Re:CRISPR used to genetically modify viable human embryos fo...
by candiodari on Saturday March 11, 2017 @02:31AM
(#13844656)
> That's a straight up violation of the Hippocratic oath
So is abortion. And, so we're clear, allowing or in any way approving of abortion as a doctor is a far more direct violation of the Hippocratic oath than this is.
> How do you address this with policy? The same way we should be addressing inequality right now.
You mean not at all ?
I've realized though that doctors and pharmaceutical industries don't need to do anything other than save sick patients to make us utterly dependent on genetic modifications. Genetic treatments do not transmit from parent to child. So every parent you treat, the children will need to be treated as well. In some cases all of them, in other cases the chances are simply increased a bit of needing the treatment, which isn't much of a difference.
Even that is ignoring what happens when actual improvements over normal humans become available as genetic treatments. 1% bigger brain ? There is quite a bit of studies that give the impression that on average brain size does correspond to intelligence, even if there are no guarantees in individual cases. It should be an easy change in the DNA to make it a few percent bigger.
So really there's a number of choices we can do:
1) genetic modification is only allowed to be used to cure the sick
This results in the whole population becoming dependent and hostage to genetic modification. Slowly at first. Then, when we learn how to optimize humans, very rapidly.
2) genetic modification is available for parents to create embryos
This actually results in slower dependence: diseases get eliminated, including in the gametes, and any treatment does not need to be repeated in children. Still, improvements will create a class based society.
3) genetic modification is free, and not optional, at least for certain ailments (like vaccines)
This would rapidly eliminate dependence on genetic modification and would be much more fair towards everyone.
So is abortion. And, so we're clear, allowing or in any way approving of abortion as a doctor is a far more direct violation of the Hippocratic oath than this is.
> How do you address this with policy? The same way we should be addressing inequality right now.
You mean not at all ?
I've realized though that doctors and pharmaceutical industries don't need to do anything other than save sick patients to make us utterly dependent on genetic modifications. Genetic treatments do not transmit from parent to child. So every parent you treat, the children will need to be treated as well. In some cases all of them, in other cases the chances are simply increased a bit of needing the treatment, which isn't much of a difference.
Even that is ignoring what happens when actual improvements over normal humans become available as genetic treatments. 1% bigger brain ? There is quite a bit of studies that give the impression that on average brain size does correspond to intelligence, even if there are no guarantees in individual cases. It should be an easy change in the DNA to make it a few percent bigger.
So really there's a number of choices we can do:
1) genetic modification is only allowed to be used to cure the sick
This results in the whole population becoming dependent and hostage to genetic modification. Slowly at first. Then, when we learn how to optimize humans, very rapidly.
2) genetic modification is available for parents to create embryos
This actually results in slower dependence: diseases get eliminated, including in the gametes, and any treatment does not need to be repeated in children. Still, improvements will create a class based society.
3) genetic modification is free, and not optional, at least for certain ailments (like vaccines)
This would rapidly eliminate dependence on genetic modification and would be much more fair towards everyone.