Mapping own DNA changes scientist's life

~@~

While reading the above article, it struck me that one day some scientist or group of scientists will be able to dissect, manipulate, splice a DNA sequence altering it's natural makeup and eliminating the inherent flaws.

Would this be a wise course of action in furthering the evolution of Mankind?

Imagine if actual human-beings were produced that had perfect genetics free of flaws which cause disease and the limitations of longevity.
Now overpopulation would be a concern if humans were to live healthy productive lives without genetically inheritable diseases. Perhaps the only avenue for humanity persuing this quest would be in space exploration?
Then again, would these people be a true representation of Man to whomever they may encounter ?

Consider the above question: Should Man persue this course if proven achievable?

The way mankind has been taught to view life and death are quite possibly about to be rewritten.

There is one more ethical~moral question Man should ponder before going off on this path.

Religion
If the first generations of a new genetically altered human beings have an advantage over natural human-beings, history would enivitably be written in these generations favor.
Would one Religious belief eventually dominate the planet?
Which one should they emulate ?

Would a genetically superior human race retain the diversity that we share today ?

Lists of Famous Adherents of Various Religious Groups
lists of prominent people (actors, politicians, authors, U.S. presidents, artists, musicians, Supreme Court justices, film directors, etc.) classified by religious affiliation.

__________________

So this is how liberty ends... with thunderous applause
In a Democracy, Silence is Permission

Knowing one's DNA sequence hardly gives knowledge of all of one's predispositions. We just don't know what all of that sequence *does*. For example, Ventr says he has no family history of Alzheimers, but found on gene taht is linked to it...and now he's taking an experimental treatment for a disease he might be suceptable to? This sounds a bit crazy to me. He ought to know that most traits are the result of multiple gene interactions, and these are far from worked out. Maybe he has other genes that are protective, and this is why there is no family history; only now he may screw up his liver with the statins.
At any rate, these discoveries will be used for somatic genetic therapy to treat genetic diseases, but germ line alteration is forbidden, and with good reason I think. If you want to know how we do when we have leave to alter a species even just using selective breeding look at dogs; what a mess! We've got psychotic breeds, breeds that can't give birth without a c-section, breeds that can barely breathe...no, we've got no buisness fooling with human inheritance.

__________________
please click and help the eggs hatch!

"The only abnormality is the incapacity to love"
-Anias Nin

Many things are forbidden, such as a poppy

UNODC - Afghanistan ends opium poppy cultivation - Update June 2
Afghanistan: Poppy, Heroin Trade Flourishing As Government Fails To Provide Alternatives
Afghanistan: Poppy Eradication Failing And Taliban Benefitting - RADIO FREE EUROPE / RADIO LIBERTY

Why do you believe "germ line alteration is forbidden" and something that will remain forbidden AND
100% adhered to by everyone, for all time ?

__________________

So this is how liberty ends... with thunderous applause
In a Democracy, Silence is Permission

"DNA perfection"?

No, I don't think so, because I don't think we can really know what it means...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

In past history, we didn't "really know" flight was possible.
And although it has not yet been perfected, it has changed Mankinds existance on this tiny globe forever.

Same could be said of the first discovery of flint and the accompaning discovery of Gunpowder.

Knowledge and Discovery can never be put back in the bottle once it exists.
Although perhaps dangerous, the knowledge of manipulating the human genome exists.
Someone is bound to try, even though they may never "know when it's "perfect".

__________________

So this is how liberty ends... with thunderous applause
In a Democracy, Silence is Permission

For now, it is forbidden. You are correct that people do break laws and do things that are forbidden. If a scientist starts research in germ line alteration, then their funding will be cut immediately. As scientific research is costly, s/he'll need good luck continuing in her/his basement or garage.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

If you could guarantee that your children and grand children would not get cancer, heart disease or diabetes, would you?

