Creation of 'three-parent babies' moves closer

Creation of 'three-parent babies' moves closer

www.timesonline.co.uk

The creation of babies with three biological parents has moved closer after a number of monkeys were conceived by a technique that could stop children from inheriting severe genetic diseases.

The modified eggs, containing chromosomes from one female monkey and mitochondria from another, were fertilised by injecting a sperm, and the resulting embryos were transferred to the wombs of surrogate mothers.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
timesonline.typepad.com

I really don't know how this sits with me.

On the one hand it has the potential to help parents conceive children free of genetic diseases.

But on the other, there is something fundamentally sacrosanct about having offspring created by two parents.

Including a third parent, in my eyes is unnatural.

But if it were my unborn baby at risk of developing medical issues, I wonder if I'd be able to ignore my problems with it?

www.timesonline.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Originally posted by kiwifoot


I really don't know how this sits with me.

On the one hand it has the potential to help parents conceive children free of genetic diseases.

But on the other, there is something fundamentally sacrosanct about having offspring created by two parents.

Including a third parent, in my eyes is unnatural.

Have you ever heard of Surrogate Mothers ? They might not be biologically a "parent" to the embryo but they are responsible in the maturation of the embryo. Three humans are involved in that process! This practice has been going on for quite a while now and is totally acceptable in most of the world.

This process merely goes a little further by introducing a third genetic material into the embryo. It is the nature of progress.

In reality, as long as the baby is healthy and has all its faculties intact, parents are not really bothered about the why and the wherefore's .

It is "natural" for a "defective" child to die young and not propagate any more into the gene pool. Thanks to human ingenuity and compassion, these "defective" children grow to be "defective" adults and continue to introduce the "defective" genes they carry for generations. If the first person with defective gene mutation died without passing in on or if an embryos with genetic defects was not allowed to mature, I doubt they would have to resort to such "unnatural" means in the near future. To compensate for the rational of human emotions and sensibilities science has to come up with all kinds of "unnatural" inventions to do what Nature would have done "naturally" !

Originally posted by IAF101

Have you ever heard of Surrogate Mothers ?

Yes of course, but that situation doesn't involve the introduction of genetic material from a third parent.

Nature, life, evolution has based reproduction on two parents, two sets of genetic information, not three.

I respectfully disagree with you, if Nature had intended for there to be three parents, then I'm sure we would have evolved like that.

But I agree, the fact that this could help people and cure some diseases is great, although i still feel that it is 'unnatural'!

I believe the saying is,threes a crowd.
However if it stops sicknesses then it might not be such a bad thing if it makes an immune system stronger.
If I thought having 4 wives and another dude to help would help me live longer and healthier then I think I would give it a try.
I would hate to be the divorce lawyer tho.

reply to post by kiwifoot


You are missing the point.

I agree with you that having genetic material from three people is not natural. However, nature never intended those who will benefit from this new procedure to live long lives either. It was human beings who through medical science sought to keep these genetically deficient people around. So, in order to compensate for their own wants, they have in essence "corrected" nature's deficiencies by introducing a third genetic material.

Modern medicine is not "natural" either. It expands peoples lifespans and perpetuates genetic "deficiencies". But it is considered a good thing and quite natural, just like introducing a third genetic material into an embryo because these are all products of human ingenuity.

Also, the mitochondria is said to have evolved independently outside a cell and then entered a cell millions of years ago to form a state of symbiosis to form the cell we know of today.

reply to post by kiwifoot

On the one hand it has the potential to help parents conceive children free of genetic diseases.

Yeah until the genetic malformities from having three parents start popping up years later.

I think they need to stop messing with the natural order of things already before they make a big mistake and then we'll all be in for a world of trouble.

Research like this is usally started by someone with good intentions (and you know what they say about that) who really wants to help mankind, but there always seems to be someone that comes along with ulterior motives. I just get a bad feeling from this.

I'll have my children the old fashion way whatever genetic problems come along I will deal with them I will not be changing the way our reproduction works.

It may work in the short term but we have no idea what will happen in the long run everything could be fine for the first 1 or 200 years and then stuff starts to happen there is no telling where this might go and I would rather not deal with it.

All these genetic manipulation smells very bad to me, some people already try to create a perfect human by doing some research on genetic manipulation, those people were called NAZI, but in the times we are living in, it seems like they are back and in very good health...


Also would you like to get a child with your eyes, the nose of his father or mother and the face of your neighbour?

Don't know for ya but me I'll say no thanks, especially when I see the face of some of my neighbours

[edit on 8/27/09 by ufopunx]