Should humans genetically engineer themselves?

MayCaesar

I do not think there is much controversy here: there is no reason not to do something that will lead us to objectively higher quality of life. Genetic engineering is the future, and it can uplift us to the level unimaginable today. Defeating aging forever is just a small fraction of what will be possible 50-100 years from now. Just as we use cars to move faster than we would on foot, we can use genetic engineering to live better than we ever have.

As for the fears of the unknown effects, all scientific advancements have them. All the more reason to do research, to study them and learn how to address them. If we never did research that has unknown dangers coming with it, we would still be living in caves and eating rotten animal corpses for survival. The more dangerous the research is, the more potential it has.

Happy_Killbot

@MayCaesar The controversy comes from the fear of the unknown, and while I definitely agree that technology should be used to uplift humanity into a higher quality of living, doing this too fast could result in unknown pitfalls.

Perhaps the most obvious one is the threat of some sort of super virus/bacteria that could kill all human life, or target specific individuals with poisons that only activate when in the genome of specific individuals. This isn't directly related to editing human DNA, but it is a potential hazard for genetic research in general.

Probably the biggest fear (if we can call it that) is the possibility to create "replicants" like in the movie blade runner, that would basically be human-like organisms created from human DNA (with all the unwanted bits removed and other pieces moved in) who would basically function as biological robots. Personally, I don't think this will ever happen because of all the moral issues surrounding this, but hey, people will freak out if you say "kill bot" in public, but not when someone says "sex bot" so who knows.

TKDB

The Chinese can play with genetic material all that they want.

There is a Medical code of ethics.

And the Chinese are playing games with that Medical code of ethics.

MayCaesar

@Happy_Killbot

This is a fair point, but by the same token, not researching genetic engineering can lead to us being unable to resist a sudden natural epidemic that could kill us all. The dangers of not researching something often outweigh the dangers of researching something, and it seems to be the case here. Researching genetic engineering can, in theory, increase our quality of life infinitely, while not researching it, at best, will merely not make things worse than they are now.

There is also the consideration expressed by many scientists: if we do not research genetic engineering, then totalitarian governments, not constrained by such notions as "human rights", will. Imagine North Korea developing genetic engineering to a level surpassing the rest of the world; this would spell catastrophe for us. It is important for the free world to be the first to take a lead in this field, otherwise we very literally may all die.

In any case, I am always for expanding the horizons of our knowledge, however dangerous it may be. Not expanding them is something we would regret forever, while expanding them, even if threatening our entire species, will always be justified.

TKDB

The article speaks for itself.

https://apnews.com/4997bb7aa36c45449b488e19ac83e86d

"Chinese researcher claims first gene-edited babies"

By MARILYNN MARCHIONENovember 26, 2018

 
"HONG KONG (AP) — A Chinese researcher claims that he helped make the world’s first genetically edited babies — twin girls born this month whose DNA he said he altered with a powerful new tool capable of rewriting the very blueprint of life.

If true, it would be a profound leap of science and ethics.

A U.S. scientist said he took part in the work in China, but this kind of gene editing is banned in the United States because the DNA changes can pass to future generations and it risks harming other genes.

Many mainstream scientists think it’s too unsafe to try, and some denounced the Chinese report as human experimentation."

"The researcher, He Jiankui of Shenzhen, said he altered embryos for seven couples during fertility treatments, with one pregnancy resulting thus far. He said his goal was not to cure or prevent an inherited disease, but to try to bestow a trait that few people naturally have — an ability to resist possible future infection with HIV, the AIDS virus.

He said the parents involved declined to be identified or interviewed, and he would not say where they live or where the work was done."

"There is no independent confirmation of He’s claim, and it has not been published in a journal, where it would be vetted by other experts. He revealed it Monday in Hong Kong to one of the organizers of an international conference on gene editing that is set to begin Tuesday, and earlier in exclusive interviews with The Associated Press.

“I feel a strong responsibility that it’s not just to make a first, but also make it an example,” He told the AP. “Society will decide what to do next” in terms of allowing or forbidding such science.

Some scientists were astounded to hear of the claim and strongly condemned it.

It’s “unconscionable ... an experiment on human beings that is not morally or ethically defensible,” said Dr. Kiran Musunuru, a University of Pennsylvania gene editing expert and editor of a genetics journal.

“This is far too premature,” said Dr. Eric Topol, who heads the Scripps Research Translational Institute in California. “We’re dealing with the operating instructions of a human being. It’s a big deal.”

However, one famed geneticist, Harvard University’s George Church, defended attempting gene editing for HIV, which he called “a major and growing public health threat.”

“I think this is justifiable,” Church said of that goal.