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

The idea of DNA perfection is an interesting one, but I am more interested in asking who decides what constitutes perfection? Where is the line drawn? If we eliminate the gene the causes alcoholism? What about red hair? The gay gene? How similar is what you're proposing in the OP to the Aryan notion that Hitler tried to genetically develop in the 40s?

Which is reason enough to not pursue it...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

Steve, please take this comparison in consideration. {not intended to go Off-topic}

Ex. : The U.S. experiment promoting democracy, mainly in the Middle East. ...
Hmm, "know when it's "perfect" ?
With your rationale, Spreading Democracy should never be attempted since we shall never "know when it's "perfect" .

Human-beings are capable of creative as well as destructive achievements.

Good intentions can often lead to disastrous results,
like the U.S. experiment promoting democracy solely in terms of free elections.

" Which is reason enough to not pursue it. ... "

~@~

On Topic again, the simple fact that this knowledge exists leads to the advent of an attempt being made to improve
the genetic makeup of our species. I'm not saying that Dr Frankenstien has reared his ugly head.
The most noble of intentions may be put forth as their intended goal.
As for financing this type of endeavor, It's been said that he who has all the toys, WINS

And that is where we must watch the closest because the investors will have control of issues such as
the make-up of the racial strain being produced, the eventual educational interests of the offspring, including religious instructions.

The famous line from the story DUNE rings true in most every aspect of Man's society.
"He who controls the spice, controls the universe"

It is therefore not a question of is this possible or probable but, who and how shall it be controlled ?

__________________

So this is how liberty ends... with thunderous applause
In a Democracy, Silence is Permission

Perfection should be defined.

What is perfection?
Here is one reason why not:
Here is another reason why not:
If this “perfection” is pursued to achieve the elimination of genetic diseases, the assumption of a resulting over-population is not a necessary result. The effects of disease via mutation and gene interactions are not considered and would have effects on creating disease and on the proposed over-population.
Not many would know; there are too many variables to consider.

Here is one reason why not:
Here is another reason why not:

If the Constitution is still in place in your future, the questions are moot.

There would continue to be diversity due to mutations and unpredictable gene interactions, still.

…through somatic genetic therapy and preventive measures for identified disease, assuming all gene interactions can be identified, especially positive or canceling gene interactions. This is very different from germ line alterations.
Vide infra with respect to ethics and reasonable research in the scientific community.

You’ve answered your own questions, but we can still try:

Altering germ lines is unethical. Funding, the majority of which is controlled by the public, would be immediately halted if research in altering germ lines is pursed with the goal of creating a “master race” rather than a goal of somatic therapy. Scientific research is expensive. With no funding, it would not continue.

Altering germ lines is impractical. The fact that there will always be mutations is one reason. Another reason is the effective control of unpredictable gene interactions.

Any single scientist who would propose this as a viable area of research would be foolish and lose their credibility in the scientific community and end up working alone. Granted, the cited scientist did find his genome but he admits that his genome made up the majority of that studied under Celera’s Humane Genome Project. The genes responsible for many genetic diseases have yet to be defined. The interactions of combination of genes have yet to be defined. Mutations are not only possible, but also probable, and cannot be predicted as of yet.



It my hope and the hope of many other scientists that fear-mongering with respect to science can be curtailed with the spread of knowledge in the area.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, those four: you could write them on your thumbnail, or sweep them clear across this bright autumn sky. But remember too, that they are more than just words. They are a way of life. So whenever you speak them; speak them firmly, speak them proudly, speak them gratefully. I am an American. ...a tradition

And, yet, you so willingly do...

We already know Democracy isn't "perfect"? Should we just shit-can it?

That certainly sounds like an argument against it than in favor of it...

It is, which also sounds like an argument against it.

I'm not devating the possibility or probabilty, but just whether or not it should be done.

Can you define what DNA 'perfection" is?

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

At first I was impressed at the answers coming from a boilermaker, then in the end you claim "many other scientists ".
So which is it or are you a scientist who moonlights as a boilermaker ?

__________________

So this is how liberty ends... with thunderous applause
In a Democracy, Silence is Permission