Doctors in the US have become the first to treat a baby with a customised gene-editing therapy after diagnosing the child with a severe genetic disorder that kills about half of those affected in early infancy.
KJ was born with severe CPS1 deficiency, a condition that affects only one in 1.3 million people. Those affected lack a liver enzyme that converts ammonia, from the natural breakdown of proteins in the body, into urea so it can be excreted in urine. This causes a build-up of ammonia that can damage the liver and other organs, such as the brain.
Writing in the New England Journal of Medicine, the doctors described the painstaking process of identifying the specific mutations behind KJ’s disorder, designing a gene-editing therapy to correct them, and testing the treatment and fatty nanoparticles needed to carry it into the liver. The therapy uses a powerful procedure called base editing which can rewrite the DNA code one letter at a time.
I did not have Gattaca on my bingo card…
Great for the kid, though. I wish them a long and prosperous life.
the trumpists are attempting eugenics the old fashioned way, gattaca would be an upgrade
Yeah I don’t see how this won’t happen now. As soon as parents are given the option to prevent systemic genetic diseases like congenital blindness, the next question will be, “do you want them to be a bit smarter?” Very few parents are going to say no.
The problem is intelligence doesn’t automatically mean better life, especially not in a country like the US.
Well, if the parents are affluent enough to pay for a non-curative genetic editing I’d say that’ll help.
In a sane society genetics would mean zero difference in average QOL outcome…
It is the single greatest correlate for life outcomes. Higher income, longer lifespan, lower addiction, higher employment, higher wealth, lower crime, better physical health on every metric, and lower rates of fatherlessness. These effects all compound the next generation too. There is nothing else in sociology which comes even close to IQ in predicting life outcomes. Not income, race, location, education, or fatherlessness.
Of course nothing guarantees a “better” life.
Well that’s just bullshit and I looked it up to be sure it was.
Income is the best life outcome. I did find that high IQ is more correlated with depression and suicide however.
Did you look it up on Instagram? Which part is bullshit? Be specific so I know which evidence you’d like me to produce.
Let’s start with income. Here are dozens and dozens of citations showing that IQ is the single most important correlate for income. Do you know what income is highly correlated with? Low crime, high employment, long life span, better health, and a hundred other important quality of life factors. Are you disputing that too?
I’m not sure if you don’t understand what I’m writing or if we’re talking past each other. To put it plainly, IQ is the single greatest determinant of income. Income is one of the (and arguably the) greatest determinant of a host of other life outcomes.
… Did you read your own link?
Not only are mostly all of the “citations” (hyperlinks) to this random website you linked just news articles (many of which don’t have actual citations or referenced research papers that are from the 21st century, or are articles from the 20th century), but some are heavily biased (quoting Jeff Bezos in the Washington Post, which he owns).
Even the website auther themselves sometimes admit to their flawed analysis, such as equating SAT scores to IQ rather than an actual IQ test. Quote:
Or here, quoted:
But most damming of all, is that this whole weird blog website is talking about a correlation between income and IQ, NOT that IQ determines income.
Correlation isn’t causation. And it’s no surprise that people who can go to good schools, don’t have to worry about food, etc, do better on a test, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they are inherently biologically more intelligent.
It’s sad how true this is. Seems like a lot of dumb people out there having a good time.
The catastrophe will be when we realize yet again that the human genome is not like a config file.
It’ll take at least a generation for Gattaca to be in full swing
Based on what? The US discussing legalising genetic experimentation for military uses is the pathway to Gattaca.
Not saying you’re wrong, curious about your time-line
Just a general timeline for technology to become ubiquitous. Starts small, for the rich or “for nerds”; begins to take over, now seen as “normal”; eventually you’re the weird one for not having it.
Microwave ovens & the Internet are the two I can think of in my lifetime, I’d say an average of about 20 years for the cycle to complete, so about a generation.
A baby (and more people after) not dying is an afterthought to you, you are mostly concerned with a fucking SciFi flick not coming true somehow.
Grow up, seriously.
This tech will save and improve a lot of peoples’ lives. It will be also be used frivolously by the rich to ‘improve’ (or actually fuck up) themselves just like they use current medical tech. Meanwhile some poorer people that need it to survive will be denied it.
These are political issues, long existing, not problems with this medical development.
I would suggest they’re more in touch with the science. It haunts science, we know we must do it for the benefit of humanity, but with the knowledge - the powerful and capital will use it for themselves.
How so?
The solution is not halting technological advancement(especially medical technology) but to try and change our political systems.