Human DNA Altered, few errors
Human DNA Altered, few errors
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... _text_free
Imagine, this is the start of a world with less disorders found in people, no more autism, no conditions that affect the life of the average person, no more crippling conditions passed from your family. This is such a great thing, right?
Imagine, this is the start of a world with less disorders found in people, no more autism, no conditions that affect the life of the average person, no more crippling conditions passed from your family. This is such a great thing, right?
-
- Courageous Chao
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:25 pm
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
Still waiting for scientists to finish creating genetically modified catgirls for domestic ownership
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
Only catgirls? What a pleb!
- chaoadventures
- Veteran Chao
- Posts: 1381
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:30 am
- Motto: "you wanna play with gabario?"
- Location: heck (still)
- Contact:
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
I can't wait for new diseases and disorders to be introduced through this! - Cynical me.
I fear every way this can possibly backfire and how odd the idea of messing with the very DNA of a person is.
But fixing pre-existing flaws with the human body sounds cool.
If we get it right, you'll even be able to have ones with glasses.
I fear every way this can possibly backfire and how odd the idea of messing with the very DNA of a person is.
But fixing pre-existing flaws with the human body sounds cool.
Patience. First we perfect the human body, then we can start adding other animals to it, just like Japan always wanted.Pufflehugs wrote:Still waiting for scientists to finish creating genetically modified catgirls for domestic ownership
If we get it right, you'll even be able to have ones with glasses.
-
- Courageous Chao
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:25 pm
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
I mean, couldn't you just make mock glasses that don't actually correct anything instead of purposefully damaging their eyesight? That seems a lot more simple.
- EvilPinkamina
- Veteran Chao
- Posts: 1724
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 1:51 am
- Motto: $5.99
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
Disorders won't be wiped out because it'll be a purely opt in process due to the overly paranoid conspiracy theorists believing that when their child's autism is modified out, the government will also put in a chip that reads their child's mind and uploads it to a 50's villain's secret supercomputer that the government will use to mind control the entire population.
Smashboards: EvilPinkaminaTriert wrote: I remember the old days when people would get shaped up by criticism and in turn be a better person.
Discord: Pinka #5535
Twitter: @PinkDandere
- SwifterTheDragon
- Quester Chao
- Posts: 162
- Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 1:38 am
- Contact:
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
chaoadventures wrote:Patience. First we perfect the human body, then we can start adding other animals to it, just like Japan always wanted.Pufflehugs wrote:Still waiting for scientists to finish creating genetically modified catgirls for domestic ownership
This can seriously go two ways. Either it changes humanity for eternity or it becomes discontinued for various reasons.
Things I'd personally like to see that would be optional is skin colour, eye colour, hair colour etc choice at birth and later on in life when you finally understand that stuff, relieve the need for braces entirely and glasses.
Still, I'd strongly appreciate a cure for cancer perfectly before anything.
After humans have been perfected, could we just give every animal the ability to understand English? Parrots are close enough already, and pets sometimes can understand you by your speech but not the other way around.
I can see people in the future being like "I want to have the tail of a ____." Or other stuff.
Also I forget where I saw this but some type of fish as the ability to regrow itself basically. Cut off its head? It'll regrow. Apparently people are trying to carry that to humans now.
Somewhere else someone took some stuff from a fish that can see in the dark and put it into their own eye, and then they could see in the dark too.
Last edited by SwifterTheDragon on Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:14 am, edited 2 times in total.
