Baby Born Using 3 Parent Technique

Got some news for ATS! Well, this isn't necessarily new because it has been done before but important, nonetheless. A baby has been born using 3-parents in an effort to limit genetic deficiencies the unborn child might have encountered.

A healthy baby boy has been born after he was conceived using a "three-parent" technique to manipulate his DNA, doctors said Tuesday. Fertility specialists from New York, Cincinnati and Britain did the experimental treatment in Mexico. It has not been approved in the U.S. It has been approved in Britain. It's not the first so-called three-parent baby, but it's the first time modern techniques have resulted in a healthy birth, the doctors said. The mother carries genetic defects known to cause Leigh syndrome, an incurable, progressive disorder in which brain cells gradually die off, causing a range of symptoms. The treatment, in which a second woman's DNA is used to replace the faulty genetic material, is aimed at producing a child free of the disease.

This is exciting and creepy at the same time. I mean, what happens when scientists start merging human and animal DNA? What if genetic advantages are only given to a select few? What about tailor-made babies? Maybe I'm looking too much into this but does anyone see where I'm going with this? What say you, ATS?

www.nbcnews.com...

a reply to: lostbook

If it works I'm all for it.....Also who doesn't want to see real life teenage mutant ninja squirrels and such.
It is helping the gene pool also so yeah .

a reply to: lostbook

I think of the "spiritual" implications this could mean.

For example, an "unnatural" 3-parent baby would probably not have a soul in the eyes of many religions.

(I don't believe that, but I can see how believers of certain dogmas could use this belief to stigmatize such humans)

a reply to: FamCore

How would they ever know, I suppose.

a reply to: FamCore

I figured 3ppl = more soul.

How do these fanatics do math?

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: lostbook

I think of the "spiritual" implications this could mean.

For example, an "unnatural" 3-parent baby would probably not have a soul in the eyes of many religions.

(I don't believe that, but I can see how believers of certain dogmas could use this belief to stigmatize such humans)

By that same logic, people should be stigmatizing invitro children, donor eggs, surrogated kids etc.

We've already left what the Stone Age considers natural far behind.

originally posted by: FamCore
For example, an "unnatural" 3-parent baby would probably not have a soul in the eyes of many religions.

(I don't believe that, but I can see how believers of certain dogmas could use this belief to stigmatize such humans)

Alternatively, a child born of a literal trinity could be worshipped as the second coming of bob ross or something

GMO babies. Just another reason for the other kiddies to bully on the playground.

a reply to: lostbook

What happens when they modify out brown eyes, or brown hair or skin...?

Hitler wanted a blond haired blue eyed race as the master race.

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: lostbook

I think of the "spiritual" implications this could mean.

For example, an "unnatural" 3-parent baby would probably not have a soul in the eyes of many religions.

(I don't believe that, but I can see how believers of certain dogmas could use this belief to stigmatize such humans)

How about the new baby without a Mother, no egg baby made by sperm alone!
news.nationalpost.com...

a reply to: SeaWorthy

How about the new baby without a Mother, no egg baby made by sperm alone!

Well without a doubt, that child will be the newly born Embodiment of the Antichrist.. just as Jesus was born by the Immaculate Mother Mary, the first child to be born of sperm alone would also only have one biological parent and could fit the persona of "all that is evil"

lol, I'm not super religious but my mind does often go to "how would they interpret this?"

Thanks for sharing that article, very interesting stuff going on in the world of science today

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: FamCore

I figured 3ppl = more soul.

How do these fanatics do math?

Then again that 53rd chromosome is bad news for humans more isn't always better

originally posted by: Brotherman

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: FamCore

I figured 3ppl = more soul.

How do these fanatics do math?

Then again that 53rd chromosome is bad news for humans more isn't always better

Chromosome count is unaltered. Still 23 pair of chromosomes in the infant.

a reply to: peter vlar
More isn't always better, hows that?

originally posted by: SeaWorthy

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: lostbook

I think of the "spiritual" implications this could mean.

For example, an "unnatural" 3-parent baby would probably not have a soul in the eyes of many religions.

(I don't believe that, but I can see how believers of certain dogmas could use this belief to stigmatize such humans)

How about the new baby without a Mother, no egg baby made by sperm alone!
news.nationalpost.com...

Wow! That's a thread all its own.