Nearing designer babies

[Atlas14]

I do not think using this would result in narrowing the gene pool. What is being proposed is;

Produce say 20 embryos.
Look at the genetic profile of these embryos.
Choose the one that has no genetic disease, the highest IQ, the required hair colour, whatever.
Implant that one, flush the rest down the bog.

Yes, but if people are striving for essentially the same genetic outcomes over and over due to some fetish or deep desire for some specific traits, these will keep reappearing in the gene pool over and over. The embryos people want could be so similar genetically that there is virtually no difference between large numbers of embryos. It just sounds way overrated. What today may be the perfect genes for immunity against West Nile Virus could the next day be worthless against a different strain of the virus, or any multiple viruses or diseases. Genes are often interrelated and are connected and it isnt always as simple as AAG or GTA coding for blue eyes. Genes can be a part of another nucleotide sequence, and thus alteration of one gene would mean the alteration of the other. But if scientists can find ways around these obstacles, I guess people will still be eager to have their "designer babies".

 

[Samson]

Yes, but if people are striving for essentially the same genetic outcomes over and over due to some fetish or deep desire for some specific traits, these will keep reappearing in the gene pool over and over. The embryos people want could be so similar genetically that there is virtually no difference between large numbers of embryos. It just sounds way overrated. What today may be the perfect genes for immunity against West Nile Virus could the next day be worthless against a different strain of the virus, or any multiple viruses or diseases. Genes are often interrelated and are connected and it isnt always as simple as AAG or GTA coding for blue eyes. Genes can be a part of another nucleotide sequence, and thus alteration of one gene would mean the alteration of the other. But if scientists can find ways around these obstacles, I guess people will still be eager to have their "designer babies".

In some ways I think you could be right, for example one of the genetic "diseases" that was mentioned was sickle cell anaemia. Being hetrozygous for this confers significant imunity to malaria, so if it was selected out the human race would be less able to resist this major cause of death.

However, I do not think selecting for say the more intelegant for the potential 20 children would caus ethis sort of problem. It would be not much different from the natural selection we have so successfully removed from the human population, in the west at least.

 

[Atlas14]

However, I do not think selecting for say the more intelegant for the potential 20 children would caus ethis sort of problem. It would be not much different from the natural selection we have so successfully removed from the human population, in the west at least.

I totally agree. I just wonder cause people always take things too far, and are never satisfied with something like letting their babies have increased IQ or what not, they might start getting into the health and other genetic aspects which are not always as black and white as a trait such as intelligence.

 

[Masquerouge]

Yes, but if people are striving for essentially the same genetic outcomes over and over due to some fetish or deep desire for some specific traits, these will keep reappearing in the gene pool over and over. The embryos people want could be so similar genetically that there is virtually no difference between large numbers of embryos.

I strongly disagree with that. People all across the globe have different tastes in what a boy or a girl look like. It's like saying "everybody wants to reproduce with a blond model". Simply not true.

Genes are often interrelated and are connected and it isnt always as simple as AAG or GTA coding for blue eyes. Genes can be a part of another nucleotide sequence, and thus alteration of one gene would mean the alteration of the other.

Very true. But that's actually an argument for genetic selection, no? It basically guarantees that you will not have a total control on the outcome, thus leaving room for diversity

But if scientists can find ways around these obstacles, I guess people will still be eager to have their "designer babies".

Why do you think people want designer babies? People do NOT want to look like each other!

 

[Atlas14]

I strongly disagree with that. People all across the globe have different tastes in what a boy or a girl look like. It's like saying "everybody wants to reproduce with a blond model". Simply not true.

I wouldn't rule it out. It still is more narrowing than pure, natural, natural breeding.

Very true. But that's actually an argument for genetic selection, no? It basically guarantees that you will not have a total control on the outcome, thus leaving room for diversity

Perhaps, but people should be prepared to deal with unexpected defects or vulnerability to known/unknown diseases if they are venturing in the realm of altering these sequences, even though the more positive outcome of theoretical diversity could result.

Why do you think people want designer babies? People do NOT want to look like each other!

Maybe not where you live, but here in America...