In recent years scientists have discovered a relatively easy way to edit genes, the strands of DNA that govern the body. The tool, called CRISPR-cas9, makes it possible to operate on DNA to supply a needed gene or disable one that’s causing problems."

"It’s only recently been tried in adults to treat deadly diseases, and the changes are confined to that person. Editing sperm, eggs or embryos is different — the changes can be inherited. In the U.S., it’s not allowed except for lab research. China outlaws human cloning but not specifically gene editing.

He Jiankui (HEH JEE’-an-qway), who goes by “JK,” studied at Rice and Stanford universities in the U.S. before returning to his homeland to open a lab at Southern University of Science and Technology of China in Shenzhen, where he also has two genetics companies. The university said He’s work “seriously violated academic ethics and standards” and planned to investigate. A spokesman for He confirmed that he has been on leave from teaching since early this year, but he remains on the faculty and has a lab at the school.

The U.S. scientist who worked with him on this project after He returned to China was physics and bioengineering professor Michael Deem, who was his adviser at Rice in Houston. Deem also holds what he called “a small stake” in — and is on the scientific advisory boards of — He’s two companies.

The Chinese researcher said he practiced editing mice, monkey and human embryos in the lab for several years and has applied for patents on his methods.

He said he chose embryo gene editing for HIV because these infections are a big problem in China. He sought to disable a gene called CCR5 that forms a protein doorway that allows HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, to enter a cell. "

"All of the men in the project had HIV and all of the women did not, but the gene editing was not aimed at preventing the small risk of transmission, He said. The fathers had their infections deeply suppressed by standard HIV medicines and there are simple ways to keep them from infecting offspring that do not involve altering genes.

Instead, the appeal was to offer couples affected by HIV a chance to have a child that might be protected from a similar fate.

He recruited couples through a Beijing-based AIDS advocacy group called Baihualin. Its leader, known by the pseudonym “Bai Hua,” told the AP that it’s not uncommon for people with HIV to lose jobs or have trouble getting medical care if their infections are revealed."

"Here is how He described the work:

The gene editing occurred during IVF, or lab dish fertilization. First, sperm was “washed” to separate it from semen, the fluid where HIV can lurk. A single sperm was placed into a single egg to create an embryo. Then the gene editing tool was added.

When the embryos were 3 to 5 days old, a few cells were removed and checked for editing. Couples could choose whether to use edited or unedited embryos for pregnancy attempts. In all, 16 of 22 embryos were edited, and 11 embryos were used in six implant attempts before the twin pregnancy was achieved, He said.

Tests suggest that one twin had both copies of the intended gene altered and the other twin had just one altered, with no evidence of harm to other genes, He said. People with one copy of the gene can still get HIV, although some very limited research suggests their health might decline more slowly once they do."

"Several scientists reviewed materials that He provided to the AP and said tests so far are insufficient to say the editing worked or to rule out harm.

They also noted evidence that the editing was incomplete and that at least one twin appears to be a patchwork of cells with various changes.

“It’s almost like not editing at all” if only some of certain cells were altered, because HIV infection can still occur, Church said.

Church and Musunuru questioned the decision to allow one of the embryos to be used in a pregnancy attempt, because the Chinese researchers said they knew in advance that both copies of the intended gene had not been altered.

“In that child, there really was almost nothing to be gained in terms of protection against HIV and yet you’re exposing that child to all the unknown safety risks,” Musunuru said.

The use of that embryo suggests that the researchers’ “main emphasis was on testing editing rather than avoiding this disease,” Church said.

Even if editing worked perfectly, people without normal CCR5 genes face higher risks of getting certain other viruses, such as West Nile, and of dying from the flu. Since there are many ways to prevent HIV infection and it’s very treatable if it occurs, those other medical risks are a concern, Musunuru said.

There also are questions about the way He said he proceeded. He gave official notice of his work long after he said he started it — on Nov. 8, on a Chinese registry of clinical trials.

It’s unclear whether participants fully understood the purpose and potential risks and benefits. For example, consent forms called the project an “AIDS vaccine development” program. "

I view what this guy is doing as Genetic Hacking.

This section of the article, explains it even more:

"A U.S. scientist said he took part in the work in China, but this kind of gene editing is banned in the United States because the DNA changes can pass to future generations and it risks harming other genes.

Many mainstream scientists think it’s too unsafe to try, and some denounced the Chinese report as human experimentation."

Things like what this guy, is doing, are some of the human made problems, that some of humanity creates for itself. 

Along with some of the other Global problems that others have created for humanity as well. 

TKDB

@MayCaesar

You create Real World concern with some of the things that you lament about: 

"There is also the consideration expressed by many scientists:

"if we do not research genetic engineering, then totalitarian governments, not constrained by such notions as "human rights", will."

