It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by QueenofWeird
This is not about genes being manipulated! Via IF several foetuses are created and then checked to see which ones are free of the breast cancer gen.
I don't understand the leap to designer babies or talk about creating perfect people.
Of course it's designer babies.
They scanned 11 foetuses to see which of them had the faulty gene. They found one that they wanted to keep and tossed out the rest. That's selecting by design. Designer babies.
Originally posted by americandingbat
There are probably people who feel that way, and again I'm troubled. Do breast cancer survivors really feel that they would be better off not having been born? Do their parents wish they had had a different kid instead?
Originally posted by martalen
Just to clarify: This baby is not the product of genetic alteration to remove the gene. In vitro embryos produced by the couple were screened for the gene and the embryo free of the cancer gene was selected for implantation.
And, yes, the headline is typically sensational. This baby is only safe from the forms of cancer caused by the presence of that gene - she is not "cancer-immune"
Originally posted by welivefortheson
there are postive and negative mutations, why you would want negative mutations to continue purely out of principle is beyond me,have you ever suffered negative mutation?,what would you say to severly disabled folks that you denied them the right to be alieved of it purely because you believe its unatural?
if you can remove a negative mutation that causes harm and suffering it should be done,however should you want to cause harm to humans allowing negative mutations that cause depopulation ,then so be it.
what would you say to severly disabled folks that you denied them the right to be alieved of it purely because you believe its unatural?
Originally posted by OhZone
Our domestic animals likewise are plagued with heritiable defects. We have practiced selective breeding with them for a long time. I don't think we have eliminated the problems there either.
Originally posted by OhZone
Playing God? Since this creator did such a lousy job we have to now clean up his mess.
Originally posted by munkey66
A doctor can look at a family tree and see a history of lung cancer and then screen out the lung cancer gene so the offspring can smoke like a chimney?
look at the family tree and see a history oh heart disease, so once again get screened to produce someone who can eat even more crap and become even heavier?
If nature decided cancer was needed, so be it,
This type of research can only lead to something bad even though it appears to offer something good.
remember that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.