- Lamby
- Chaos Chao
- Posts: 2228
- Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 5:38 pm
- Motto: running this block, running the chain gang
- Location: 9th circle
- Contact:
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
umm yeah you guys have either been watching too much tv or just being horny dweebs xP i can do both though because i'm perfect and a lady
swifter your post is actually adorable, idk why
okay my serious opinion is i think it's ethical to eliminate terminal illness like mine with genetic engineering anyway; but the article is basically futurology so i'm leaning towards pink's post. beyond that, i don't know, but i do support exploring research and they're just lab embryos that don't matter
swifter your post is actually adorable, idk why
okay my serious opinion is i think it's ethical to eliminate terminal illness like mine with genetic engineering anyway; but the article is basically futurology so i'm leaning towards pink's post. beyond that, i don't know, but i do support exploring research and they're just lab embryos that don't matter
"Oh baby won't you stop it/you and I haven't got it
Television romance "
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
Pink I'm not sure I understood what you were saying at all
- EvilPinkamina
- Veteran Chao
- Posts: 1724
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 1:51 am
- Motto: $5.99
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
This bit is self-explanatory. I'm saying any genetic disorders will not be wiped out due to thisEvilPinkamina wrote:Disorders won't be wiped out
This is saying that the genetic manipulation will be optionalbecause it'll be a purely opt in process
this is why i believe the manipulation will be optionaldue to the overly paranoid conspiracy theorists
This is saying the benefit of genetic manipulation, followed by the paranoid twist that these conspiracy theorists will throw on itbelieving that when their child's autism is modified out, the government will also put in a chip that reads their child's mind
This is the "the government is evil and is trying to control our brains" end that many conspiracy theorists believe every good technological innovation will cause.and uploads it to a 50's villain's secret supercomputer that the government will use to mind control the entire population.
Smashboards: EvilPinkaminaTriert wrote: I remember the old days when people would get shaped up by criticism and in turn be a better person.
Discord: Pinka #5535
Twitter: @PinkDandere
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
now i get it
-
- Courageous Chao
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:25 pm
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
ThisLamby wrote:umm yeah you guys have either been watching too much tv or just being horny dweebs xP
- EvilPinkamina
- Veteran Chao
- Posts: 1724
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 1:51 am
- Motto: $5.99
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
tbh genetic manipulation wont last long until people start uploading their consciousnesses onto computers and transfer them into specialized robot bodies
Smashboards: EvilPinkaminaTriert wrote: I remember the old days when people would get shaped up by criticism and in turn be a better person.
Discord: Pinka #5535
Twitter: @PinkDandere
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
My massive fear of death hopes that we can do that in the next couple of years.
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
There is a movie about the idea of a society with regular human modification. Actually, there are probably many, but I am thinking specifically of the movie popularly shown in high school bio. classes, Gattaca.
Pretty much all parents have their fetus-babies modified to be less likely for heart disease, brain disorders, other genetic conditions (and probably also modified cosmetically.) But the film follows a guy who's parent's decided to have a natural birth. He can't get a lot of jobs because of his 'genetic inferiority' (which is kind of legitimate, but then ethically weird, which is mostly the point.)
Anyway, I think that film shows a kind of interpretation of the world Pinkamania and Swifter were thinking about. Not being modified could be a detriment.
Swifter's point about animal modification, though, was not addressed. A pretty interesting point though.
But really, any form of human modification (or even adding human genes to animals) gets thrown into a very ethically questionable spot very fast.
(I would love to get the ability to see UV and IR light.)
Pretty much all parents have their fetus-babies modified to be less likely for heart disease, brain disorders, other genetic conditions (and probably also modified cosmetically.) But the film follows a guy who's parent's decided to have a natural birth. He can't get a lot of jobs because of his 'genetic inferiority' (which is kind of legitimate, but then ethically weird, which is mostly the point.)
Anyway, I think that film shows a kind of interpretation of the world Pinkamania and Swifter were thinking about. Not being modified could be a detriment.
Swifter's point about animal modification, though, was not addressed. A pretty interesting point though.
But really, any form of human modification (or even adding human genes to animals) gets thrown into a very ethically questionable spot very fast.
(I would love to get the ability to see UV and IR light.)
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
I personally worry about costs relating to these procedures, and if it would result in serious cases of classism. Especially if we can use the procedures to avoid having to vaccinate, and then someone tries to make vaccination more expensive. Realistically, I think it'd be dangerous for the already fragile economics of the medical industry.
