Build-a-baby!

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: duack  Some people are so open minded they contradict themselves. Besides, just about every developed country has its own secret police and the main point of this is to stop terrorists and drug dealers from getting away. 

Also, manticore said this...

Ah, the one racial term no one seems to complain about. How is it a 'honky' nose, compared to a, um, never mind... quote>

I don't get it.

quote>

If you're not from the US, you may not know that 'honky' is a racial slur for white people.

[fukuda 351]

Bad if you can decide whether Junior is going to be the star basketball player or not.quote>

So I guess in the future it's all going to be about the people with money engennering a child that will grow up to have alot of money also and people that live in poor countries don't stand a chance.quote>

Being a star basketball player or a rich guy is not hardcoded in people's genes. There are traits that depend almost completely on the genotype (DNA), like having brown eyes or curly hair. And other traits that depend almost completely on the phenotype (environment), like being a star basketball player or being rich. It 's for instance useless for you to be a very intelligent person if you can't get the education to use it or the familiar environment to be able to train it.

Thats what God gave you.quote>

I'd rather leave that up to God quote>

I didn't know god intervened in meiosis

Its almost impossible for something to "appear later" because all genes ever do is multiply themselves, and produce amino acids using the same process every time.quote>

No. There's something called gene regulation in the way. There's a reason why cells can differentiate into different types and why there are parts of the body that appear later or at a different rythm (mature gonads for instance). Portions of the ADN chains are blocked by several mechanisms and cannot be transcribed into proteins (proteins are the blocks of life, instead of amino acids, DNA cannot produce amino-acids) unless they receive a signal to be un-blocked(or not).

So your genes actually change throughout your life, and Im not too sure but I think this is one of the reasons the risk of birth defects is higher in older women, because your genes are slowly mutating.quote>

While the DNA of any cell mutates, only the mutations into the germ cells are important to the entire body, as all the cells descend from the zygote. If a gene of a given body cell mutates, the effect of this mutation is silenced by all its companion cells (unless it becomes a cancer!) and won't pass into the offspring.

Personally, I'd say it would take a lot of the fun out of having kids.quote>

Completely agreed

Seriously, we're still far away from "kid engineering".... This kind of sensationalist news have been around for several years. So yes, you can (even if I'm not completely sure about it) choose what colour will be the hair of your children, but did you choose your own hair colour? If these parents are so shallow about their child's hair, they'll just dye it anyway

The part about the medic applications is the most interesting and useful one IMO

---------------- Off-Topic --------------------

simple like obesity; increase the body's natural level of metabolism. quote>

Even if I wouldn't call obesity a simple thing, there may be non-genetic ways to stimulate metabolism, like using intermediate metabolites. An increased metabolism can be quite annoying if you can't control it.

About all the totalitarian talking, there's something I don't understand.. There are way cheaper and "easier" ways to fulfill their goals, all already tested several times... A modern totalitarian regime usually only lasts as long as the leader lives and then goes downhill until it falls apart, that can be as long as only one generation

[Jezus53 18]

Originally posted by: fukuda

About all the totalitarian talking, there's something I don't understand.. There are way cheaper and "easier" ways to fulfill their goals, all already tested several times... A modern totalitarian regime usually only lasts as long as the leader lives and then goes downhill until it falls apart, that can be as long as only one generationquote>

True, but if you get a group of leaders instead of just one leader, then theoretically, when one of them dies, the spot can be filled with someone the rest feels suited to fill that place. I don't know why they never did that before **cough**greed**cough**, but it would've made complete logically sense to divide it to provide a more stable government, and one that would be harder to destroy. But that's another topic.

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: duack

Also, manticore said this...

Ah, the one racial term no one seems to complain about. How is it a 'honky' nose, compared to a, um, never mind... quote>

I don't get it.

quote>

 

He is making the assumption that you were using American slang.  However, seeing as how you live down under,  you are probably not aware of the slang in question.

Correct me if I'm wrong but when you said you "Everyone in my family has a honky nose", I believe you meant that your nose was larger or more prominent than you would like it to be.

manticorefan heard the slang term "honky", which is a derogatory term for a Caucasian person.

Slang is not universal and it's easy to trip on it during international conversations.

 

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: SkiGeek Caucasian person.quote>

Personally, I hate the term "Caucasian".

I mean, where I'm from is nowhere near Caucasus. The vast majority of "Caucasian" people are from nowhere near Caucasus. How the hell did they come up with that one? Wouldn't "European" make a lot more sense if "white" is too politically incorrect?

