Braininvat » Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:40 pm wrote:It's funny, I've never found the line that hard to draw. If it fixes a debilitating condition, then it's just good medicine. If you could spare your child Huntington's disease or Celiac disease or spina bifida or cleft palate or cystic fibrosis, etc. wouldn't you want to make that "edit" ? I think most agree that making "supermen" is neither feasible or ethical. But there's always suffering in life and I don't see any need to add to that suffering by deciding that children having severe genetic diseases is some sort of lofty philosophic goal.
Editing like this is also a path to far more affordable healthcare. Compare the costs of treating a lifelong chronic condition compared with editing the condition out at the start of life. Which seems the more humane and elegant solution to a medical problem?
"Any gene that associates with poor quality of life or diminished lifespan?" So there are about 300+ genes in Gene age that are associated with longevity. Many that are a simple SNP that in some cases confer an extra 5 years of lifespan - would this be ok to fix?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests