Unnatural selection: How far will parents go?

I'm going to have a Gattaca baby.

This is also part of Evolution.

I'm 21 now and I'm planning to wait with children until germ-line therapy is available against at least a couple of genetic diseases.

Unfortunately, there's going to be a lot of "ethical debate" on this topic.

And as history has shown, the results out of legislature tend to be more draconian and idiotic than enlightened and liberal.

If marijuana was made illegal because of racism towards Mexicans, what do you think will happen with this?

When people are still arguing over whether evolution should be taught in schools, can you imagine what will happen when this sort of technology becomes a real possibility? When parents can literally design their children? There's going to be a huge firestore of controversy, and I don't doubt that some of it will be violent.

Also, as Suzu wisely pointed out, the title of the article is somewhat misleading, as this type of selection is also natural, since, we are all a part of nature. Whatever we do can be viewed as what nature does.

People generally want what's best for their children. So, naturally they will want to give them an advantage where possible. Questions like, "is it moral to make my child smarter" will be difficult to justify. We send them to schools and try to encourage good grades. Most of the girls wear make-up and "enhancing" clothing. Those who need or want to be stronger work out regularly. If there was a device that would make us smarter, or machinery that would make us stronger, or apparel that would make us more beautiful, I guarantee people would take advantage of it without any moral concern. We already do all of this stuff within the boundaries we're given. The difference is that we're manipulating the starting point - thus changing our beginning boundaries.

That's ok, itistoday, because those that oppose such advances will be left behind to suffer from their "natural" inferiorities and should they decide that violence is their only avenue of suppression (which is typical of small minded people) they will quickly be defeated by the superior engineered beings among them.

Their only hope is to make such advancements illegal from the outset, though that will only buy them time, not save them from the inevitable. Take "human cloning" for example... While illegal here in the States, other countries impose no such restrictions on research and development.

There are bound to be "Islands of Dr. Mureau" popping up left and right.

Take this guy for instance: http://en.wikiped...Kurzweil

He's already convinced he's going to live forever regardless of what anyone says.

*Edit: I also agree with Suzu.

Just imagine what would happen if there were no more people of low IQ to sweep the street and clean the toilets - a social disaster!

Gene therapies in clinical trials have been put on hold and people that can take advantage of them are being deprived of medical treatments because people are worried about the eugenic implications of future gene therapies.

The only problem will be the transitional period. The one where there would be some normal people and some enhanced people obviously creating a huge difference and unrest in the population. However after everyone becomes 'enhanced' then there will be no problem (until they find some other atomic gene that gives even more powers)

Bob, I don't believe there will ever be a period when everyone reaches the same level. Take the Amish for example... Certainly the majority will ascend, but you'll always have hold-outs... Unless there's a major catastrophe which only the enhanced can survive.

Let's just start changing our genetics without any real idea about what any thing does... Great idea.

That's like editing the code for a program without knowing the language.

This won't happen for a while, so I wouldn't star worrying about it just yet. It's still fairly hard to perform genetic therapy, let alone genetic engineering. And there are no clear "smarter" traits, or"athletic", since a lot of these deal with the environment just as much as with nature.

I would love to see smarter children. Technological singularity, but with humans instead of A.I.'s? Heck yeah!

Let's just start changing our genetics without any real idea about what any thing does... Great idea.

That's like editing the code for a program without knowing the language.

Perhaps, but what better way to learn? At least we are able to produce as many simpler and sacrificial systems as we wish to learn the vast majority of it. When it comes time to try it on humans, we should have a fairly good idea how the language works.

This won't happen for a while, so I wouldn't star worrying about it just yet.

This is very true. We're still a long ways away from fully understanding genetic code, so Psyleid's worries are unfounded since no one is suggesting that we jump right into this without understanding how it works.

What actually is becoming a closer reality (and what I think will happen first, before we get into DNA manipulation), are cyborgs. In other words, replacing various parts of the body with robotic systems.

Actually, this has already begun (pacemakers, etc.), and it's almost everyday that we hear news of more advanced artificial limbs. Pretty soon they'll be good enough to act as an upgrade. :-)

In fact, I remember reading just the other day about a skier (or snowboarder) who had to have surgery to replace some sort of tendon or muscle with an artificial one, and actually ended up performing better than she had previously. Anyone know what I'm talking about and have a link?

Best guesses seem to place this technology as feasible around 2018-23, even if it's not approved by the FDA for a long time after that. That is only 9-14 years away--not long at all.
Once it's doable, several scenarios seem likely. One is people will start showing up wanting their embroyo's tested for this or that set of sequences' presence/absence. Something like that is already happening in testing for various genetic problems. This just enhances the specificity of the process by using sequencing information available off the web. That way the FDA is cut out of the approval loop, doctors can duck ethical or FDA questions and essentially act as contractors saying: 'Yes, the sequence is present' or 'No it's not there.' At that point it's all on the parents with the doctors not only out of the loop, but prevented by malpractice considerations from playing around with the process. Alternatively; parents just test embroyos until they get some that work 'right' and replicate them. I can also see a healthy black or grey market developing in guaranteed quality embroyos for implantation.
I'm betting the human desire of parents for smart, beautiful, psychologically and physically disease free kids will overwhelm any FDA or governmental restrictions or attempts at restricting this technology. I suspect only a tiny minority, mostly fundamentalist or deeply conservative, would want anything else. How could a mere government keep people from fulfilling so fundamental a want?

When it comes to looking forward on topics like these, I find the Deus Ex games to be good inspiration. Aside from treating the genome as sacrosanct, the other major qualm against GE is of commodifying ability and creating a self-perpetuating aristocracy. The privileged invest in these advances for their children, who will then be better able to invest in more advances.

Ah, but has anyone though of viral modification of our commensal bacteria? Imagine if you could improve them too! Improved nutrient processing efficiency, photosynthetic augmentation, added immune system functions... the list goes on. The bacteria on and inside you outnumber you 10 to 1... we should consider tuning them up first. (Also, we are way closer to complete working knowledge where their genomes are concerned.)

Regardless, I agree with (I think) all of the above posters. We don't need to worry about this right NOW, the government is NOT going to be able to stop it when it does come.

Come to think of it, I think you'll be seeing nanotech working in the human augmentation process much sooner than biotech.

Come to think of it, I think you'll be seeing nanotech working in the human augmentation process much sooner than biotech.

I wouldn't back that horse so quickly. We've only spent 25 years with the genome, and most of that was spent figuring out what it was. The innovations comming out with our first line technology were fast and furious, we're now starting to refine that, wait until we see what the next level of tech is.

If anything the two will probably be married long before any of us know about it's capabilities.