GMO to a delivery room near you...

sucks2beme

We have more than enough things already to end the human race.
Pick one. The bomb for instance. We already have the means to end all life.
I don't think this is going to be quite as big a threat as that is.
Most likely it's going to be the playtoy of the rich and powerful.
The poor will still have lots of babies the old fashioned way,and in big numbers.
Genetic testing is already been deployed, so you're way too late with that warning.

Syndil

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Movies are for fun... history is where you find the real scary crap. Funny that you quote me on everything else in your replies, but when I actually produce historical precedent to support my healthy skepticism of the benevolent nature of science, you completely ignore it.

I ignored it because it was a horrible example. There were all kinds of horrendous things that happened as a result of Hitler's **** Germany. Science and technology was not the cause of these bad things happening--it was the people in charge.

I do not fear new discovery, nor do I really fear GMO for the most part. I do not trust anyone, given history's lessons and repeated examples of what happens when one acquires far too much power, to use that power in a beneficial way. To me there is no more ABSOLUTE POWER than the power to manipulate and control the very structure of life itself.

Someday perhaps my genome or my (or your) child's genome will be determined as "undesirable" and they will be sterilized at birth and prevented from reproducing, or worse, forced termination of that pregnancy. It already happens in places like China... is that a road we want to go down?

Again, one does not lead to the other. There are so many leaps (or dives, as it may be) in social structure that would have to take place before anything like this nightmare occurs. If something like **** Germany were to rise again, then yes, maybe something like that will happen. But if something like **** Germany does rise again, the manipulating of DNA for nefarious purposes or sterilizing children at birth would be the least of our worries.

Pursuing the technology is not going to suddenly create another **** Germany, which is the fear you seem to be unable to overcome.

nooshinjohn

Syndil wrote: »

Pursuing the technology is not going to suddenly create another **** Germany, which is the fear you seem to be unable to overcome.

This technology won't give rise to rogue states, but it may give rogue individuals new tools to play with. There are way to many nutjobs out there for me to believe that at least a few won't see some other potential.

As an example, there are fringe elements within the climate change community that believe the earth can only sustain 300 million or so humans at any given time, and even then, that existence should be confined to a land mass no bigger than the state of Texas... the rest of the planet should be allowed to return to a "natural" environment. This kind of genetic manipulation COULD(not will as I am no prophet) give these insane people the power and the tools to bring this to pass.

I have a great deal of faith in humanity and all it's flawed, unique diversity. When will we realize that genetic perfection is not and never should be a goal. The goal should be to become better souls.

BlueFox

nooshinjohn wrote: »

This technology won't give rise to rogue states, but it may give rogue individuals new tools to play with. There are way to many nutjobs out there for me to believe that at least a few won't see some other potential.

It will. The issue is, will we be ready?

As an example, there are fringe elements within the climate change community that believe the earth can only sustain 300 million or so humans at any given time, and even then, that existence should be confined to a land mass no bigger than the state of Texas... the rest of the planet should be allowed to return to a "natural" environment. This kind of genetic manipulation COULD(not will as I am no prophet) give these insane people the power and the tools to bring this to pass.

This is just politics.

I have a great deal of faith in humanity and all it's flawed, unique diversity. When will we realize that genetic perfection is not and never should be a goal. The goal should be to become better souls.

So do I. To me, our genetics and 'soul' are interrelated. How much depends on the individual. It seems reasonable to think if our bodies improve then our minds will also improve, and the mind is what determines the person you are. At least in my mind.

tonyb

Playing God never quite turns out the way intended. If technologies can reduce or limit certain diseases, cool......but as with everything great power demands great responsibility. Who do you trust with such power ? Who's to say in the wrong hands this opens the door to creating one "master" race and one "slave " race ? Hmm....seems I heard that before somewhere.

My other thought is, if you cure certain diseases by way of technologies, mother nature has a way of churning out a few more with no cure, newer diseases. Mother nature always finds a way to balance things out or even eliminate problematic species. Every DNA has a time span built in regardless of what you do. Some of this may result in a better quality life, which also may result in the best looking corpses we will ever see.

The other thing to note is, no species continues without a birth rate higher than a death rate. How exactly does that equation work out if we keep trying to save some from death, but also limit births by killing the young ? It doesn't work, and for the first time here, births are now less than the amount of people kicking the bucket.

BTW Fox, it's not politics what John stated. There are nutjobs who really believe that and are in positions of power all over the globe. They even talk openly about it, have organizations who strive for it.

obieone

"Embracing technology for the betterment of mankind"...

nooshinjohn

“A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95 percent decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

Google this statement and do some homework. These experiments in Britain are nothing more than the new face of "Eugenics".

tonyb

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Google this statement and do some homework. These experiments in Britain are nothing more than the new face of "Eugenics".

Can you say George Bernard Shaw ?