"Imagine North Korea developing genetic engineering to a level surpassing the rest of the world; this would spell catastrophe for us. It is important for the free world to be the first to take a lead in this field, otherwise we very literally may all die."

"In any case, I am always for expanding the horizons of our knowledge, however dangerous it may be. Not expanding them is something we would regret forever, while expanding them, even if threatening our entire species, will always be justified. "

From what published material, did you use to help you think up your above commentary? 

Happy_Killbot

@TKDB why does everything have to be "from published material" with you? There is such a thing as free thinking and critical thought you know. Not everything has to be feed to you straight from the of some establishment. Just because it is published doesn't make it more true, it just means the publishers thought it was important enough that it deserved to be made into a book.

Appeal to authority does not a good argument make.

Even if it turns out that no one on this site knows the first thing about genetic engineering does not mean we can't have a conversation about it that involves actual thought. I have no doubt that North Korea has a bio-weapons program and most likely is utilizing resources from the US and China to accomplish their nefarious goals. Just because we don't know what such weapons and technologies would look like doesn't mean such things can't exist or will never exist.

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

The internet is educating me, on how various individuals, like to lament over humanity, through the lenses of their individual mindsets?

@Happy_Killbot, Who taught you, your mindset? 

"why does everything have to be "from published material" with you?"

Because people have written books, like this one:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf

@Happy_Killbot, So it's educational to know where some individuals get their influences from, and maybe what books, helped to influence their individual mindsets? 

And your teaching me even more through the very lense of your individual word's:

"There is such a thing as free thinking and critical thought you know."

"Not everything has to be feed to you straight from the of some establishment."

"Just because it is published doesn't make it more true, it just means the publishers thought it was important enough that it deserved to be made into a book."

"Appeal to authority does not a good argument make."

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

Look at what some of humanity has created, to exist?

Nuclear Weapons, Chemical and Biological Weapons, The Gatling Gun, and Napalm.

And now Genetic Engineering that could lead to human experimentation?

Some of humanity continues to meddle with humanity, because some and their  Scientific Ego, needs a good self coaxing every now and then?

"Even if it turns out that no one on this site knows the first thing about genetic
engineering does not mean we can't have a conversation about it that involves actual thought."

"I have no doubt that North Korea has a bio-weapons program and most likely is utilizing resources from the US and China to accomplish their nefarious goals."

"Just because we don't know what such weapons and technologies would look like doesn't mean such things can't exist or will never exist."

Happy_Killbot

@TKDB I think you are just a failed scientific experiment.

MayCaesar

@TKDB

I read this interesting article, I believe, in Nature, where one expert on genetics compared the work in the field done in the US with that done in China and made a very disturbing conclusion: since China is not constrained by human rights considerations and can just plainly experiment on living humans, it might eventually outcompete the US, to the point where it will control the international market, as everyone will be willing to sacrifice a lot just to gain access to the new technology.

Now, I am not saying that we should experiment on humans as well, to even out the scales. This is a valid concern, however, and we should not refrain from researching genetic engineering and performing experiments with volunteers out of fear, one of the reasons being the dangers of not researching it.

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

What Real World evidence can you use to explain your statement?

"@TKDB I think you are just a failed scientific experiment."

Some and their individual opinion, and perception are easy to experiment with, on the Internet. 

Are you trying to use my word's, as part of an experiment from the individual confines of your own mind? 

NoahRoot

we humans have to stop before we get out of hand, are technology has destroyed beauty [global warming] animals [GMOs] and even are selves! [toxic water, radiation, drugs, alcohol] we dont need to carry on, just sit back and let evolution take charge.

Happy_Killbot

@NoahRoot It's too late, we have already crossed the line. now we have to catch up by developing more technology, there is no going back. Besides that, ever notice how all the things you listed as being "human causes" are actually parts of nature?

Climate change has been happening for thousands of years before humans even existed.

genetic modifications happen naturally via mutations and adaptations.

sometimes, water will become toxic just by moving through mineral reserves or because of bacteria.

Radiation is everywhere, in fact eating a banana a day exposes you to as much 2.6 mrem per year, due to potassium-40

Most drugs are made from plants and plant extracts, because the plants make the drugs to ward off predators.

Alcohol is made by bacteria and fungi, yeast in particular as a way of making food without oxygen.

As you can see, nature has been doing what humans do for far longer than we have.

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/30/china/gene-scientist-china-intl-hnk/index.html

"Chinese scientist who edited genes of twin babies is jailed for 3 years"

"(CNN)A Chinese scientist who helped create the world's first gene-edited babies has been sentenced to three years in prison.

