It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Aussies flock to designer baby technology

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 03:03 AM

Originally posted by tezzajw

I'm not flaming you or trying to make a joke of your medical condition. Here's some sincere and honest questions to you:

Would you prefer that you had never been born at all?
Would you prefer that you were one of the rejected embryos and your parents had chosen a healthier embryo instead, that wouldn't have been you?

Feel free not to answer, as I'm not trying to upset you. Cool.

Yes often,but im hear and i make the best of it.

Yes but would i have known the difference?But at the same time my condition has made me who i am(Someone my friends seem to like being around)

My nickname at school was "Pants" as i have no bladder or bowl control.
Something i wouldnt wish on any child.

Thanks for asking tezzajw.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 03:04 AM
I dont see any problem with this at all. Screening for diseases is a very very good idea. Give your child a better live and improve the gene pool.
I dont believe this is playing god, if it is we are already playing god by giving people medicine. And since I dont believe in god I dont think we can play god. We can however make ourselves and future generations better. Make them less dependant on medicine as well. Heck one day we might save the entire planet thru the same method.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 05:23 AM
reply to post by SvenTheBerserK

you put too much hope into genetic engineering.

when the causes weren't genetic in the first place, screening wouldn't do squat. a deficiency in folic acid alledgedly increases the odss, therefore pre-natal diagnostics is what you're looking for, in which case abortion is probably the only 'remedy' available. this i can agree with, though, because it's better for everyone than killing a child at birth, like the Spartans did.

genetic screening is imho just a convenient form of Eugenics, which was conceived as the means to an ideological end and never worked as advertised, while conflicting evidence is routinely ignored.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 06:20 AM
reply to post by Long Lance

Thanks for the link.

I found this little snippet interesting.

Several March of Dimes grantees are searching for genes that may contribute to spina bifida and other NTDs to develop new ways to prevent these disorders.

They seem to be looking at Genetics's.

Also i do think changing hair/eye colour ect is a bit vain.
I think it should be simply kept to prevention of medical issues.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 11:19 AM
they're looking at genetics everywhere, wion't take long and your favorite pizza will be found in your genes. it's suspected, much like Autism and they proclaim there's a link and 'risk factors' but never say more, because their links are usually statisic in nature.

call me jaded, i've seen too much snakeoil over time, but how could genetic makeup not influence your odds? we are after all different people with different charakteristics, but the question is whether it's a disease.

if folic acid and nutrition in general help, isn't that a more reasonable approach? genetic diversity is an insurance against unforseen events, if you took sickle cell anemia, would you eradicate it, even though it does help ward off malaria? who would decide what's acceptable and what isn't? on what basis?

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in