Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Yesterday at 03:34 PM

الحبيب من يشبه اكثر؟؟؟
by akay
June 21, 2025, 01:05 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
June 21, 2025, 07:37 AM

New Britain
June 20, 2025, 09:26 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
June 18, 2025, 09:24 PM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
June 17, 2025, 11:23 PM

Is Iran/Persia going to b...
by zeca
June 17, 2025, 10:20 PM

News From Syria
June 17, 2025, 05:58 PM

Muslim grooming gangs sti...
June 17, 2025, 10:47 AM

ماذا يحدث هذه الايام؟؟؟.
by akay
June 02, 2025, 10:25 AM

What happens in these day...
June 02, 2025, 09:27 AM

What's happened to the fo...
June 01, 2025, 10:43 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering

 (Read 6127 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     OP - March 21, 2009, 12:33 PM

    Quote
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20127006.600-fears-over-designer-babies-leave-children-suffering.html

    MADELINE Kara Neumann, age 11, died of diabetes because her parents prayed rather than taking her to doctors. Caleb Moorhead, age 6 months, died after his deeply religious vegan parents refused a simple vitamin injection to cure his malnutrition. The list of children killed by their parents' superstition or wilful ignorance is a long one.

    Most people are rightly appalled by such cases. How can parents stand by and let their children die instead of doing all in their power to get the best medical care available?

    Yet this is precisely what society is doing. We now have the ability to ensure that children are born free of any one of hundreds of serious genetic disorders, from cystic fibrosis to early-onset cancers. But children continue to be born with these diseases.

    All would-be parents should be offered screening to alert them to any genetic disorders they risk passing on to their children. Those at risk should then be offered IVF with pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (IVF-PGD) to ensure any children are healthy.

    Why isn't it happening? Because most people still regard attempts to influence which genes our children inherit as taboo. When a fertility clinic in Los Angeles recently offered would-be parents the chance to choose their child's eye colour, for instance, it provoked a storm of criticism that forced the clinic to reconsider

    Such fears are misplaced: IVF-PGD is little use for creating designer babies. You cannot select for traits the parents don't have, and the scope for choosing specific traits is very limited. What IVF-PGD is good for is ensuring children do not end up with disastrous genetic disorders.

    Nearly 150 years after Darwin unveiled his theory of evolution, we have yet to grasp one of its most unsettling implications: having diseased children is as natural as having healthy ones. Every new life is a gamble, an experiment with novel gene combinations that could be a brilliant success or a tragic failure.

    Thanks to technology, we are no longer entirely at the mercy of this callous process. Rather than regarding this ability with suspicion, we should be celebrating it and encouraging its use. Instead, we continue to allow children be born with terrible diseases because of our collective ignorance and superstition. That makes us little better than the parents of Madeline and Caleb.


    People need to be educated from school about what the term 'designer babies' really means. It is a completely misleading term and is hindering scientific progress. Our gene pool is not going to become limited, that is a silly fear many people seem to have.
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #1 - March 21, 2009, 08:07 PM

    I hadn't thought much about this before but that article puts it very well. This bit is particularly lucid:

    Quote
    Nearly 150 years after Darwin unveiled his theory of evolution, we have yet to grasp one of its most unsettling implications: having diseased children is as natural as having healthy ones. Every new life is a gamble, an experiment with novel gene combinations that could be a brilliant success or a tragic failure.


    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #2 - March 23, 2009, 09:01 PM

    Religious people will fight and fight against the idea of designer babies. And then Two decades later when we have all those much healthier babies, they will get even more religious as they thank god for providing them with all those healthy babies and perfect inner ears and complex little eyes.

    "Ask the slave girl; she will tell you the truth.' So the Apostle called Burayra to ask her. Ali got up and gave her a violent beating first, saying, 'Tell the Apostle the truth.'"
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #3 - March 23, 2009, 09:30 PM

    Nearly 150 years after Darwin unveiled his theory of evolution, we have yet to grasp one of its most unsettling implications: having diseased children is as natural as having healthy ones. Every new life is a gamble, an experiment with novel gene combinations that could be a brilliant success or a tragic failure.

    Interesting way of looking at it..

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #4 - March 23, 2009, 10:39 PM

    Accurate way of looking at it. For all the talk of "Mother Nature" and "God's will" the fact is that genetic fuckups are perfectly normal and natural.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #5 - March 24, 2009, 06:21 AM

    Accurate way of looking at it. For all the talk of "Mother Nature" and "God's will" the fact is that genetic fuckups are perfectly normal and natural.

    Yeah, that is so true. I never looked at it that way before. Manly because we refer to healthy babies as normal but the unhealthy ones are normal too!

