately does not prevent them from researching Human Genetic Engineering (HGE), we can expect their research to continue all the more in the future. What needs to be noted is that this research is paying dividends in terms of discovery and development. The Chinese are actually learning to refine CRISPR and perform more accurate edits on humans. These techniques and developments are all things which the Western world is missing out on. Now before you say that we can do without them, please consider what naturally occurs in the capitalist world market:

China, being the only country to research HGE is the only country who develops cures for common genetic defects. Citizens of Western nations who want to remove defects or prevent their unborn children from developing them are naturally going to desire this. China has the supply, and we provide the demand, so the future is inevitably going to put China as being the sole supplier for HGE services.

The fact that we prohibited this research backfired spectacularly in that China now has a monopoly on such services. Every year of R&D puts their HGE capabilities further ahead of our own. Essentially, a ban on research into HGE achieves nothing. China is going to do it if we don't, and we really don't want China to be the only country able to do HGE. Therefore it is in our best interests to compete with them scientifically, and not prohibit our own scientists from researching HGE.

Designer babies are not something that can be prevented, therefore we need to be the ones who have the technology such that we are in the best possible place to control the market, impose regulations and project our own moral positions into world trade. If we don't do this, we are simply giving the green light to a future where China is the country who decides what is acceptable or not in terms of HGE.

TL;DR: In order to stop China creating a market for human genetic engineering and monopolising it, it is very important that Western nations are able to meet the demands for this technology on their own. This future will not be realised with the current research restrictions in place.

still though, i don't think it can simply cure diseases. That's not how evolution works.

Viruses more than likely will adapt to counter crispr and cas9. we then may have to deal with a far more deadly virus.
Ape Lives Matter (ALM)

What if I were to tell you that humans have false logic? Prepare for confusion.

-.-- --- ..- / ... .... --- ..- .-.. -.. / .... .- ...- . / -. --- - / - .-. .- -. ... .-.. .- - . -.. / - .... .. ... .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.-
Smithereens
Posts: 5,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2016 4:27:10 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/28/2016 3:49:23 AM, imperialchimp wrote:
still though, i don't think it can simply cure diseases. That's not how evolution works.

Viruses more than likely will adapt to counter crispr and cas9. we then may have to deal with a far more deadly virus.

CRISPR/Cas9 are not evolutionary tools. What they would do is rewrite the immune system to recognise specific viral DNA and expunge it.
Adenoviruses would not be a target for CRISPR/Cas9, the hard ones are the retroviruses, which splice their own DNA into the host cell. CRISPR would rewrite the viral DNA out of all the cells that have it. How do you develop a defense against that?
Music composition contest: http://www.debate.org...
imperialchimp
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 7:29:24 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 9/28/2016 4:27:10 AM, Smithereens wrote:
At 9/28/2016 3:49:23 AM, imperialchimp wrote:
still though, i don't think it can simply cure diseases. That's not how evolution works.

Viruses more than likely will adapt to counter crispr and cas9. we then may have to deal with a far more deadly virus.

CRISPR/Cas9 are not evolutionary tools. What they would do is rewrite the immune system to recognise specific viral DNA and expunge it.

Um okay... so how does this relate to viruses possibly countering crispr?

Adenoviruses would not be a target for CRISPR/Cas9, the hard ones are the retroviruses, which splice their own DNA into the host cell. CRISPR would rewrite the viral DNA out of all the cells that have it. How do you develop a defense against that?

Nature finds a way...
Ape Lives Matter (ALM)

What if I were to tell you that humans have false logic? Prepare for confusion.

-.-- --- ..- / ... .... --- ..- .-.. -.. / .... .- ...- . / -. --- - / - .-. .- -. ... .-.. .- - . -.. / - .... .. ... .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.-