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: Duke87

 

Originally posted by: SkiGeek Caucasian person.quote>

Personally, I hate the term "Caucasian".

I mean, where I'm from is nowhere near Caucasus. The vast majority of "Caucasian" people are from nowhere near Caucasus. How the hell did they come up with that one? Wouldn't "European" make a lot more sense if "white" is too politically incorrect?quote>

You have an excellent point.

But not all Europeans are white.

but that discussion could go on for days.

[Patricius Maximus 236]

About all the totalitarian talking, there's something I don't understand.. There are way cheaper and "easier" ways to fulfill their goals, all already tested several times... A modern totalitarian regime usually only lasts as long as the leader lives and then goes downhill until it falls apart, that can be as long as only one generationquote>

True, but what I am worrying about is, once taking power, the regime would design all children to be indifferent or subservient to the government. While they oppress the older ones, that would give them time to die off, leaving only the children that were designed.

I concede this is an unlikely scenario, but it is one way to potentially perpetuate a totalitarian government.

Being a star basketball player or a rich guy is not hardcoded in people's genes. There are traits that depend almost completely on the genotype (DNA), like having brown eyes or curly hair. And other traits that depend almost completely on the phenotype (environment), like being a star basketball player or being rich.quote>

Not exactly. Genetics do not control everything, but, which is more likely to be a star basketball player: a short, chubby person, or a tall, thin person with a high metabolism? The answer is obvious. Wealth has more to do with environment, but it is often correlated with intelligence. Ever hear of a dumb person running a Ponzi scheme or being a successful CEO? No.

It 's for instance useless for you to be a very intelligent person if you can't get the education to use it or the familiar environment to be able to train it.quote>

Not precisely. Intelligence can show itself in other ways than simply education. If that idea were true, almost no prominent scientist throughout history would have arisen! We are not that dependent on state-run schools. History demonstrates that.

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

About all the totalitarian talking, there's something I don't understand.. There are way cheaper and "easier" ways to fulfill their goals, all already tested several times... A modern totalitarian regime usually only lasts as long as the leader lives and then goes downhill until it falls apart, that can be as long as only one generationquote>

True, but what I am worrying about is, once taking power, the regime would design all children to be indifferent or subservient to the government. While they oppress the older ones, that would give them time to die off, leaving only the children that were designed.

I concede this is an unlikely scenario, but it is one way to potentially perpetuate a totalitarian government.

quote>

But you don't need genetic engineering to achieve that. People have been doing it for centuries. Lets face it, humanity already has all the tools it needs to create and maintain totalitarian regimes, and knows how to use them. Indifference and subservience are easily cultivated without having to alter a single gene. Even a free society is at risk, as many people don't care about an issue until it directly affects them and by then its usually too late. This makes the average and reasonable viewpoints vulnerable to fewer but more active and committed extreme viewpoints. In this way even in the most democratic systems you could see radical or repressive policies inserted by stealth. People who have freedoms tend to take them for granted (especially if they are not the first generation to have them) and are at risk of losing them if they don't keep fending off those who would take those freedoms away.

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

Ever hear of a dumb person running a Ponzi scheme or being a successful CEO? No.quote>

Unfortunately yes.

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

This can only be good. So far, the only negatives I've heard are examples from fiction novels, and perhaps that extrememly boring movie "gataca". But in reality, the advantages are enourmous and the disadvantages almost non-existant.quote>

Ah, but these fiction novels that I have mentioned serve as a warning: a warning to prevent the rise of totalitarian regimes in your city, state, or region.

quote>

Yes and I agree these should serve as a warning we should heed. Its generally better to explore the consequences of an issue through fiction than to deal with the unfortunate consequences of a real event. Movies and books are important in getting people to consider issues and their consequences, even if the movies aren't necessarily factually accurate.

Originally posted by: hym

Second, the NSA doesn't spy on every citizen. It neither has the resources nor the technology to make such a concept feasible.quote>

Somewhat off the point you were actually making and still on the movie theme, an effective totalitarian regime doesn't need to. Usually they set it up so the citizens spy on and dob in each other.  Most people have probably seen this genre.