    "Poor human nature, what horrible crimes have been committed in thy name!"
    - Emma Goldman
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #6 - March 24, 2009, 11:21 AM

    Nearly 150 years after Darwin unveiled his theory of evolution, we have yet to grasp one of its most unsettling implications: having diseased children is as natural as having healthy ones. Every new life is a gamble, an experiment with novel gene combinations that could be a brilliant success or a tragic failure.


    The last sentence in this paragraph from the New Scientist is slightly incorrect,  as twins are an exception to this rule.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #7 - March 24, 2009, 11:28 AM

    Nearly 150 years after Darwin unveiled his theory of evolution, we have yet to grasp one of its most unsettling implications: having diseased children is as natural as having healthy ones. Every new life is a gamble, an experiment with novel gene combinations that could be a brilliant success or a tragic failure.


    The last sentence in this paragraph from the New Scientist is slightly incorrect,  as twins are an exception to this rule.

    Why?
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #8 - March 24, 2009, 12:29 PM

    Nearly 150 years after Darwin unveiled his theory of evolution, we have yet to grasp one of its most unsettling implications: having diseased children is as natural as having healthy ones. Every new life is a gamble, an experiment with novel gene combinations that could be a brilliant success or a tragic failure.


    The last sentence in this paragraph from the New Scientist is slightly incorrect,  as twins are an exception to this rule.

    Why?

    Nature does not always produce novel gene combinations - in the case of twins, they share the same ones.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #9 - March 25, 2009, 02:20 AM

    Only in the case of identical twins. Wink

    There are also various species of critter that reproduce asexually. Even some reptiles are capable of it.

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #10 - March 25, 2009, 07:39 AM

    Only in the case of identical twins. Wink

    There are also various species of critter that reproduce asexually. Even some reptiles are capable of it.


    Thats true, all vegetables/animals that reproduce assexually are also  excluded. 

    Did you know that despite our claim re. identical twins, recent research is now actually showing that even their DNA is not identical.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #11 - March 25, 2009, 08:32 AM

    Quote from: IsLame
    Thats true, all vegetables/animals that reproduce assexually are also  excluded.

    Asexual reproduction can still create some genetical variety.

    Quote from: IsLame
    Did you know that despite our claim re. identical twins, recent research is now actually showing that even their DNA is not identical.

    Any details?

    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #12 - March 25, 2009, 01:17 PM

    Quote from: IsLame
    Thats true, all vegetables/animals that reproduce assexually are also  excluded.

    Asexual reproduction can still create some genetical variety.

    OK, replace the word "all", with "some"

    Quote from: IsLame
    Did you know that despite our claim re. identical twins, recent research is now actually showing that even their DNA is not identical.

    Any details?

    Its was from a copy of American Journal of Human Genetics - here's a link to it http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/health/11real.html?ref=science

    Apparently the difference arise to copy number variations, but its not known yet whether this occurs at embryo or a later stage.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #13 - March 25, 2009, 04:26 PM

    Since we are talking about Genetics, I want a suggestion for a little off topic issue:

    I know a Hindu who believes strongly in caste system defends his case using Genetics arguments, He says initially caste distinction was by profession / intellectual power. Then over the generations people belonging to different castes passed their genes and traits to their progeny. And if the castes will intermarry, finally people will lose their distinct trait. Eg. the castes which have been warrior for centuries have strong and healthy body than business castes. Like in India, Marathas who are warrior are physically stronger than Gujaratis who are primarily in business. So, he says while inter-marrying both will lose that distinct traits. If they don't intermarry then they will be more specialized in their field and progress.

    Genetics is not my strong area, please help me refute him.
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #14 - March 25, 2009, 04:28 PM

    Well, female twins will always have some difference, because females have two copies of the X chromosome, one of which devolves into the inactive Barr body during embryogenesis, i.e. formation of the embryo. The X chromosomes are chosen randomly for inactivation. In other words, the active X chromosome is chosen randomly: one sister may have a lethal mutation and die soon after birth whereas the other sister is perfectly healthy, for example. Auto-immune diseases sometimes follow this pattern.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barr_body

    Other than that, identical twins have identical genomes. Of course mutations can occur and accumulate in somatic cells i.e. body cells, but these mutations are bound to be local. Cancer, for example, requires a set of mutations. One twin may accumulate these mutations and develop cancer, whereas the other twin may not: but this does not mean that their genomes are different, only that some of their somatic cells accumulated different mutations.

    I hope this helps...