He Jiankui shocked the world in 2018 when he announced that twin girls Lulu and Nana had been born with modified DNA to make them resistant to HIV, which he had managed using the gene-editing tool CRISPR-Cas9 before birth.

He, an associate professor at the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, said at the time that he was "proud" of the achievement. He later claimed that a second woman was pregnant as a result of his research.

But he was condemned by many of his peers, with the experiment labeled "monstrous," "unethical," and a "huge blow" to the reputation of Chinese biomedical research. Many people within the scientific community raised ethical concerns, including the level of consent He had obtained from the parents of the babies, and the level of transparency around gene editing."

This individual is behind bars where he belongs. 

MichaelElpers

@NoahRoot. Actually technology has lead to longer life spans and withoit gmos a billion more people would be starving.

@MayCaesar. My fear of genetic engineering more comes from a place where only wealthier people are able to afford the genetic alterings and it leading to a supremacy race or authoritarian global regime. It is nearly impossible to predict these things however because it is hard to determine how a race of beings more intelligent than the current form will view morals or how they will perceive what contributes the most benefit...i.e better to keep a few above the rest or better for humanity to invest in improvement all around. I like to think the latter is would win out.  

Also i would hope that it doesnt turn the human race into machines...i.e limiting uniqueness and possibly freedom in order to gain utopia.

Happy_Killbot

@TKDB The reason he was jailed was for failing to file a proper medical licence and by failing to follow proper medical regulations, which is where you conveniently stopped your copy/paste.

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

Are you a fan of this (Doctor's genetic hacking work?)

Are you a supporter of Human Experimentation?

Who side are you on?

His side, or humanities side? 

The takeaway from the article, was this section:

"But he was condemned by many of his peers, with the experiment labeled "monstrous," "unethical," and a "huge blow" to the reputation of Chinese biomedical research. Many people within the scientific community raised ethical concerns, including the level of consent He had obtained from the parents of the babies, and the level of transparency around gene editing."


Some background on the history of Human Experimentation:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_human_experimentation

"Nazi human experimentation was a series of medical experiments on large numbers of prisoners, including children, by Nazi Germany in its concentration camps in the early to mid 1940s, during World War II and the Holocaust. Chief target populations included Romani, Sinti, ethnic Poles, Soviet POWs, disabled Germans, and Jews from across Europe.

Nazi physicians and their assistants forced prisoners into participating; they did not willingly volunteer and no consent was given for the procedures. Typically, the experiments resulted in death, trauma, disfigurement or permanent disability, and as such are considered examples of medical torture.

At Auschwitz and other camps, under the direction of Eduard Wirths, selected inmates were subjected to various hazardous experiments that were designed to help German military personnel in combat situations, develop new weapons, aid in the recovery of military personnel who had been injured, and to advance the Nazi racial ideology.[1] Aribert Heim conducted similar medical experiments at Mauthausen.

After the war, these crimes were tried at what became known as the Doctors' Trial, and revulsion at the abuses perpetrated led to the development of the Nuremberg Code of medical ethics. The Nazi physicians in the Doctors' Trial argued that military necessity justified their torturous experiments, and compared their victims to collateral damage from Allied bombings. But this defense, which was in any case rejected by the Tribunal, cannot apply to the twin experiments of Josef Mengele, which were performed on children and had no connection to military necessity."

The History of Human Experimentation goes back a few decades doesn't it @Happy_Killbot?

MichaelElpers

@TKDB. Where did happy killbot say he ever want to force people to be experimented on.

Happy_Killbot

@TKDB You draw a false dichotomy by suggesting that there are "sides" here. To you, everything has to be black and white, but I don't see things like that. The things that he did should be done, just not in the way that he did it. It doesn't matter anyways, because it's going to happen one way or another, and it doesn't matter if any of us want it to or not, but if the public is generally against it, it will happen in the shadows.

On top of this, it isn't exactly human experimentation because the experiment begins before the person exists, so it technically has more in common with chemistry.

TKDB

@MichaelElpers

I was sharing the history of Human Experimentation via the Nazis via WW2.

And the Chinese Doctor, was apparently dabbling in Human Experimentation.

IE Genetic hacking.

MichaelElpers

@TKDB. Yes but there is a difference between forcing experimentation on someone and experimenting on someone who has freely chosen to do so.  They arent comparable.

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

No the Chinese Doctor drew sides, when he crossed the line of Medical Ethics.

His side, verses everyone else's. 

I didn't draw anything.

So you can blame the Chinese Doctor for opening another Pandora's Box, in regards to human experimentation, via his genetic hacking experiments.

You draw a false dichotomy by suggesting that there are "sides" here.

And you can peddle your individual opinions and perceptions as you wish to, and Thank You for educating me on your mindset in regards to genetics and medical science.

