Genetically Modified Babies Are Already A Reality

so, i found this.

The U.S. federal agency Food and Drug Administration (FDA) begins its consideration of biological procedures which, if successful, will allow to create genetically modified people, reports an article from The New York Times.

i'm sure many saw this coming. but, if this isn't the first time it's been published in the new york times with f.d.a. consideration, that's news to me. either way, i figured i should shed some light on this since i'm not finding this case here in the forum. no doubt there's been build up to this, but publishing in the times is kind of a big deal, i think.

Marcy Darnovsky is the executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society. “This is a dangerous step”, warns Darnovsky. According to her, these methods will “change all the cells in the bodies of children born as a result of their use, and these changes will be transmitted to future generations.”

so, it's alarming enough that these people are considering risking individual lives. but, it sounds like something that would pass down, should anyone have a child. i'm not one the play the "future generation" flute. there is no future, and no past, only the present. besides, i personally believe this world is changing in a big way far too rapidly to be thinking about anything near that far ahead. but, that's another topic. my point being, i'm sure some of these members of our f.d.a. /do/ bother to look into the future; that's what makes this all the more concerning.

“The objectives are worthy, but the methods are particularly problematic in terms of consequences for society and health risks“, says the author.

right.. i promise i'm not a psychic.

“Genetic modification of sperm, eggs and embryos at an early stage of development should be strictly prohibited. Otherwise there is a risk of sliding into experiments on humans and high-tech eugenics“, the author writes.

However, it seems that the resistance to inherited gene modifications decreases in many countries. The idea of manipulating mitochondria is considered not only by the U.S., but also by the British authorities.

"sliding into"? that's not at all the same as "sliding into animal marriage", right?

pardon my satire, but i'm making a point here. it's a pattern of insanity. people clash over "morals", and that gets blended into what is actually common sense morals, like risking ruining a person's birth without their choice in the matter. my point being, the f.d.a. could easily treat people's criticisms of this as the same criticisms from mental radicals over "gays getting married". if the f.d.a. groups all critics in this party, they can continue looking into something like this with the old "all great ideas come with opposition" feelings. good intentions don't give a person the consideration to hold great power. good sense gives a person that consideration, should that be necessary. this is obvious, right? but, i say this now because organizations like the f.d.a. can easily pretend like there's no need to consider who has good sense since the members in power actually don't have any good sense - they're mental problems with power themselves. and, with this power, they're going to do whatever they please unless people do more than criticize their actions.

full article:

www.belgievandaag.com...

this is the part where i say cheers. i'm not saying we should "be on guard now". this is just another step in many equally crazy things going on right now. like i said, i didn't see it here, so every piece of news helps.
- w -

I think the notion is rather obnoxious as far as genetically modified humans being something "bad". A lot could be said, but if they're rather open about genetically modifying crops, and those genes can be transferred into our genes in the gut, our genes are not obviously being seen as an importance. But that sort of collateral damage is ok, but say guided genetic modification reducing various risks for cancer, not ok.

I'd give medical science a good chance, over not even considering medicine or health when it comes to gmos. And the difference is that gmo crops aren't around for the sake of your health. It's about profits.

Stormie, you and I should start a ATS club for members with creepy avatars

I'm actually excited for genetic augmentation. I think it's a step in the right direction. As for the danger factor, I wasn't aware of that in previous cases. Choosing the gender, and some smaller features like hair color and so on have been around for a bit, but I believe the US has rejected the practice so far. I believe a number of European countries are pretty much heading the whole Augmentation wave.

It'll be an interesting future indeed

a reply to: Stormie

This reminds me of the movie Gattica. Also, I read a sci-fi story about these parents in the future who refused to genetically alter their daughter. This made her a freak among her classmates. It turns out that the parents knew there was a disease built into all the modifications and her classmates dropped dead one by one. She was the only one left alive.

originally posted by: Stormie
so, i found this.

The U.S. federal agency Food and Drug Administration (FDA) begins its consideration of biological procedures which, if successful, will allow to create genetically modified people, reports an article from The New York Times.

i'm sure many saw this coming. but, if this isn't the first time it's been published in the new york times with f.d.a. consideration, that's news to me. either way, i figured i should shed some light on this since i'm not finding this case here in the forum. no doubt there's been build up to this, but publishing in the times is kind of a big deal, i think.

Marcy Darnovsky is the executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society. “This is a dangerous step”, warns Darnovsky. According to her, these methods will “change all the cells in the bodies of children born as a result of their use, and these changes will be transmitted to future generations.”

so, it's alarming enough that these people are considering risking individual lives. but, it sounds like something that would pass down, should anyone have a child. i'm not one the play the "future generation" flute. there is no future, and no past, only the present. besides, i personally believe this world is changing in a big way far too rapidly to be thinking about anything near that far ahead. but, that's another topic. my point being, i'm sure some of these members of our f.d.a. /do/ bother to look into the future; that's what makes this all the more concerning.

“The objectives are worthy, but the methods are particularly problematic in terms of consequences for society and health risks“, says the author.

right.. i promise i'm not a psychic.

“Genetic modification of sperm, eggs and embryos at an early stage of development should be strictly prohibited. Otherwise there is a risk of sliding into experiments on humans and high-tech eugenics“, the author writes.