Seriously, if folks ever care to do some research on history and how that correlates to today, you may understand some of what you see today. Most probably won't though, it takes some effort in a world made up of 60 second sound bites.

tonyb

You do have to laugh a bit at this though too. If your going to screw around with DNA, make me look like an Italian soccer player with junk the size of Johnny Holmes.

nooshinjohn

would it take much for a certain GMO food to trigger a GMO marker embedded in a human being to effectively shut that person off(kill) at a prescribed time without fear of a disease spreading further than the intended victim?

Sounds like extreme paranoia, I agree. All I am saying is do you trust complete strangers to have nothing but the best interests of humanity in mind as they go about playing with the most powerful tools in the universe? Who is paying for this research, and how do the various parallel fields of research fit together? What connection do they have to each other and where do they lead. Who benefits and who gains? The most important question? Who Loses???

Trust no one...

nooshinjohn

tonyb wrote: »

You do have to laugh a bit at this though too. If your going to screw around with DNA, make me look like an Italian soccer player with junk the size of Johnny Holmes.

LOL... I could go for a bit of Harrison Ford in his mid to late 30's with all the talent of Garth Brooks and John Lennon combined.:cheesygrin:

tonyb

So John, you want to be a pot smoking country western singer that looks like Harrison Ford ? :cheesygrin:

You can do better my friend....

sucks2beme

tonyb wrote: »

So John, you want to be a pot smoking country western singer that looks like Harrison Ford ? :cheesygrin:

You can do better my friend....

But that's where the fun is....

DMara

tonyb wrote: »

My other thought is, if you cure certain diseases by way of technologies, mother nature has a way of churning out a few more with no cure, newer diseases. Mother nature always finds a way to balance things out or even eliminate problematic species. Every DNA has a time span built in regardless of what you do. Some of this may result in a better quality life, which also may result in the best looking corpses we will ever see.

The other thing to note is, no species continues without a birth rate higher than a death rate. How exactly does that equation work out if we keep trying to save some from death, but also limit births by killing the young ? It doesn't work, and for the first time here, births are now less than the amount of people kicking the bucket.

Have you noticed human population has increased exponentially continuously? So which way do you want to go? Allowing birth rate to be higher than death rate forever while waiting for mother nature to wipe a bunch off the face of the earth to "balance things out"? Or just go ahead and find a way to kill each other off to please mother nature so that she'll calm down?
How many more human heads can the earth accept before it runs out of resources?
Should we look for other livable planets? And since they are millions of light years away, how will we transport our people there? Of course, via science & technology, and maybe modern medicine will continue to increase our average lifespan so that we have more time to travel there.
I have no dog in this fight. How to worry less is the way I'd like to enjoy this short life

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Trust no one...

Well, I'd rather trust a lot of people, then weed out the bad throughout my years, than live a life without trusting anybody

I truly believe in the human spirit. Our history has proven we have gone through a lot, and we're still standing tall as king of the earth. I believe anything bad happened will be conquered by our spirit. When it ends, it ends; nothing more or less to worry my @ss off.

tonyb

I think some are reading too deep into what John or I were saying. Let me see if I can do better and John can correct me if I stray too far.

First, many believe in letting nature take it's course and some things should just not be fooled with. Yes, DNA manipulation probably has a place in science/medicine no doubt about that. Sure would be nice to cure some diseases, anyone with a sick child would attest to that.

The "trust" problem John and I both have is based on history and even current events. You can cure diseases, change the landscape, even the face of the human species, but unless you change the inherit characteristics of man, none of this will matter much in the long run. Man is capable of doing great good, or great evil. When you look around today globally, which part of man do you see winning ? Given the latest headlines, is it not safe to say trust is an issue just in our country ?

For me, not speaking for John here, we need to work on the inside first. We need to learn to take care of one another as a species instead of constantly looking for ways to conquer one another. Once we do that we move ahead on the evolution scale. Otherwise we just reduce ourselves to trained dogs, fighting each other for what our masters tell us. So yeah, you can manipulate DNA for some good, but will that just result in better, more healthier trained dogs ? Unless we learn to stop fighting one another, death will always have it's place on this planet no matter how you manipulate DNA. I know, that's kinda putting the cart before the horse, but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to see the possibilities, both good and bad. I don't fear technical advancement, I fear the men who will eventually control it.

As far as man still being "king of the earth".....given what, our 100,000 track record which maybe 5,000 years is even worth mentioning ? We have yet to be around long enough to take that title. Doubt we will too. Many other species have lasted millions of years, we seem to be having troubles just in the last 200 or so. Mother earth has a way of cleansing itself and the human species isn't as durable as you may think. If it wasn't for a few caves in southern Africa during the last ice age we may have very well been gone.

tonyb

Dmara,

We are not too far apart on this my friend. Other parts of the globe are increasing sure, and I get your equation on birth/death rates, resources etc. I agree, we as a species can't stay on this one planet forever, not if we want to be around in a thousand years anyway. But who is looking, who is proposing funds to develop technologies to allow us to move off this planet ? Nobody.....that I see anyway. I like to call it "captive consumerism". Isn't that what it really is ?

mrbigbluelight

tonyb wrote:

Otherwise we just reduce ourselves to trained dogs, fighting each other for what our masters tell us. So yeah, you can manipulate DNA for some good, but will that just result in better, more healthier trained dogs ?