"To you, everything has to be black and white, but I don't see things like that. The things that he did should be done, just not in the way that he did it. It doesn't matter anyways, because it's going to happen one way or another, and it doesn't matter if any of us want it to or not, but if the public is generally against it, it will happen in the shadows."


Why don't you ask the AMA, if they agree with your opinion, or perception, over the below commentary from you?

https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/code-medical-ethics-overview

"Ethics for Physicians & the Health of the Community

Ethics for Physicians & the Health of the Community discusses community health. Learn more about the ethics physicians and community health on the AMA."

"4 ways to counteract medical misinformation

Fake medical news is an old phenomenon given greater life by the internet. Fighting it requires coordination among physicians and other key voices. "

"ETHICS

Code of Medical Ethics: Physicians & the health of the community

A doctor's job doesn't stop at individual care. Find out how caring for the health of the community can also lead to better health for individual patients. "

"ETHICS

When the news media calls, keep these 4 things in mind

A physician appearing on a news show isn’t just another talking head. Learn how to maintain your own integrity, and that of the medical profession, when taking part in the media. "

"ETHICS

Why does the medical profession need a code of ethics?

From political conversations to use of social media, the AMA Code of Medical Ethics addresses the new issues confronting physicians, patients and society.

PATIENT SUPPORT & ADVOCACY

You suspect a patient is being abused. What should you do?

The AMA Code of Medical Ethics offers guidance on what to do to help prevent, identify and treat violence and abuse. "

Chapter after chapter on Medical Ethics?

"On top of this, it isn't exactly human experimentation because the experiment begins before the person exists, so it technically has more in common with chemistry."

@Happy_Killbot

You could use the below Contact form to get into contact with them, and share the same thoughts with them, that you've shared with me?

No, it's not black and white, it's about Ethics, verses the unethical. 

Contact Form

Physicians, residents or medical students can reach us by using the contact form or calling the AMA Member Service Center at 800-262-3211 (Monday-Friday 7 a.m.-6 p.m. CST).

Happy_Killbot

TKDB said:

@Happy_Killbot

No the Chinese Doctor drew sides, when he crossed the line of Medical Ethics.

His side, verses everyone else's. 

I didn't draw anything.

What Hypocrisy!

His side vs everyone else's but you didn't draw anything eh?

Maybe drawing you a picture would help you understand.

The double-speech with this one is outrageous!

You could use the below Contact form to get into contact with them, and share the same thoughts with them, that you've shared with me?

No, it's not black and white, it's about Ethics, verses the unethical. 

It's not black and white, it's <insert something binary>

You seriously can't see the  irony and dare I say, stupidity in that statement do you?

TKDB

@MichaelElpers

So you're saying that the Nazi Human Experimentation is different from this Chinese Doctors human experimentation because it was consented to?

Was the Chinese Doctors human experimentation against Medical Ethics, yes or no?

Because this was said about the Chinese Doctors ethics, wasn't it?

"But he was condemned by many of his peers, with the experiment labeled "monstrous," "unethical," and a "huge blow" to the reputation of Chinese biomedical research. Many people within the scientific community raised ethical concerns,  including the level of consent He had obtained from the parents of the babies, and the level of transparency around gene editing."

The Doctor earned 3 years in jail, for his human experimentation work. 

MichaelElpers

@TKDB i havent read about this chinese doctor but yes it is different if he didnt force them too.

If it was the same as the nazi camps he would have gotten way more than 3 years.

TKDB

@MichaelElpers

The Chinese Doctor manipulated those individuals.

To have his way with his Human Experimentation ideas.

"@TKDB i havent read about this chinese doctor but yes it is different if he didnt force them too.

If it was the same as the nazi camps he would have gotten way more than 3 years."

Do you support that Chinese Doctors Human Experimentation work? 

Here's the AMA information, maybe you could reach out to the AMA as well?

Contact Form

Physicians, residents or medical students can reach us by using the contact form or calling the AMA Member Service Center at 800-262-3211 (Monday-Friday 7 a.m.-6 p.m. CST).

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

Are you a fan of this (Doctor's genetic hacking work?)

Are you a supporter of Human Experimentation?

Who's side are you on?

His side, or humanities side?  

Are you going to dodge these questions, to peddle more of your opinion and perception?


"What Hypocrisy!

His side vs everyone else's but you didn't draw anything eh? ( Nope, the Chinese Doctor, is and was wrong for his human experimentation efforts.)

Maybe drawing you a picture would help you understand.

The double-speech with this one is outrageous!"


"It's not black and white, it's <insert something binary>

You seriously can't see the  irony and dare I say, stupidity in that statement do you?"

