PDA

View Full Version : Genetic Engineering



Canadian Nanook
04-12-2004, 03:01 PM
I'm curious what other people's opinions are on genetic engineering, for health reasons and simply for cosmetic reasons, should it be allowed and under which circumstances

dave22
04-12-2004, 03:18 PM
Originally posted by Canadian Nanook
I'm curious what other people's opinions are on genetic engineering, for health reasons and simply for cosmetic reasons, should it be allowed and under which circumstances

Sure Genetic Engineering sounds great, and then the next thing you have The Eugenics Wars.

JigaroKagan
04-12-2004, 03:23 PM
Think Gattaca, but multiply it by a billion.

Jcfreak_02
04-12-2004, 04:39 PM
I do not think we should practice any genetic engineering on people. Everything else... go for it. It is a slippery slope that we should not start to let slope.

Section 8
04-12-2004, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by Jcfreak_02
I do not think we should practice any genetic engineering on people. Everything else... go for it. It is a slippery slope that we should not start to let slope.

It might be more appropriate to compare it to a cliff ... as in, currently, we are standing right at the edge, looking down, and wondering what will happen if we take just one itty-bitty step.

In so far as humanity is concerned, there really isn't any slippery slope to consider. Only a foolish man messes with things which he does not understand ... only a race of total imbeciles -- which, in this case, would happen to be ours -- messes with things that, not only does it not understand, but also carries with it the penalty of extinction if we happen to be wrong.

Evolution does not favor the weak of mind.

lucubration
04-12-2004, 09:14 PM
It's very dangeous. I'll only volunteer 2 of my 3 would be children :D

The.Giant
04-12-2004, 10:25 PM
Originally posted by Section 8
Evolution does not favor the weak of mind.

The only problem with that is that the weak of mind are now producing more offspring than the educated are.

Bottom line, if things don't change drastically in the next 50 years we're gonna see some horrific events.

Canadian Nanook
04-12-2004, 10:25 PM
Why not for health reasons, to eliminate cancer and AIDS from society as a whole, won't it better the lives of man if we can prevent lethal diseases or fix mental disabilities or prevent most of the diseases which cause us to die early now?

The.Giant
04-12-2004, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by Canadian Nanook
Why not for health reasons, to eliminate cancer and AIDS from society as a whole, won't it better the lives of man if we can prevent lethal diseases or fix mental disabilities or prevent most of the diseases which cause us to die early now?

Simply put, i feel there are too many people on this planet.

We keep proglonging the lifespan of everybody, and for what? If we cure cancer, aids, etc people will just do whatever they feel like doing and we'll decend into chaos.

Mw6wW
04-12-2004, 11:49 PM
Originally posted by The.Giant
Simply put, i feel there are too many people on this planet.

We keep proglonging the lifespan of everybody, and for what? If we cure cancer, aids, etc people will just do whatever they feel like doing and we'll decend into chaos.

Bump, overpopulation is spiraling out of control.

TranceNRG
04-13-2004, 01:00 AM
Somatic genetic engineering should be allowed

but germ line genetic engineering needs to watched.

Canadian Nanook
04-13-2004, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by TranceNRG
Somatic genetic engineering should be allowed

but germ line genetic engineering needs to watched.

I have no idea what you just said, can you explain what somatic and germ line genetic engineering are?

TranceNRG
04-13-2004, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by Canadian Nanook
I have no idea what you just said, can you explain what somatic and germ line genetic engineering are?


somatic chromosomes are the chromosomes that will not be passed through your sperm to the next generation.
so it's part of the diploid 2N chromosomes in your body.

Germline chromosomes are the haploid N chromosomes in your body that are either in sperms or eggs of the male or female.
those will be passed on to the next generation.

Let's say if you have a cencerous gene and you're 20 years old.
if you modify that gene, it's a somtic change. Since that effect will not be passed to your next generation.
your genes would be cured.

did that make sense?