Bingo, with a capital "B".

"Some" governments have shown they have been, and are, very manipulative in affairs around the globe. IMO, the results have been less than stellar.
With dealing with DNA manipulation, the results have to be stellar. No room for error. Previous results show that we have a reason for great concern.

nooshinjohn

Nice summation Tony. When our potential for nobility far surpasses our insane desire to manipulate and destroy will we be ready for the power to manipulate life. Even then, I have my doubts, as all it takes is one lunatic with a Napoleon complex and the burning desire to become God to toss all that is noble and good into the fires of his own greed and all bets are off.

For some reason, the most vile and evil of men seem at first to be driven by the most benevolent desires, and a desire to build a better world, and each time they become consumed by their darker nature. So singular in their focus on the end game that they fail to see the destruction they have brought about.

We can never allow ourselves to live by the mantra "the ends justify the means". If we go down that path, He'll will not be far behind. When a guy says that 95% of humanity must be killed off to save the planet, and he is able to find an audience of like minded crazy people and billions of dollars to play with... We still live in the dark ages when it comes to what resides in the hearts of men and yet we want to play with our mitochondrial DNA. If there is a God, he is either laughing at our stupidity or crying over our arrogance. Either one is not good.

Syndil

This whole thread reminds me of just about any thread anywhere discussing RFID. A whole lot of FUD from people who don't understand what they're talking about; very little logic to base an intelligent discussion on.

Out-of-control governments, mad scientists, yada yada... Those are entirely separate topics from the technology. Just about any technology can be used for good or evil. We can use rockets to explore the universe, or we can use rockets to nuke our neighbors. So, should rockets have never been invented, just to avoid that possibility? I don't know how to put it more simply than that.

nooshinjohn

Syndil wrote: »

This whole thread reminds me of just about any thread anywhere discussing RFID. A whole lot of FUD from people who don't understand what they're talking about; very little logic to base an intelligent discussion on..

My wife is a published Doctor of Pharmaceutics from Purdue University and holds a Master's in microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics from UCLA. I am confident I have picked up enough from her to have some credibility here. If I don't understand the concepts, I just as her...

According to her, there are way to many variables here for them to simply cut and paste specific genes because each one has a unique impact on the rest of the chain. Even if a child is successfully carried to term and is born live, the potential for far more defects that the ones prevented will still exist, with the possibility that they may not manifest for years. Ethically, she feels that his goes so far beyond where we stand technically, that due to the risks involved, nobody should be attempting this for a very long time...

Syndil wrote: »

Out-of-control governments, mad scientists, yada yada... Those are entirely separate topics from the technology. Just about any technology can be used for good or evil. We can use rockets to explore the universe, or we can use rockets to nuke our neighbors. So, should rockets have never been invented, just to avoid that possibility? I don't know how to put it more simply than that.

Seriously? Who do you think is PAYING for the research? Keep in mind that some of the very people that got us to the moon were some of the most vile scientists ever to put on a labcoat. They just happened to be scooped out of Berlin before the Russians showed up. As thanks for their hard work, they were given new names and asylum here and others that weren't so helpful ended up as notches on the belts of the Massad.

The bottom line for me is I understand history and the manner in which it tends to repeat itself. I don't need a PHD in Physics to know which way those winds blow.

Syndil

You have a very bleak worldview which I do not share. In fact it offends my sensibilities, as it suggests (or at least hints at) that humanity is inherently evil. I believe the direct opposite. Of course, depending on your religion, that may be to be expected.

nooshinjohn

Syndil wrote: »

You have a very bleak worldview which I do not share. In fact it offends my sensibilities, as it suggests (or at least hints at) that humanity is inherently evil. I believe the direct opposite. Of course, depending on your religion, that may be to be expected.

On the contrary... I have great hope for humanity and I do not believe we as a species are inherently evil. Quite the opposite actually, as there are so many things which are quite stunning in their ability to change our lives for the better. All I am trying to point out is that of the 6 billion people currently calling this hunk of rock home, all it takes is a relative handful to try and screw things up for everybody else, and that history is replete with examples of exactly that.

Remember that the first thought of harnessing atomic power had nothing to do with ships, electricity, medical research and treatment... it was to blow things up. And when fission wasn't powerful enough, they went for fusion. That one we still can't figure out how to use for anything else except to power a Delorean time machine in the movies.

