Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Genetic Modification


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 Tetiel

Tetiel
  • 11533 posts


Users Awards

Posted 08 December 2005 - 10:01 PM

Could it go too far? Eventually in the future it will be possible to change a future child's DNA inside the egg and sperm cells such that the child could grow up to become a supermodel, a world class tennis player, a scientist that discovers a cure for an infectious disease, a world leader that could change the world. But the question is should we allow such a thing? Is it right to change a child's DNA to fit what the parents want?

Is it okay for a parent to choose their baby's eye color? IQ? Their personality?

However on the flip side if we disallow genetic modification we could lose out on many benefits. We have already figured out a lot of genetic disorders that occur inside the chromosomes. We can have it pinned down if a woman will get genetically-caused breast cancer or not and they can pretty much tell when a woman will have it. If somehow you could through gene therapy change the fate of a future child, would you?

If it is right to change their DNA for medical reasons but not for superficial reasons? Or are they both the same thing? If a child is going to be born with a 90 IQ should they suffer being born below average if we could easily change the fact in the future?

Or is that really all going too far?

Discuss

(I will post my opinion later. These are just some questions for consideration)

Edited by Tetiel, 08 December 2005 - 10:01 PM.


#2 Guest_Casilla_*

Guest_Casilla_*

Posted 09 December 2005 - 10:04 AM

Right for medical, wrong for superficial.

Because if we did it as a race, our breaking off from the evolutionary cycle may kill us off when we are unable to do something that our forefathers could do, but did not think it important.

Of course, we could also speed it up tremendously, but in a time of need, would we have a generation to waste? Probably not.

#3 Sakura

Sakura
  • 2180 posts

Posted 09 December 2005 - 10:42 AM

there are certain things that would be ethical and moral, though I do think there's a point where our medeling could go too far.

A perfect example for the use of scientific needs changed is myself, actually. I had childhood epilepsy, a very severe case, that I didn't know I inherited as I don't know my biological fathers family. it is a trait that I will pass to any of my children. Darcy, mine and zero_delocke's daughter, has inherited it from me, unfourtunately. While she only had to suffer through a few seizures, and hopefully no more, the preventative medication we have her on will be a hinderance. She has to take two pills twice a day until at least puberty. A very difficult thing for us and her. Because of this Eli and I are not having any more children, despite the fact that I would love to somewhere down the line. With some genetic mods I could have children that would be healthy. We could save kids from going through stuff like this, cancer, downs syndrome, palsy, so many things. I would go so far as to say that a person having an IQ of 90 would be a hinderance. Why not make our species more intelligent, there are no repercussions for being more intelligent.

However, changing eye color, improved athletic abilities, beauty, etc...sounds too much like a Nazi dream society. There has to be a point where we stop, there's a point where the child is a human baby or a scientifc creation.

Also, there will always be a certain algorithm that decides these factors, making the modified people close to genetically identical. If this were the case, it would take a single disease to pass through and finish us off.

Superficial, no. "Scientifc", yes.

Edited by sakura.seppun, 09 December 2005 - 10:45 AM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users