 

@Happy_Killbot

Instead of peddling your above opinion and perception, why not reach out to the American Medical Association?

"Contact Form

Physicians, residents or medical students can reach us by using the contact form or calling the AMA Member Service Center at 800-262-3211 (Monday-Friday 7 a.m to 6pm cst)

What are you worried about?

Why don't you ask the AMA, if they agree with your opinion, or perception, over your individual opinion or perceptions in regards to the Chinese Doctors human experimentation work? 

https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/code-medical-ethics-overview

"Ethics for Physicians & the Health of the Community

Ethics for Physicians & the Health of the Community discusses community health. Learn more about the ethics physicians and community health on the AMA." 

TKDB

A real world question for @Happy_Killbot and @MichaelElpers, in regards to the Chinese Doctors work on human experimentation:

Would either of you personally volunteer to be schooled on the Chinese Doctors Science of human experimentation, and to be educated on his individual Science of human experimentation, in regards to genetic hacking, if he asked you to join him, in his research? 

Or if he asked you to assist him, in some human experimentation, on some voluntary subjects, would either of you volunteer to assist the Chinese Doctor, in his genetic hacking work? 

@Happy_Killbot

@MichaelElpers ;

What say, either of you? 

MichaelElpers

@TKDB I would say no, but am not going to make decisions for others.  For me it would also depend on what the end goal was.  If someone or the fetus is going to die who am i to deny them the chance of life.

Happy_Killbot

@TKDB If you understood the first thing about how the process that leads to the creation of genetically altered twins, one of whom is permanently resistant to HIV worked, you wouldn't have said that realizing that it isn't possible to do things in this way. You should do some more reading, and I don't mean news articles. Read actual scientific papers on the subject, or at the very least watch the attached video. We can talk after you take the initiative to educate yourself instead of being the fool.

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

, I did read, what was published, and it educates everyone from its very own published words.

"We can talk after you take the initiative to educate yourself instead of being the fool."

The Chinese Doctor, who's work just educated everyone on a Global scale, and his work initiative just got himself JAILED for his genetic work, and human experimentation work, is now a Global fool.

Because of what reason @Happy_Killbot?

"But he was condemned by many of his peers, with the experiment labeled "monstrous," "unethical," and a "huge blow" to the reputation of Chinese biomedical research. Many people within the scientific community raised ethical concerns,  including the level of consent He had obtained from the parents of the babies, and the level of transparency around gene editing."

Happy_Killbot

@TKDB ;POP QUIZ TIME!

1). What help was received by Dr He Jiankui to perform this experiment?

2). What is the purpose of the genetic alteration?

3). At what stage was the genetic treatment administered to the twin?

4). How many couples had Dr He Jiankui recruited to perform these experiments on, and who's consent was required?

5). What was China's initial reaction to the actions of Dr He Jiankui?

Answer these questions in open format. Most of them you can not get from news articles.

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

, I'm not playing your Happy Killbot self pandering game.

I prefer that you keep your brain matter to yourself. 

So you can apply, your "Internet Brain Matter" game with someone else, who's less fortunate enough to let you play with how they should view things from YOUR way of thinking?

"1). What help was received by Dr He Jiankui to perform this experiment?

2). What is the purpose of the genetic alteration?

3). At what stage was the genetic treatment administered to the twin?

4). How many couples had Dr He Jiankui recruited to perform these experiments on, and who's consent was required?

5). What was China's initial reaction to the actions of Dr He Jiankui?

Answer these questions in open format. Most of them you can not get from news articles."

Have a good day, Dr. He Jiankui supporter? 

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

And I noticed how you dodged this REAL WORLD question?

Would you personally volunteer to be schooled on the Chinese Doctors Science of human experimentation, and to be educated on his individual Science of human experimentation, in regards to genetic hacking, if he asked you to join him, in his research? 

Or if he asked you to assist him, in some human experimentation, on some voluntary subjects, would either of you volunteer to assist the Chinese Doctor, in his genetic hacking work?  

What's your REAL WORLD answer?

And not your internet reality based answer. 
 

Happy_Killbot

@TKDB Seems you are completely under-qualified to have this type of discussion. Whenever you realize that your lack of knowledge completely bars you from saying or doing anything useful, let me know.

If you don't care to learn about what is going on with the subject matter, what makes you assume that you have anything important to say whatsoever? You are like a child trying to take a part in adult affairs. You are so clueless you don't know how little you know.

Goodbye.

MayCaesar

TKDB said:

@MichaelElpers

So you're saying that the Nazi Human Experimentation is different from this Chinese Doctors human experimentation because it was consented to?

Was the Chinese Doctors human experimentation against Medical Ethics, yes or no?

Because this was said about the Chinese Doctors ethics, wasn't it?

"But he was condemned by many of his peers, with the experiment labeled "monstrous," "unethical," and a "huge blow" to the reputation of Chinese biomedical research. Many people within the scientific community raised ethical concerns,  including the level of consent He had obtained from the parents of the babies, and the level of transparency around gene editing."

The Doctor earned 3 years in jail, for his human experimentation work. 

Is this a serious question? Yes, a few volunteers agreeing on being a part of an experiment in order to earn some money is quite different from millions people being executed and sent to torture chambers against their will.

As for the doctor having been jailed... It is China. In China you can be jailed for anything, and even for nothing; it is a totalitarian state. My guess is this particular doctor was jailed because his work offended the traditional wing of the party; happens all the time over there.

ZeusAres42

If it's for some good like medical reasons and people are consenting then sure, why not.

FYI, if anyone wants an argument against my position here please be so kind as to make sure it's not one of the following

• Appeal to nature
• Appeal to tradition
• Appeal Faith
• Appeal To Heaven
• Appeal to Spirituality
• Moralistic fallacy

Getting rather bored of those arguments now. All other arguments welcome.

piloteer

@Happy_Killbot

The Chinese doctor who mutilated those twins for life has not been seen publicly since the beginning of 2019, and the Chinese government has retracted all support and suspended any further research activities by him, and they keep him under guard. The supposed gene he mutilated in the babies without their consent does not cause uniform protection from HIV, so they can still get the virus. Furthermore, that gene also protects them from west Nile virus, so they're more susceptible to that now. The twins were born prematurely, and it is unknown whether they are alright.  

https://www.livescience.com/amp/top-retracted-science-studies-2019.html

It's the last part of the article, so if you want to save time, just scroll down. The rest of it is a good read also though. 

The Center for Genetics and Society does not support neo-eugenics. 

TKDB

@MayCaesar

Would you volunteer to help the Chinese Doctor out with the Human Experimentation?

Would you volunteer to become a human experiment if he asked you to?

(TKDB said:

@MichaelElpers

So you're saying that the Nazi Human Experimentation is different from this Chinese Doctors human experimentation because it was consented to?

Was the Chinese Doctors human experimentation against Medical Ethics, yes or no?

Because this was said about the Chinese Doctors ethics, wasn't it?

"But he was condemned by many of his peers, with the experiment labeled "monstrous," "unethical," and a "huge blow" to the reputation of Chinese biomedical research. Many people within the scientific community raised ethical concerns,  including the level of consent He had obtained from the parents of the babies, and the level of transparency around gene editing."

The Doctor earned 3 years in jail, for his human experimentation work.)

"Is this a serious question? Yes, a few volunteers agreeing on being a part of an experiment in order to earn some money is quite different from millions people being executed and sent to torture chambers against their will."

As for the doctor having been jailed... It is China. In China you can be jailed for anything, and even for nothing; it is a totalitarian state. My guess is this particular doctor was jailed because his work offended the traditional wing of the party; happens all the time over there."

piloteer

@ZeusAres42

Gene editing (neo-eugenics) usually takes place before pregnancy, so consent would be out of the question. The offspring of anyone who's genes have been altered also cannot give consent. Consent is out of the question when it comes to our genetic makeup. I hope this argument satisfies your stringent argumentation requirements.    

Happy_Killbot

@piloteer Did you get your parents permission for your genetic make up before you were born?

Unless you have mastered time travel, I doubt it. No one can give consent for our genetics on account of we don't exist when the genetic structure is determined. So why should we concern ourselves with the consent of the unborn, when they have no way to object?

piloteer

Happy_Killbot said:

@TKDB ;POP QUIZ TIME!

1). What help was received by Dr He Jiankui to perform this experiment?

2). What is the purpose of the genetic alteration?

3). At what stage was the genetic treatment administered to the twin?

4). How many couples had Dr He Jiankui recruited to perform these experiments on, and who's consent was required?

5). What was China's initial reaction to the actions of Dr He Jiankui?

Answer these questions in open format. Most of them you can not get from news articles.

1. The hospital where the mutations occurred did not support the procedure, but they secretly let them take place in their facilities. Without the aid of their space and equipment, the procedure would not have taken place. The hospital helped him. The Chinese government also gave economic support for the mutilations, so they also helped.    

2. The misinformed purpose was to make the twins immune to HIV.

3. The mutilation occurred during the embryonic stage of the twins development.

4. There were eight couples whose children were recruited for mutilation. Only two were confirmed to have been born with the altered genes, but a third previous is suspected of also being mutilated by this doctor, and the health of that baby and the twins are unknown. Apparently all that was needed for this "doctor" was the consent of the hospital, the Chinese government, and the parents. The consent of the children was not needed by this "doctor" apparently.