As far as the world-view goes... look at what is happening around the globe. Can you honestly say that the world is a safe place to be playing with the power of God?(for lack of an appropriate term)

Syndil

It was not to "blow things up;" it was to end WW2, saving countless Japanese and American lives in the process.

When you consider that humanity has been in the possession of the absolute power required to wipe out all life on this planet for several decades now, I fail to see the justification for the magnitude of your reaction. I also do not see the justification for comparing this technology to "the power of God."

BlueFox

nooshinjohn wrote: »

As far as the world-view goes... look at what is happening around the globe. Can you honestly say that the world is a safe place to be playing with the power of God?(for lack of an appropriate term)

The more appropriate term, or phrase, is learning and understanding how the universe works. It is true that as we learn it is possible to destroy everything. I seem to remember one concern regarding the Large Hadron Collider was it might create a Black Hole which would consume the Earth, Moon, Mars, Sun, etc. Where do we draw the line as to what is acceptable, and what isn't?

tonyb

Good points Syndil, but lets remind ourselves that the absolute power to destroy ourselves, the nuke, has always been in somewhat sane hands world wide. Only used as a deterrent, never really for actual use. That is until now....when countries like Iran, North Korea, and others headed up by some serious nutjobs who no doubt would pull the trigger. Why do you think the rest of the world is sanctioning these nations ?

We can go down the laundry list of technologies used for good or evil, but the common denominator in every single instance is man himself. The good in man needs to heavily outweigh the bad before bestowing such powers and trust. That may come some day, but that day isn't today, nor for the foreseeable future. No, I'm not saying to halt all tech advancements either, just that safeguards need to be in place and damn good ones.

nooshinjohn

Syndil wrote: »

It was not to "blow things up;" it was to end WW2, saving countless Japanese and American lives in the process..

While the necessity of using Fat Man and Little Boy to end WWII can be debated( the Japanese were desperately seeking terms of peace as early as late 1944 in Switzerland) there is no doubt that their creation was driven by the desire to have the ultimate weapon of destruction, which was my point to begin with.

It is also worth repeating that the genesis of DNA research and using it to create better humans comes out of the Eugenics movements of the early 1900's. These movements were led by some of the ugliest souls ever to take a breath of air. Margaret Sanger for one, should be vilified for her actions, but is instead a hero. The same goes for countless others that champion these sadistic views of their fellow humans.

Test-tube babies... I am very cool with that. Helping nature along and doing a good thing in the process is a benefit to all. Manipulating nature and using it to create a human life (cloning for example) from something that could not develop naturally is something else.

Syndil

tonyb wrote: »

We can go down the laundry list of technologies used for good or evil, but the common denominator in every single instance is man himself.

This has been my point from the beginning. Guns don't kill people, and neither does DNA manipulation.

I say let the technology develop. It obviously is not in the hands of nutjobs at the moment. If it ever gets to that point, we will deal with it when/if that time comes, as we always have.

Currently we are keeping a close eye on the nutjobs trying to make nukes, and you can bet there will be a price to pay should they be allowed to succeed. Personally I see a lot of posturing for the sake of propagandizing their own people, but they know what will happen should they actually produce irrefutable evidence of nuclear testing. Depending on whom you ask in the States, Iraq may have been a failure, but it serves as a grave reminder to anyone foolish enough to "get serious" about weapons of mass destruction. The message goes something like this: "We don't even need hard proof that they exist to grind your government into dust, so you'd better watch your step, unless you are prepared to be 'Westernized.'"

So there is no need to panic and give this new technology an abortion before we even realize what its potential may be. And as I see it, the potential for this new technology is greater than that of vaccines. Treatments are fine, but prevention is ideal. And what better way to prevent a genetic disorder than to delete it from our genome.

Also consider that, at this very moment, roughly 8% of the DNA in each one of the cells in your body is leftover junk from various viruses. Viruses have been "experimenting" with our genome since humans first walked the earth, and they certainly haven't kept our well-being in mind when doing so.

tonyb

Which goes back to my point, Viruses is Mother Natures way of limiting those species it wants to. Cure one, another will pop up. Really not much more to discuss here. We've all stated our thoughts on it, doesn't mean anyone has to be right or wrong. I just wonder if the technology advances to a state that we are literally making humans to order, who will place any safeguards ? The same people abusing the technology ? There in lies the problem from where I sit anyway.

Then again, you can ask those same questions about lots of things. Who's responsible for the countries safety ? The same ones putting us at risk ? Who's responsible for enforcing the rule of law ? The same ones breaking those laws ? I could go on, but it's an elite class looking to dominate by hook or crook everyone else. The pattern is always the same, history tells us so. The faces change, the agendas remain the same.....and the sales pitch is always for your benefit somehow. How stupid are we to keep swallowing the same song and dance generation after generation ?