11-12-2012, 07:07 PM
Quote:So the question would be; should we do it? I have a close friend who died from Cystic Fibrosis -- which is an inherited condition and we know the genes involved. Some genetic ailments we might entirely removed from the gene pool. Should we? I don't see why we wouldn't for this purpose.
Yes, of course we should. If we could eliminate cystic fibrosis, just like we eliminated polio, or smallpox? Why not? Sheer Luddism?
Quote:Many labs around the world are proscribed from"Somatic" and "Germline" genetic engineering to human embryos, but I believe it is being done under the covers in private labs. It is certainly very commonly done to animals and plants in the US which has no ban on Chimera research at this time.
Isn't all genetic engineering either somatic or germline? And from my (extremely limited) understanding, the Weismann Barrier is a pretty steep obstacle to making somatic genetic alterations heritable. So we can pursue gene therapies prior to that point without worrying about serious ethical consequences.
Not that I am against germline therapies even in principle - we alter our genetic code by deliberate selection all the time. It's just that when we pick someone up at a bar and whoopsie daisy a pregnancy results, we tend to think of that as "normal" rather than "playing god," but it's all just chemical alterations of our genome. If I have a child with someone with a known faulty gene, causing (for instance) hemophilia, am I committing a crime? I wouldn't have thought so.
-Jester