Unrelated to realism: If I could, I'd have a child with brightly colored hair. Mainly because that's the coolest thing I could care about, and because if it is bright or pale, dying to a more traditional color wouldn't be hell.
Also I'd be more afraid of modifying humans after they were grown. Or allowing people to give their unborn children additional appendages. That could be really dangerous and hard to treat if there were any problems.
Unrelated to realism: If I could, I'd have a child with brightly colored hair. Mainly because that's the coolest thing I could care about, and because if it is bright or pale, dying to a more traditional color wouldn't be hell.
The more human the result, the less likely ownership would be legal. It's similar to why I doubt Persocoms (from Chobits) are likely to happen, unless the doll industry takes off.Pufflehugs wrote:Still waiting for scientists to finish creating genetically modified catgirls for domestic ownership
I agree with Lamby, this is great cute optimism.SwifterTheDragon wrote:Things I'd personally like to see that would be optional is skin colour, eye colour, hair colour etc choice at birth and later on in life when you finally understand that stuff, relieve the need for braces entirely and glasses.
Still, I'd strongly appreciate a cure for cancer perfectly before anything.
After humans have been perfected, could we just give every animal the ability to understand English? Parrots are close enough already, and pets sometimes can understand you by your speech but not the other way around.
I can see people in the future being like "I want to have the tail of a ____." Or other stuff.
Also I'd be more afraid of modifying humans after they were grown. Or allowing people to give their unborn children additional appendages. That could be really dangerous and hard to treat if there were any problems.
I wonder if letting someone live beyond a normal human lifespan will be considered unethical at some point. Though I'm not really afraid of the inevitability of death, and kinda thing an unending life worse be worse than a limited life.Triert wrote:My massive fear of death hopes that we can do that in the next couple of years.
Avatar Art by chocohugs; Signature by Tsui
- Nano
- Legendary Chaos Chao
- Posts: 12256
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 5:50 am
- Motto: My kickstarter failed, but that's okay!
- Location: Union of Chaoviet Socialist Republics
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
Sweetdreams: Coming soon(?)
- chaoadventures
- Veteran Chao
- Posts: 1381
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 2:30 am
- Motto: "you wanna play with gabario?"
- Location: heck (still)
- Contact:
- Jeffery Mewtamer
- Advanced Chaos Chao
- Posts: 3234
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 3:59 pm
- Motto: Sightless Scholar
- Contact:
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
Setting aside fantasies of real life mew mews or zoan-type devil fruit minus the weakness to sea water, here are a few things to consider:
1. There's a big difference between altering the DNA of a single cell(say a human zygote) and reliably altering the DNA of a collection of billions of cells(say, a fully grown human). As a result, the precedure will most likely be limited to parents who opt for in vitro fertilization.
2. Scientists are still trying to figure out which gene combinations are responsible for which genetic disorders as well as figure out which disorders are genetic, which are due to environmental factors, and how the two interact for things that aren't purely one or the other.
3. Just because a altered zygote develops into an embryo and survives in vitro as long as an embryo grown from an unaltered zygote is no guarantee the altered zygote could be implanted in a woman's womb and grow to term, or wouldn't have other unforeseen side-effects later in lifeif it survied long enough to be born.
4. This procedure will likely be very expensive, allowing the rich to give their children yet another advantage over their poorer peers, insurance companies would likely refuse to cover it or make plans that cover it prohibitively expensive, and even universal healthcare countries might be hesitant to cover the costs without lots of data supporting the notion that genetically altered persons are overall healthier.
As for giving humans animal ears and tails, we'll probably see plastic surgeons crafting convincing facsimiles or modified stem cells being used to grow ears and tails that are then surgically graphed on to the patient and needing to rely on normal habit forming techniques to impart the desired animal behaviors long before we see genetic modification reach the point of modifying a zygote that will grow into a healthy, baby catgirl who will grow up to live a normal human life span, much less infuse a teenager with cat DNA ala Tokyo Mew Mew.
