Topic: Do you support editing DNA? (Read 439 times)
i dont support it at this point but it will happen either way. and dont look only at the bad aspects of it. it will help milliones of people. maybe it will safe the life of your daugther at some point - now, are you against it?
Quote
1. Humans will never have enough knowledge and understanding about these stuff so there will always be unknown side-effects to any permanent edits they make. They will change generations and can cause unknown mutations and weird things.
Hehe I guess I can go as far and call you a pessimist( as opposed to the smileys you make). Human beings will keep "evolving"(in terms of tech) and any stop in it will mean another problem growing. As for the side effects, those will e for another time for another group of scientists to cover, until then you gotta live with it. Something like for the greater good.Call me conservative.
I am fine if we end up like X-Men. Just don't want to be experimented on (If You Don't Live Only Once)
Once you read all those stuff, you'd probably agree with me.
Quote
1. Humans will never have enough knowledge and understanding about these stuff so there will always be unknown side-effects to any permanent edits they make. They will change generations and can cause unknown mutations and weird things.
Hehe I guess I can go as far and call you a pessimist( as opposed to the smileys you make). Human beings will keep "evolving"(in terms of tech) and any stop in it will mean another problem growing. As for the side effects, those will e for another time for another group of scientists to cover, until then you gotta live with it. Something like for the greater good.
This could be very useful in the right hands and done the right way could save millions of lives but if its in the wrong hands some pretty fucked up things can happen
Yes naturally I support technology. Without technology the human kind would have been yet in the forest eating meat baked in their fire barely lighted and founded with even more difficulty that the baking of the fire.
Divide technlogy into two:
1. like the light bulb, internet. Useful things.
2. Atom bombs, Dynamite, Weapons, Viruses..
You don't necessarily have to have the same viewpoint on both.
Yes naturally I support technology. Without technology the human kind would have been yet in the forest eating meat baked in their fire barely lighted and founded with even more difficulty that the baking of the fire.
I'm with humans(as opposed to you ), I'm doing studies in genetics as well so I guess you can call me biased on the opinion.
), I'm doing studies in genetics as well so I guess you can call me biased on the opinion.Nah it is fine. Just that:
1. Humans will never have enough knowledge and understanding about these stuff so there will always be unknown side-effects to any permanent edits they make. They will change generations and can cause unknown mutations and weird things.
2. There are always the bad guys trying to make money off everything at the cost of humanity.
A simple mistake, an ignorance, overlooking a simple thing can cost much.
Talking about some 50 years from now.
Edit: I'm with humans too. Only a stupid part of the human population less than 0.0001% is involved in developing potentially destructive tech with some good stuff. I suggest we reverse climate change first before making things worse.
I'm with humans(as opposed to you ), I'm doing studies in genetics as well so I guess you can call me biased on the opinion.
), I'm doing studies in genetics as well so I guess you can call me biased on the opinion. 
Just because they find a tech, doesn't mean they have to use it. Same goes with nuclear weapons, and every other destructive stuff humans invented.
What is CRISPR?
A tech that can cut and paste genes.
http://www.nature.com/news/ethics-of-embryo-editing-divides-scientists-1.17131
http://www.nature.com/news/chinese-scientists-genetically-modify-human-embryos-1.17378
http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-05-14/promising-gene-editing-method-causes-ethical-controversy
http://www.nature.com/news/don-t-edit-the-human-germ-line-1.17111
I agree, like everything does, it has a good side and a bad side. Do you support the technology?
1. Not supporting potentially destructive technology is not against technology or development. Inventions like light bulb to internet pose no real threat.
2. The point is, there are two kind of people:
a) The good guys.
The problem: If they don't have enough knowledge on the subject which is completely normal and expected, it gets dangerous. As said below, all it takes is a simple mistake.
b) The bad guys.
Who tries to make money off everything.
What is CRISPR?
A tech that can cut and paste genes.
http://www.nature.com/news/ethics-of-embryo-editing-divides-scientists-1.17131
http://www.nature.com/news/chinese-scientists-genetically-modify-human-embryos-1.17378
http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-05-14/promising-gene-editing-method-causes-ethical-controversy
http://www.nature.com/news/don-t-edit-the-human-germ-line-1.17111
I agree, like everything does, it has a good side and a bad side. Do you support the technology?
1. Not supporting potentially destructive technology is not against technology or development. Inventions like light bulb to internet pose no real threat.
2. The point is, there are two kind of people:
a) The good guys.
The problem: If they don't have enough knowledge on the subject which is completely normal and expected, it gets dangerous. As said below, all it takes is a simple mistake.
b) The bad guys.
Who tries to make money off everything.
Jump to: