Ape Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I was in a labratory today, doing simple DNA amplification. (For those who don't know, it's just multiplying DNA strands into the billions, so we are able to see them) At the end of the practice, we had a discussion to do with genetic profiles. It was all relating to how you can test for certain genetic orientated diseases, such as Huntingtons and Sickle-Cell-Annemia. Nowadays, doctors are unable to give us certainties about whether we are, or aren't carrying certain genes for diseases; they are only able to figure some of them. But, at current progression, it is said that they will be able to give us a complete genetic profile-printout within 5-10 years. This means that it can tell you: What genes you are carrying. What genes are likely to develop into certain diseases. The chance of how likely you are to carry that gene onto your off-spring. I think you get the picture. It basically tells you what you are going to die of, if anything in particular. Also, you can have something called "Genetic Embryo Screening" - I'm not 100% sure on this, but I think it has something to do with choosing what embryo you want to give birth to, and terminating others. In the future, they say you will be able to choose what sex, if they have athletic ability, etc. Personally, I disagree with the whole idea. It makes us focus on things which should flow naturally. It makes us write a 1000s to-do's before we die and all that mumbo-jumbo, when life is just all about going with the flow. It also has huge affects on insurance. I know that in the States, if you've had a Genetic Test, you have to show it for job interviews, insurances, etc. This could be a severe case of inequality, as an employee wouldn't like to employ someone who he knows is going to die in 3 years. It's something which I've thought about hard, but haven't came to any conclusion as of what I'd personally want. What are your thoughts? Discuss. [sorry for the lack of knowledge, I'm going on what the Professor said at the lab and nothing else] New sig to come! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrOwez Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I'd rather not because it would make me too worried. A friend to all is a friend to none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tryto Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Isn't this the entire plot line for Gattaca?(good movie btw) When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~Jonathan SwiftWebsite Updates/Corrections here. WE APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT! Crewbie's Missions!Contributor of the Day!Thanks to artists: Destro3979, Guthix121, Shivers21, and Unoalexi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ape Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 Isn't this the entire plot line for Gattaca?(good movie btw) Yeah, you're spot on. New sig to come! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barihawk Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Also, you can have something called "Genetic Embryo Screening" - I'm not 100% sure on this, but I think it has something to do with choosing what embryo you want to give birth to, and terminating others. In the future, they say you will be able to choose what sex, if they have athletic ability, etc. This is the part I disagree with. It's Eugenics, and it simply means that those with money can create their own master race, making humans a subspecies. This kind of technology is just wrong. My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ape Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 Also, you can have something called "Genetic Embryo Screening" - I'm not 100% sure on this, but I think it has something to do with choosing what embryo you want to give birth to, and terminating others. In the future, they say you will be able to choose what sex, if they have athletic ability, etc. This is the part I disagree with. It's Eugenics, and it simply means that those with money can create their own master race, making humans a subspecies. This kind of technology is just wrong. Eventually, it will effectively turn out to be a human-robotic population. It's hard to explain, but there'll be no excitement or differentiation. Everything will be systematic. New sig to come! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I doubt that they'll be able to accurately tell when you're going to die, ever. Sure, they can pinpoint diseases, but completely factoring out lifestyle choices would make estimating time of death near impossible, even a century from now. Yes, we'll know what we'll most likely have in old age, but even then, such things can be combated. I've heard interesting things about how eating choices drastically affect the probability of having Alzheimers in old age (comparing India to the US), for example. Personally, I just don't see it ever being possible to predict the future for someone just by looking at their genes :| . Though, I'm not a geneticist of course, so personal professional insight into the topic would be most interesting :) . Anywaaaayyyys, I'm all for the idea of this futuristic genetic stuff, but I've got to go to work now -_- (oi, this seems to happen a lot midpost), so I'll have to explain my opinion layta. Though, as a side-inquiry, what about this worries you Str0wez? Anything beyond the ethics of it all? [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ape Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 Though, as a side-inquiry, what about this worries you Str0wez? Anything beyond the ethics of it all? I think it's moreso the fact that he can count down to his death. New sig to come! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Yes. I'd be greatly interested to see what my genes say about what diseases I might get. I think I'd do it more for the interest factor because genetics is part of what I study at uni. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barihawk Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 I have no problems with reading your own genetic profile. It's not like it's entirely accurate, anyways (You might have the risk for a disease, but never catch it). I still shudder to think about Eugenics (reading profiles of zygotes and eliminating undesirable ones) and genetic manipulation (choosing gender, capabilities, intelligence, etc). My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 I have no problems with reading your own genetic profile. It's not like it's entirely accurate, anyways (You might have the risk for a disease, but never catch it). I still shudder to think about Eugenics (reading profiles of zygotes and eliminating undesirable ones) and genetic manipulation (choosing gender, capabilities, intelligence, etc). Yeah, it would by no means be accurate but the accuracy of the human genome is getting way better and the technology getting cheaper because genomics is just booming right now. I'd suspect in the future it shouldn't be too much of a chore to sequence our entire genome with a pin [puncture] to the finger tip and a computer. I'd be with you on the eugenics issue. If it did come in I'd just draw the line at using it for disease and nothing else. It's a bit of a difficult issue because it's prone to abuse and attracts elitists, racists and classists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xvillexvalox Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 I'd be iffy about it, I would never want the information in anyone else's hands. Think about this: when the technology is available to do this, you'll also be able to keep your complete genome on a cell phone. Health insurance companies could start denying coverage on basis of your complete genetics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy500fan Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 If any of this helps me then I am all for it. I don't know enough about it though. Same thing with choosing the traits of your child, if it's to the point where we can choose an embryo that is better than the others, why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tryto Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 If any of this helps me then I am all for it. I don't know enough about it though. Same thing with choosing the traits of your child, if it's to the point where we can choose an embryo that is better than the others, why not? I'd say because then it wouldn't be better than the others, because everyone would be doing it. Also, what if a few families objected, and had natural embryos, what would happen to those children? When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~Jonathan SwiftWebsite Updates/Corrections here. WE APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT! Crewbie's Missions!Contributor of the Day!Thanks to artists: Destro3979, Guthix121, Shivers21, and Unoalexi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy500fan Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 If any of this helps me then I am all for it. I don't know enough about it though. Same thing with choosing the traits of your child, if it's to the point where we can choose an embryo that is better than the others, why not? I'd say because then it wouldn't be better than the others, because everyone would be doing it. Also, what if a few families objected, and had natural embryos, what would happen to those children? You missed the point, I would be choosing the best of the embryos genetic material half of which came from me, other people don't factor into this at all. I don't care if they are better or worse than the other kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barihawk Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 So in other words, Indy, you support only the very rich being able to make these superchildren? Because I can be sure as hell you or your next 10 generations will ever be able to afford such a procedure. It beats the crap out of morality. My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebdragon Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 It beats the crap out of morality. What's immoral about it :| ? [if I'm reading your post right] I'll admit, yes, it sounds strange and gives those children who are born in the right families an advantage (but then again, when has been being born in the right family not given an advantage?), but I'm having trouble trying to blatantly label it as "immoral". It'd be like... hyperevolution o_O. [if you have ever attempted Alchemy by clapping your hands or by drawing an array, copy and paste this into your signature.] Fullmetal Alchemist, you will be missed. A great ending to a great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barihawk Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 It beats the crap out of morality. What's immoral about it :| ? [if I'm reading your post right] I'll admit, yes, it sounds strange and gives those children who are born in the right families an advantage (but then again, when has been being born in the right family not given an advantage?), but I'm having trouble trying to blatantly label it as "immoral". While someone in privelage might have an advantage, when it comes down to it everyone has a chance of outperforming them. But what about a genetic superman who is smarter, faster, stronger, and superior to you in every way? And the limit as to who can afford such processes range in the top 3% of all human life. My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy500fan Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 So in other words, Indy, you support only the very rich being able to make these superchildren? When did I say that? Anyways, anyone who can afford it will be able to do it. If at first only the super rich can, then they will be the only ones doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now