XEastCoastHateX
04-13-2004, 12:39 PM
I saw let it go on...Than in about 20 years when things are crazy and there are all kinds of problems stemming from it, we can so we told you so....

BuckWyld
04-13-2004, 12:50 PM
I like science, I am all for genetic engineering.

TranceNRG
04-13-2004, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by XEastCoastHateX
I saw let it go on...Than in about 20 years when things are crazy and there are all kinds of problems stemming from it, we can so we told you so....

did you say the same about researching nuclear physcis?!

Canadian Nanook
04-13-2004, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by TranceNRG
somatic chromosomes are the chromosomes that will not be passed through your sperm to the next generation.
so it's part of the diploid 2N chromosomes in your body.

Germline chromosomes are the haploid N chromosomes in your body that are either in sperms or eggs of the male or female.
those will be passed on to the next generation.

Let's say if you have a cencerous gene and you're 20 years old.
if you modify that gene, it's a somtic change. Since that effect will not be passed to your next generation.
your genes would be cured.

did that make sense?
I understand

Jcfreak_02
04-13-2004, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by TranceNRG
somatic chromosomes are the chromosomes that will not be passed through your sperm to the next generation.
so it's part of the diploid 2N chromosomes in your body.

Germline chromosomes are the haploid N chromosomes in your body that are either in sperms or eggs of the male or female.
those will be passed on to the next generation.

Let's say if you have a cencerous gene and you're 20 years old.
if you modify that gene, it's a somtic change. Since that effect will not be passed to your next generation.
your genes would be cured.

did that make sense?
Thanks for the explaination Trance, reminds me how out of biology lingo I am.

Canadian Nanook
04-14-2004, 07:47 AM
No one has given me a major reason why should or why shouldn't we genetically engineer our children. Some people said overpopulation, fine, then what about for cosmetic reasons. I want my kids to have better muscle building genes than my own, I want my kids to be taller than me, I want my kids to be smarter and more athletic, why is that so terrible?
(by the way, that was all hypothetical, I'm not ready for kids yet)

TranceNRG
04-14-2004, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by Canadian Nanook
No one has given me a major reason why should or why shouldn't we genetically engineer our children. Some people said overpopulation, fine, then what about for cosmetic reasons. I want my kids to have better muscle building genes than my own, I want my kids to be taller than me, I want my kids to be smarter and more athletic, why is that so terrible?
(by the way, that was all hypothetical, I'm not ready for kids yet)

The problem would be...
what gives you the right to change the genes of generations and generations after you?

of course religious people will say, it's up to God to decide.

Canadian Nanook
04-14-2004, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by TranceNRG
The problem would be...
what gives you the right to change the genes of generations and generations after you?

of course religious people will say, it's up to God to decide.
If God gave us the ability to change our Genes then why wouldn't he want us to do it. It would help us prevent inbreading. It's not outlined anywhere in any religious book that you can't genetically engineer your children

M_D
04-14-2004, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by Canadian Nanook
No one has given me a major reason why should or why shouldn't we genetically engineer our children. Some people said overpopulation, fine, then what about for cosmetic reasons. I want my kids to have better muscle building genes than my own, I want my kids to be taller than me, I want my kids to be smarter and more athletic, why is that so terrible?
(by the way, that was all hypothetical, I'm not ready for kids yet)

These traits are things we all (or most) of us want to have. I think it's safe to say we value those types of traits. But, acquiring those traits through genetic engineering kinda devalues them, because now more and more people can acquire them more easily.

A ****ty as it sounds, our livelihood depends on the genetically weak (those unable to produce strong offspring). This means less competition for food, shelter, jobs, and other survival needs for the rest of us health, strong people.

Canadian Nanook
04-15-2004, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by M_D
These traits are things we all (or most) of us want to have. I think it's safe to say we value those types of traits. But, acquiring those traits through genetic engineering kinda devalues them, because now more and more people can acquire them more easily.

