If it works it won’t be unethical within a couple of generations.

If it’s highly effective our descendants will think we were barbarians for ever questioning its use.

I agree it will change - actually if this becomes medically responsible nothing needs to change. we just need to stop experimenting on humans. once the science is sound it becomes healing humans with gene therapy

Drug testing is always experimentation on humans. Drugs have to have human trials for safety before we are certain they are safe. Testing on animals reduces the risk but does not eliminate it.

And if the treatment is only effective on infants or children then there's no way to get informed consent. Your options are to experiment the best you can and accept the risk or forgo the opportunity (or more likely let China do it and accept both the risks and the rewards, as they seem willing to do).

I read that as "not even grey". It actually achieved its purpose.

which part is unethical though? it was voluntary

> it was voluntary

Do you think parents can consent to this sort of experiment on behalf of an unborn child?

should parents be liable for any kind of genetic defect they pass to their children?

Intent and premeditation are strong in western law, hence differences between murder and manslaughter. Consenting to a genetic experiment which then has ramifications on offspring therefore stands apart from the natural inheritance of uncontrolled genetic issues, as well as from the obverse situation where a parent does not undertake medical treatment that could possibly result in preventing inherited genetic issues.

In other words, taking action to make changes is a crucial difference when compared to inaction, even if the outcomes are similar.

of course it is not the same. but i think the argument was on the unborn baby 's rights being violated because of the genetic procedure.

Also this is not a case of arbitrary experimentation, the parents ARE preventing an inherited genetic issue, which is something that so far has been ethically acceptable so far, for embryo selection.

>>the parents ARE preventing an inherited genetic issue

The parents THINK they ARE preventing an inherited genetic issue. I would not dare mess with "god's creation" /evolution. Too many unknowns once you start mix and matching and there's no going back. We know very little...

then you should not have children, but you should clone yourself. because your children are certainly going to be a messed up version of god's creation

>>because your children are certainly going to be a messed up version of god's creation

Nope, whatever happens it's the natural way: mistakes, mix, match and all.

it seems some mistakes are more privileged than others ;)

This isn't a child though, in a sense. This is a designed good. So yes, they should be responsible for any condition they knowingly design into another person.

If you believe in the possibility of trait selection in this manner to an advanced level, it is vital that this happens. A tyrannical father may demand his children may be atheists, and prevent them from going to church now. A tyrannical father in the future may have the ability to edit the God gene (assuming one exists for the sake of argument) right out before birth, never allowing the chance of it.

And this is the best case, in which the effort to design doesn't saddle the child with a host of other conditions.

well, its just unethical based on USA rules against human experimentation. obviously moral and ethical codes can evolve to accommodate advances in science eventually.

this is not a medical procedure, which is what makes it unethical to perform. its an experiment with unknown outcome which is why current ethics dictates it is not okay to do this.

>well, its just unethical based on USA rules against human experimentation. obviously moral and ethical codes can evolve to accommodate advances in science eventually.

Well, if they "evolve to accommodate advances in science" either they weren't that moral or ethical based in the first place, or moral and ethics gave in for what's technologically possible.