    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #15 - March 25, 2009, 04:31 PM

    Since we are talking about Genetics, I want a suggestion for a little off topic issue:

    I know a Hindu who believes strongly in caste system defends his case using Genetics arguments, He says initially caste distinction was by profession / intellectual power. Then over the generations people belonging to different castes passed their genes and traits to their progeny. And if the castes will intermarry, finally people will lose their distinct trait. Eg. the castes which have been warrior for centuries have strong and healthy body than business castes. Like in India, Marathas who are warrior are physically stronger than Gujaratis who are primarily in business. So, he says while inter-marrying both will lose that distinct traits. If they don't intermarry then they will be more specialized in their field and progress.

    Genetics is not my strong area, please help me refute him.

    I love it when people use pseudo-genetics to back up their racist theories.

    There is a thing called "hybrid vigour." Inbreeding often creates and maintains recessive genetic diseases in closed gene pools. Because most genetical diseases are recessive, hybrids are more likely to have a healthy copy of the gene, and thus survive.

    Tell your friend that if the castes intermarry, newer generations will actually combine the better traits of different castes. That's the simplest way of putting it.

    Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #16 - March 25, 2009, 04:41 PM

    That is good way  Afro I will tell him that inter marrying will give new generation better traits from different castes.

    I can't tell him regarding disease because most Hindus don't marry to someone who can be traced to 7 generation of common ancestory, yes there are few groups where cousins can intermarry.

    I hate when ppl like this back up there own  theory and then say 'This is Science.'
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #17 - March 25, 2009, 06:01 PM

    Here's an interesting article on a similar issue, namely inter racial marriages in U.S.A., decriminalized only in 1967.  grin12
    www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-04-12-interracial-marriage_n.htm

    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #18 - March 25, 2009, 09:02 PM

    Its was from a copy of American Journal of Human Genetics - here's a link to it http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/health/11real.html?ref=science

    Apparently the difference arise to copy number variations, but its not known yet whether this occurs at embryo or a later stage.

    Interesting. I'd never thought about it but it does make a certain amount of sense. Genetics is a lot more complicated than the widespread notion of a "blueprint".

    Have you heard of "chimeras"? These are people who are more or less the opposite of identical twins. Instead of one fertilised egg splitting into two embryos and developing as separate people (as per identical twins) chimeras occur when two different fertilised eggs are in the uterus and one of them is absorbed by the other very early on. The result is an apparently normal person who, when tested, has some of the characteristics of both genetic codes.

    http://www.blisstree.com/geneticsandhealth/human-genetic-chimeras/

    http://genetics.suite101.com/article.cfm/chimeras

    http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=23

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #19 - March 25, 2009, 09:04 PM

    That is good way  Afro I will tell him that inter marrying will give new generation better traits from different castes.

    I can't tell him regarding disease because most Hindus don't marry to someone who can be traced to 7 generation of common ancestory, yes there are few groups where cousins can intermarry.

    I hate when ppl like this back up there own  theory and then say 'This is Science.'

    Tell him the upper castes are inbred and this is why they come out with stupid theories.  Cheesy

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #20 - March 25, 2009, 09:42 PM

    I love it when people use pseudo-genetics to back up their racist theories.

    There is a thing called "hybrid vigour." Inbreeding often creates and maintains recessive genetic diseases in closed gene pools. Because most genetical diseases are recessive, hybrids are more likely to have a healthy copy of the gene, and thus survive.

    Tell your friend that if the castes intermarry, newer generations will actually combine the better traits of different castes. That's the simplest way of putting it.

    Doesnt your theory specifically apply to genetic diseases?  I just dont see how physical differences/personality differences can be determined as good or bad ones and thus become recessive or dominant accordingly. 

    I do see the logic in that if you only marry tall people together, then you are more likely to get tall children?  In this example the short gene is not recessive, and an average is taken from both parents inherited genes.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #21 - March 25, 2009, 09:44 PM

    Its was from a copy of American Journal of Human Genetics - here's a link to it http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/health/11real.html?ref=science

    Apparently the difference arise to copy number variations, but its not known yet whether this occurs at embryo or a later stage.

    Interesting. I'd never thought about it but it does make a certain amount of sense. Genetics is a lot more complicated than the widespread notion of a "blueprint".



    Might explain the reason why I have never found identical twins look exactly the same.  Will take a link at the chimeras link later

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Fears over 'designer' babies leave children suffering
     Reply #22 - March 25, 2009, 09:54 PM

    Have you heard of "chimeras"? These are people who are more or less the opposite of identical twins. Instead of one fertilised egg splitting into two embryos and developing as separate people (as per identical twins) chimeras occur when two different fertilised eggs are in the uterus and one of them is absorbed by the other very early on. The result is an apparently normal person who, when tested, has some of the characteristics of both genetic codes.


    So they have different DNA in different parts of the body? Multicoloured hair, different eye colour, long arms - short legs? Genetic fingerprinting them must prove difficult, they must make excellent criminals..

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »