Scientific Discussion: Gene Editing and its Possibilites

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by SageCREEPER, Aug 1, 2017.

  1. So yeah, scientists have cracked large genome editing, the implications are massive. I want to hear what you think about it.
  2. I haven't even heard of this..
  3. I want a bear sized rabbit that excretes gummy bears, 7up and air freshener.
  4. Probably never gonna happen... lol
    I was thinking more of helping the human race kind of changes. Also, lifetime cosplay... amirite? :D
    PetezzaDawg likes this.
  5. Sources?
  6. As someone who minored in Genetics in college, I'm replying here to see what everyone says, as well as offer my input.

    I think the OP needs to be clarified before I'll start up my side though. What sort of genomic editing are you referring to?
  7. Well, I'm not fully qualified to talk about this as I'm eleven and probably know next to nothing when compared to you ( :p ) but large genome editing was the name mentioned
  8. TBH, I was browsing in Indigo and I found a magazine with an interesting cover. I picked it up, flipped it open, and read through a little, and was extremely excited about its contents. Large genome editing.
    I'm pretty sure that means in the future we might be seeing some human-animal hybrids walking around, such as this, for example:
    (It's from a comic I read, but I think it stands as a pretty good example :)) https://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.ne.../Tobias.png/revision/latest?cb=20100623223229
  9. Thats not a Source...

    A Source would be a Link to some New Article of a site. Having a Picture is nothing...
    For example
    http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-neuralink-connect-brains-computer-neural-lace-2017-3
  10. As fascinating as human-animal hybrids would be, don't hold your breath.

    The science behind gene editing is targeted towards curing diseases, repairing damage, and potentially enhancing "natural" human development. Improving lifespan, immunities, strength, intelligence, all that super-human jazz. While it's true that geneticists look to other species in the animal kingdom for solutions, the traits they're after don't include physical properties.

    Example: Turritopsis Dohrnii is a Mediterranean jellyfish sometimes referred to as 'immortal' for its ability to restructure its cells under age or stress, effectively reversing the aging process and regenerating itself. Scientists would love to unlock this ability in humans, but that doesn't mean we'll have tentacled jelly-people wandering about.

    In addition, there is enormous pressure against "tampering" with human DNA. Hell, we humans have enough trouble just dealing with different skin colors and cultural ethnicity. Adding multi-species hybrids to society would be like pouring gunpowder on a trash-fire. (Exception: I doubt Japan would have much issue accepting neko ears/tails.)

    Sorry to disillusion you Sage, but as much as I'd love a tiger tail, Science just isn't interested in making IRL furries.
  11. I'm sure you have heard of the infamous 'salmon tomatoes' that have arisen from displacing a salmon gene into a tomato vine. Genetic engineering does have some social implications, and a Gattaca situation would be the epitome of hypercapitalist dystopias. However, genetic engineering is bound to bring benefits to humankind IF REGULATED PROPERLY. The technology behind this is extremely new and experimental, and at this point it is safe to say we won't have any real life 'catdogs' in the immediate future.
  12. The major problem I have with all this (same with genetically altered food and such) is that there won't be a way out anymore. And although many sources say that thorough studies have been done people can still make mistakes.

    However, I personally can't help get the impression that many people don't want to bother themselves with the long term effect of certain developments. Sure, it may not affect you now, it may not affect you in 20 years, but will it affect your children? Or their children?

    Those are questions which I hardly see raised, or at best approached from a theoretical perspective. But theory doesn't always match reality.
  13. I've heard the genome editing can be used in early stages of life to reduce the chances of birth defects, which I'm all for. It has a lot of potential to save and/or improve the quality of people's lives in the future, as well as change what hair/eye color people will have, among other things
    I don't think animal/human hybrids is a good idea. It sounds unrealistic and has too much potential to go wrong (This isn't a sci-fi movie after all)
  14. Oh Jay... :rolleyes:

    1968 - "2001: A Space Odyssey"



    Present Day - Skype TV

    *(Actually, Microsoft 'discontinued' this in 2016, but the technology has existed for close to a decade now)

    1964 - Stark Trek (TOS) Communicator


    1997 - Motorola StarTAC


    Present Day - Smartphones! Smartphones everywhere!


    Also on the table: holographic interfaces, self-lacing shoes, self-driving cars, voice-activated assistant AI, and hoverboards (real ones, not that two-wheeled mini-Segway crap). We're seeing the dawn of quantum computing and teleportation (of data, not physical objects yet). And regarding the topic at hand, eugenics programs have been referenced in sci-fi as early as 1924.

    While there are many reasonable and ethical arguments to be made over a topic as controversial as human genetic enhancement, I respectfully ask you to please not clutter the discussion with a phrase as silly as "this isn't a sci-fi movie." Science fiction is just Science Fact awaiting its proper time.
  15. Maybe not my best word choice :p
    Kephras likes this.
  16. i just want this, but apparently it would cost to much :(
    NuclearBobomb and TomvanWijnen like this.
  17. It's alright. You've got me thinking now, just how far humans have come in such a short time. I was born in 1983 and saw the dawn of the internet in my early teens. Now there are teenagers alive today who've never known a world without it. My parents witnessed the Space Race, the entire operational lifecycle of the Space Shuttle, and the evolution of the personal computer. My grandfather saw the dawn of the atomic bomb and nuclear energy.

    Imagine what we'll see in another fifty years...
  18. This thread is interesting, given the recent news about US scientists successfully editing a genetic disease out of a human embryo for the first time. Which is what, I think, Sage was referring to - not inter-species genetic splicing. And as much I'd like to take my axolotl's ability to produce stem cells for all of my life and repair any part of my body and any organ I want to, as well as being 100% cancer-resistant, scientific research isn't focused on that at all. (This was actually a bad example as a big part of genetic research actually involves axolotls and their ability to regenerate and their inability to develop cancer... not exactly researching how to splice humans with their DNA though...)

    And yes, the implications are massive. It shows that we're making progress to eliminating other genetic diseases in our species, and it's going to renew the whole "hurr durr ethics!!!!1!!" argument.

    Using 'ethics' as an argument isn't a solid point against this stuff. I'm not sure that the people who argue this would like to wake up every morning and have to pump their lungs to get rid of the crap inside of them because they have pulmonary fibrosis. I'm not sure they'd like to avoid intense activity for fear of their heart giving out due to a genetic heart defect. I'm not sure they'd like to have to live inside of a sterile environment their entire lives because of SCID.

    For that last example, see David Vetter, who lived in a sterile transport chamber - a 'bubble' - for most of his life, even after NASA gave him a sterile suit modelled off a spacesuit, and usually stayed confined within a children's hospital. He died at the age of 12, after his sister gave him a bone marrow transplant in an attempt to get rid of his disease, that caused him to fall ill with infectious mononucleosis - a disease that a normal person can recover from in a matter of three to four weeks. He cost $1.3 million to keep alive for those 12 years.

    Editing human embryos can change all of that. It can stop diseases like that from being inherited by people's children. Could even help with mental health too, such as with things like OCD, as that is caused by a genetic defect that causes the brain to not produce enough serotonin, leading to an overactive orbitofrontal cortex (basically the decision-making part of the brain).

    So when someone argues 'this is unethical', they're wrong, because a few embryos are the price you pay for helping so many people's lives.

    Massive implications.
    Kephras likes this.
  19. If this gets into the wrong hands, you may end up with a Real-life Plague Inc game.
  20. Literally the only thing that would convince me to move to Florida. Orange juice ftw.
    NuclearBobomb likes this.