5. The Chinese government gave the "doctor" the green light to do the mutilations, and they helped fund it. They have since disallowed the "doctor" to any further research activities, and he hasn't been seen publicly since January of 2019, and is reportedly kept under guard by the Chinese government.     
        
      

piloteer

@Happy_Killbot

The procedures and the premise behind them are obviously flawed. The genes that are altered, or taken away also serve other functions in the body which can adversely affect the children, and their children. I clearly stated that consent was out of the question when it comes our genetic makeup, so the threshold for ZeusAre42's acceptance cannot be met, because they argued that it should be done with consent. I never said we give any consent for our genetic makeup. I'm just arguing that altering the genes of unborn babies will adversely affect their health and it should be seen as much as a crime and as morally disgusting as molesting children, because like you said, "they have no way to object". It also seems that ZeusAre42 has marked my posts as great arguments since I've posted this argument. I guess logical reasoning still holds some merit here, so it looks like your argument has an icy slope to traverse here.         

TKDB

@Happy_Killbot

I'm under-qualified to have this type of conversation?

Do you support the Chinese Doctors human experimentation work, yes, or no?

And any person getting mutilated, or having their bodies being changed via the human experiments, or dying from a human experiment, is pretty sick isn't it?

People living with a limb missing, because it was amputated, is that fair to the voluntary volunteer? 

Would you volunteer to help the Chinese Doctor out with the Human Experimentation?

Would you volunteer to become a human experiment if he asked you to? 



"@TKDB Seems you are completely under-qualified to have this type of discussion. Whenever you realize that your lack of knowledge completely bars you from saying or doing anything useful, let me know.

If you don't care to learn about what is going on with the subject matter, what makes you assume that you have anything important to say whatsoever? You are like a child trying to take a part in adult affairs. You are so clueless you don't know how little you know.

Goodbye."

Happy_Killbot

@piloteer My counter is to show the absurdity of your assumption that genetically modifying an unborn child is mutilation and the same as molestation.

By this same logic, we all ought to be antinatalists because any time a child is born the child does not consent to being born and does not consent to their genetic makeup. Therefore, having a child, either intentionally or unintentionally, would also be mutilation and molestation, especially if the parents have a history of genetic disorders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism

You can not have your cake and eat it too.

piloteer

@Happy_Killbot

The genetic makeup of an unborn child is not necessarily abusive in any sense as is. Altering genes without considering the adverse consequences that will occur does squarely put that action in the realm of abuse. Your "counter" argument is incomplete and does not overcome my reasoning. Purposely using procedures that will harm the child's health is abusive and can be considered mutilation.   

Happy_Killbot

@piloteer Every time someone is born, they will have a completely unique genetic makeup. If changing someone's genetic makeup using science is abuse, then so is just having children the natural way.

You must realize by now that most genetic disorders are inheritable. All of a sudden you would be making the argument for eugenics if your reasoning is to be followed.

ZeusAres42

piloteer said:

@Happy_Killbot

The procedures and the premise behind them are obviously flawed. The genes that are altered, or taken away also serve other functions in the body which can adversely affect the children, and their children. I clearly stated that consent was out of the question when it comes our genetic makeup, so the threshold for ZeusAre42's acceptance cannot be met, because they argued that it should be done with consent. I never said we give any consent for our genetic makeup. I'm just arguing that altering the genes of unborn babies will adversely affect their health and it should be seen as much as a crime and as morally disgusting as molesting children, because like you said, "they have no way to object". It also seems that ZeusAre42 has marked my posts as great arguments since I've posted this argument. I guess logical reasoning still holds some merit here, so it looks like your argument has an icy slope to traverse here.         

To me, you both actually have good points. Even though you don't necessarily agree with each other. I am not entirely sure who I agree with more right now. All I know is that it appears you both have some very good points. @piloteer

piloteer

@Happy_Killbot

The premise behind the idea of neo-eugenics is not sound. Altering and editing genes has adverse consequences. Every gene does serve a purpose, not only in that individual, but in the human genome as a whole. Altering genes to reverse the bad effects they have on an individual also alters the good effects of those genes, and it does so for the individual and the human genome. The gene the Chinese mutilator altered also protects the children from west Nile virus, and helps regulate white blood cells, which means they're more susceptible to any and all viruses, including HIV. It's no wonder the Chinese government is keeping the results of the "experiment" quiet. Those children have been mutilated. Your counter argument is a baseless straw man. I never claimed children should have to give consent to their existence. I'm arguing that purposefully altering their genes which will harm their health is abusive and can be considered mutilation.