A ****ty as it sounds, our livelihood depends on the genetically weak (those unable to produce strong offspring). This means less competition for food, shelter, jobs, and other survival needs for the rest of us health, strong people.
So then make restrictions such as have a certain amount of credits which everyone can buy. These credits act towards certain characteristics. Say give everyone 10 credits. It takes 2 credits to improve a child's IQ by 15 points. It takes a certain amount to change a child's appearance such as on a scale, model type may be 5 credits and normal, maybe a little more handsome and easier to build muscle may take 2 credits, something of that sort. This way, everyone will be different. They will still start out with the same genes as the parents but can be adjusted certain amounts keeping some people dumber keeping some people faster and keeping some people stronger

Jef-El
04-15-2004, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by M_D
A ****ty as it sounds, our livelihood depends on the genetically weak (those unable to produce strong offspring). This means less competition for food, shelter, jobs, and other survival needs for the rest of us health, strong people.

The problem is, today, we allow the weak to continue on.

Humans have thrown out the idea of Natural selection, for the most part, and the weak are allowed to keep reproducing. We dont hunt for food anymore, we hop in a car, or open a fridge to eat food that we did not kill. We dont run from preditors etc... We sit infront of televisions and computers.

To the origional post, I think Genetic engineering is going to happen, and I dont see why we should stop it. There will be people who choose to do it and those who do not. Much like plastic surgery. I dont see ethical problems with it, besides that it might be impossible.

TranceNRG
04-16-2004, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by Canadian Nanook
If God gave us the ability to change our Genes then why wouldn't he want us to do it. It would help us prevent inbreading. It's not outlined anywhere in any religious book that you can't genetically engineer your children

well... since I am in 3rd year genetics, I agree :D

but I can't understand why God people would disagree.

Coliones
04-16-2004, 02:10 PM
Its going to happen one way or another. The only part that is scary is some military genius, or madman (fine line between the two) will figure they can make a weapon out of it and it gets out of hand. We know absolutely nothing about the genome yet we are screwing around with it not knowing what is going to happen. It'll be an interesting day when some scientist says "Whoops" and something is generated that makes HIV + Ebola look like the common cold.

drags
04-17-2004, 08:25 AM
its still to early to tell what the health and environmental effects will be.
just say you put a gene in a plant that will enable it to produce some sort of pesticide, the plant will be producing the pesticide 24 hours a day instead of being sprayed by the farmers...for arguments sake lets say once a day.

JigaroKagan
04-17-2004, 08:50 AM
Should genetic engineering, nanotechnology, etc succeed, one can only imagine how far humans will transcend the boundaries of human frailty. Just how far will humans merge with technology? It's terribly exciting to think of and yet even more exciting to know that my generation will be one of the first to truly exercise this feat of human ingenuity.

Canadian Nanook
04-17-2004, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by JigaroKagan
Should genetic engineering, nanotechnology, etc succeed, one can only imagine how far humans will transcend the boundaries of human frailty. Just how far will humans merge with technology? It's terribly exciting to think of and yet even more exciting to know that my generation will be one of the first to truly exercise this feat of human ingenuity.
I agree, it's really interesting that my children could become extremely intelligent even before they are born

LethalOnGuitarZ
04-17-2004, 09:25 AM
Almost everytime we stumble across a fascinating new area of scientific research, we find some use of it for weapons and war. It's happened with the Nuclear Physics, it'll happen with space, and soon enough, genetic engineering.

I'm completely against research into genetic engineering. Why do we have to mess with everything we know we don't have to? So we'll be able to cure countless diseases... so what? The likelyhood is that diseases will develope resistant to our medical capabilities. Besides, the human population is spiralling out of control, another 50 years and we'll have exhausted almost every resource this planet has to offer.

As said in the Matrix ...... Humans are nothing more then a plague of locusts. (With the exception of me :D)