That said, in fantasy masquerading as science fiction land, I totally wouldn't mind becoming a genetic catboy or lion man, nor would I object to correction of my genetic risk factors for diminishing health and lengthening my telomeres to neonatal lengths. And for those wondering, telomeres are the "junk" DNA at the end of chromosomes that help protect them from damage in replication. Telomeres get shorter as we age and are widely considered to be a major cause of old age, with the theory being that if we could rebuild telomeres, we could prevent the decline of old age unrelated to disease.
As for giving animals human-level speech, short of replacing puppy mills with puppy labs, you'd probably have better luck trying to give your pet brain surgery to implant a stem-cell grown speech center than altering their DNA to naturally grow the extra brain tissue.
And considering ordinary housecats already make it clear they see their human companions more as servants than masters, I don't think real-life catgirls would take kindly to someone claiming ownership over them, though I'm sure they'd be very affectionate to any human that offers them sufficient pampering. The eager to please maid stereotype strikes me as more appropriate for a dog girl or something even more uncommon. There's a reason female cats are called queens.
1. There's a big difference between altering the DNA of a single cell(say a human zygote) and reliably altering the DNA of a collection of billions of cells(say, a fully grown human). As a result, the precedure will most likely be limited to parents who opt for in vitro fertilization.
2. Scientists are still trying to figure out which gene combinations are responsible for which genetic disorders as well as figure out which disorders are genetic, which are due to environmental factors, and how the two interact for things that aren't purely one or the other.
3. Just because a altered zygote develops into an embryo and survives in vitro as long as an embryo grown from an unaltered zygote is no guarantee the altered zygote could be implanted in a woman's womb and grow to term, or wouldn't have other unforeseen side-effects later in lifeif it survied long enough to be born.
4. This procedure will likely be very expensive, allowing the rich to give their children yet another advantage over their poorer peers, insurance companies would likely refuse to cover it or make plans that cover it prohibitively expensive, and even universal healthcare countries might be hesitant to cover the costs without lots of data supporting the notion that genetically altered persons are overall healthier.
As for giving humans animal ears and tails, we'll probably see plastic surgeons crafting convincing facsimiles or modified stem cells being used to grow ears and tails that are then surgically graphed on to the patient and needing to rely on normal habit forming techniques to impart the desired animal behaviors long before we see genetic modification reach the point of modifying a zygote that will grow into a healthy, baby catgirl who will grow up to live a normal human life span, much less infuse a teenager with cat DNA ala Tokyo Mew Mew.
That said, in fantasy masquerading as science fiction land, I totally wouldn't mind becoming a genetic catboy or lion man, nor would I object to correction of my genetic risk factors for diminishing health and lengthening my telomeres to neonatal lengths. And for those wondering, telomeres are the "junk" DNA at the end of chromosomes that help protect them from damage in replication. Telomeres get shorter as we age and are widely considered to be a major cause of old age, with the theory being that if we could rebuild telomeres, we could prevent the decline of old age unrelated to disease.
As for giving animals human-level speech, short of replacing puppy mills with puppy labs, you'd probably have better luck trying to give your pet brain surgery to implant a stem-cell grown speech center than altering their DNA to naturally grow the extra brain tissue.
And considering ordinary housecats already make it clear they see their human companions more as servants than masters, I don't think real-life catgirls would take kindly to someone claiming ownership over them, though I'm sure they'd be very affectionate to any human that offers them sufficient pampering. The eager to please maid stereotype strikes me as more appropriate for a dog girl or something even more uncommon. There's a reason female cats are called queens.
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
tbh this is disgusting
-
- Courageous Chao
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:25 pm
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
It was funny until Jeff came along and took it seriously.
Re: Human DNA Altered, few errors
i'm not talking about the thread itself, dude