However, it seems that the resistance to inherited gene modifications decreases in many countries. The idea of manipulating mitochondria is considered not only by the U.S., but also by the British authorities.

"sliding into"? that's not at all the same as "sliding into animal marriage", right?

pardon my satire, but i'm making a point here. it's a pattern of insanity. people clash over "morals", and that gets blended into what is actually common sense morals, like risking ruining a person's birth without their choice in the matter. my point being, the f.d.a. could easily treat people's criticisms of this as the same criticisms from mental radicals over "gays getting married". if the f.d.a. groups all critics in this party, they can continue looking into something like this with the old "all great ideas come with opposition" feelings. good intentions don't give a person the consideration to hold great power. good sense gives a person that consideration, should that be necessary. this is obvious, right? but, i say this now because organizations like the f.d.a. can easily pretend like there's no need to consider who has good sense since the members in power actually don't have any good sense - they're mental problems with power themselves. and, with this power, they're going to do whatever they please unless people do more than criticize their actions.

full article:

www.belgievandaag.com...

this is the part where i say cheers. i'm not saying we should "be on guard now". this is just another step in many equally crazy things going on right now. like i said, i didn't see it here, so every piece of news helps.
- w -

Forget about babies I want my superhero super powers serum for adults and I wants it now!

Who's behind all this Monsanto. .?

Do they taste better than normal ones? #masonfood

Don't reach for the stars, bring the stars to us... one tech leap at a time.

To think we could go intergalactic any other way, and with this in mind, to think of this as immoral... blows my mind, man.

a reply to: Stormie

I'm guessing that their idea is that they will figure out a way to "prevent" "genetic defects". The human immune system was just fine, before it was tampered with. I guess they figure they have to figure out how to fix what they have allowed to be broken. In the mean time, it's cost a lot of people misery and suffering.

That's quite a deep post I've made. It would take a lot of research to understand where I'm coming from, but it's true. As the old saying says, "If it isn't broken-then don't fix it". It will remain true for years to come. They have to figure out a way to make better humans, since the gene pool has been artificially corrupted at this point...

a reply to: InFriNiTee

Expand please. Which vectors are you speaking of?

We need babies to be round-up ready if they are going to be fed GMO's the rest of their lives!
Think about the chiiiildren!!

In our profit crazy world, instead of fixing situations at the source, we constanlty create other needs that are profitable.

originally posted by: theMediator
We need babies to be round-up ready if they are going to be fed GMO's the rest of their lives!
Think about the chiiiildren!!

In our profit crazy world, instead of fixing situations at the source, we constanlty create other needs that are profitable.

Brilliant.

"Designer Babies" is not a 'new' thing

they were invented a long time ago

Is it too late to change my genes?

a reply to: Stormie

a reply to: Stormie

Interesting. So....the Trailer Park couple that gets married at Walmart can order up their own version of Honey Boo Boo?

originally posted by: TonyS
Interesting. So....the Trailer Park couple that gets married at Walmart can order up their own version of Honey Boo Boo?

If a trailer park couple gets married at Walmart they most likely will end up with a Honey Boo Boo without any type of genetic manipulation.

originally posted by: Ghost147
Stormie, you and I should start a ATS club for members with creepy avatars

I'm actually excited for genetic augmentation. I think it's a step in the right direction. As for the danger factor, I wasn't aware of that in previous cases. Choosing the gender, and some smaller features like hair color and so on have been around for a bit, but I believe the US has rejected the practice so far. I believe a number of European countries are pretty much heading the whole Augmentation wave.

It'll be an interesting future indeed

i know you meant no harm, but that hurts a lil bit. my avatar is a self portrait i made of me. everybody else said it's beautiful. but, i'll change it out though, just in case.
. A .

i've never trusted medical science since they hide cancer cures, test chemicals on animals, and give out labels for mental differences that aren't actually disorders. i just don't see how there's much reason to trust when people have been doing this so blatantly.

a reply to: Stormie

Sorry about that, 3D eyes tend to creep me out for some reason (Nothing against the actual features itself though ).

I completely agree with you. Although all of those things originally were produced with good intentions. Someone just wanted to make a buck off of other peoples misfortunes and only then did they become this dark undertone.

EDIT: I like your new avatar better Same model?

I thought GMO babies were always a thing.

"You are what you eat". That which fuels and regenerates your biologic system.

Mom eats GMO as food, over decades.. mom feeds baby GMO. Baby in belly feeds off GMO from mommy's intake.

Baby is born being fueled by GMO and that is the substance that aided in building it's body and maintaining it in the belly.

How did that get overlooked?

Oh right, a bunch of twisted creepy freaks in a lab want to make serious GMO babies from the sperm and egg.

Where did humanity go...

People will be excited until they found out that certain kinds employment will require someone to be "genetically modified" OR that insurance costs will go up for those whom are not "genetically modified" OR that being denied a service because you are not "genetically modified" is not considered "discrimination".

Remember this is America, we have no labor protection, no union representation and no access to collective bargaining. In situations like this we are sheep to be slaughtered. Mark my words, Europeans will fare MUCH better on the labor front when such tech becomes reality.