Originally posted by: Explodingsims

Well, this sounds like a slippery slope. While it might start out as a good idea, you just know someones going to use this against us.quote>

That's true of anything. But a society can't sit around and not take on new ideas and technologies that have a considerable benefit as opposed to a smaller risk of misuse (and I'm not saying that this is necessarily one of those things). Its a matter of weighing up the relative value and consequences, being aware of the risks and making safeguards and preparations to deal with those should it become necessary.

[fukuda 351]

Not precisely. Intelligence can show itself in other ways than simply education. If that idea were true, almost no prominent scientist throughout history would have arisen! We are not that dependent on state-run schools. History demonstrates that.quote>

Education means education, I never said anything about being state-run, private or at home. How many prominent scientists received no education at all? Bohr, Schr

[Patricius Maximus 236]

Not so obvious if that given person is lazy, not very socially talented or hates basketball. Not everything is written in DNA, 100 years ago people believed in the total plasticity of the human brain and that with education everyone could become anything, now it seems that people believes in the total control of genes over personality. It's as always an oversimplification of the issue at hand... quote>

What I was trying to get at is there are more basketball players that are tall and thin than short and chubby. You place too much weight to the environment for dictating personality or intelligence. Since intelligence often runs in families, there logically must be a genetic component to it. 

Education means education, I never said anything about being state-run, private or at home. How many prominent scientists received no education at all? Bohr, Schrödinger, De Vries, Hawking, De Broglie, Dalton, Newton, Lorentz, Laplace, Curie and even Einstein all did receive an education.. quote>

Ah, yes. I thought you meant today's universal education system. But many prominent scientists and inventors recieved little or no formal education: just look at Thomas Edison or John Dalton. Dalton started running a school at age 15, yet went to no school (to my knowledge).

However, I said that intelligence can be used in other ways even without any education. That is true. What about the first proto-humans to build a fire? They recieved no education, yet used their intelligence to unleash a revolution in technology.

People aren't born intelligent, intelligence changes over time as the mind is trained or not, you can't make someone intelligent just by swapping 2 genes, as you can't build a pro basketball star too.quote>

You cannot take an average baby, "train" them and make them into geniuses with IQ's of 150 without there being a genetic predisposition towards being intelligent. It simply cannot and does not happen. I recognize that genetics does not dictate everything, but environment doe s not dictate everything either. It is the combination of genetics and environment that produce a person's characteristics. I personally think from my experience that it is usually more nature than nurture that dictates a person.

[fukuda 351]

Patricius, I'm not denying the effect of genotype, I'm just warning about the oversimplification of issues. The visible effects of DNA aren't only dictated by genes, or better said, genes aren't the only functional part of the genome. Genes are only the protein-coding part of the mechanism, what dictates how and where genes are expressed are the gene-regulating regions, which, unlike the genes, ain't completely mapped yet.

It's way too early to start talking about modifying the personality of people. Even funnier, genes are more tricky than what most people think. For instance, depending on the reading frame you use, the same gene could code an enzyme that increases production of a nerve signaling factor ("increasing" intelligence) or a membrane factor that alters your nose's shape, seemingly distant genes are really intertwined so tightly that they couldn't be separated to be modified differently. Needless to say that what humans consider "beautiful" could be actually harmful for the body, ask the anorexic people or the chinese women...

Furthermore, people aren't only their DNA, while it determines the major part of things, people are also what they live. This is almost the only thing that separates us from the rest of the actual animals, thanks to our brain neoteny we are relatively able to build systems, concepts and thoughts that would be hardcoded in other animals. You may want to build superhumans, but a more or less small part of them will be different no matter what you code themselves to be

[Patricius Maximus 236]

Patricius, I'm not denying the effect of genotype, I'm just warning about the oversimplification of issues.quote>

Thanks for that clarification. I agree on that point.

Even funnier, genes are more tricky than what most people think. For instance, depending on the reading frame you use, the same gene could code an enzyme that increases production of a nerve signaling factor ("increasing" intelligence) or a membrane factor that alters your nose's shape, seemingly distant genes are really intertwined so tightly that they couldn't be separated to be modified differently.quote>

They sure are tricky. I never cease to be interested in the unintended consequences of modifying a bodily function. For instance, the same bone drug that stops bones from shedding actually inhibits a healthy process, and the bones rot anyway. More knowledge of gene functions are needed before anything remotely resembling a designer baby can be created.

Needless to say that what humans consider "beautiful" could be actually harmful for the body, ask the anorexic people or the chinese women... quote>

Yes, many things humans consider beautiful are harmful to the body. Others are not.