- Admin
- #31
Offline
Gene edited baby (1 Viewer)
- Thread starterOptimus Prime
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
saintfan-n-alex
Super Forum Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2005
- Messages
- 10,338
- Reaction score
- 4,311
Offline
I for one welcome our illegally genetically altered infant overlords
OP
OP
- Joined
- Jul 18, 1998
- Messages
- 24,981
- Reaction score
- 53,969
Offline
The scientist at the heart of the scandal involving the world’s first gene-edited babies has said he moved “too quickly” by pressing ahead with the procedure.
He Jiankui sent shock waves across the world of science when he announced in 2018 that he had edited the genes of twin girls, Lulu and Nana, before birth. He was subsequently sacked by his university in Shenzhen, received a three-year prison sentence, and was broadly condemned for having gone ahead with the risky, ethically contentious and medically unjustified procedure with inadequate consent from the families involved.
Speaking to the Guardian in one of his first interviews since his public re-emergence last year, He said: “I’ve been thinking about what I’ve done in the past for a long time. To summarise it up in one sentence: I did it too quickly.”.
However, he stopped short of expressing regret or apologising, saying “I need more time to think about that” and “that’s a complicated question”……..
www.theguardian.com
He Jiankui sent shock waves across the world of science when he announced in 2018 that he had edited the genes of twin girls, Lulu and Nana, before birth. He was subsequently sacked by his university in Shenzhen, received a three-year prison sentence, and was broadly condemned for having gone ahead with the risky, ethically contentious and medically unjustified procedure with inadequate consent from the families involved.
Speaking to the Guardian in one of his first interviews since his public re-emergence last year, He said: “I’ve been thinking about what I’ve done in the past for a long time. To summarise it up in one sentence: I did it too quickly.”.
However, he stopped short of expressing regret or apologising, saying “I need more time to think about that” and “that’s a complicated question”……..
Scientist who edited babies’ genes says he acted ‘too quickly’
Exclusive: He Jiankui stops short of apologising for procedure that shocked the world of science in 2018
Offline
Every movie everThe scientist at the heart of the scandal involving the world’s first gene-edited babies has said he moved “too quickly” by pressing ahead with the procedure.
He Jiankui sent shock waves across the world of science when he announced in 2018 that he had edited the genes of twin girls, Lulu and Nana, before birth. He was subsequently sacked by his university in Shenzhen, received a three-year prison sentence, and was broadly condemned for having gone ahead with the risky, ethically contentious and medically unjustified procedure with inadequate consent from the families involved.
Speaking to the Guardian in one of his first interviews since his public re-emergence last year, He said: “I’ve been thinking about what I’ve done in the past for a long time. To summarise it up in one sentence: I did it too quickly.”.
However, he stopped short of expressing regret or apologising, saying “I need more time to think about that” and “that’s a complicated question”……..
Scientist who edited babies’ genes says he acted ‘too quickly’
Exclusive: He Jiankui stops short of apologising for procedure that shocked the world of science in 2018
OP
OP
- Joined
- Jul 18, 1998
- Messages
- 24,981
- Reaction score
- 53,969
Offline
Guess this can go here
==================
A US startup company is offering to help wealthy couples screen their embryos for IQ using controversial technology that raises questions about the ethics of genetic enhancement.
The company, Heliospect Genomics, has worked with more than a dozen couples undergoing IVF, according to undercover video footage.
The recordings show the company marketing its services at up to $50,000 (£38,000) for clients seeking to test 100 embryos, and claiming to have helped some parents select future children based on genetic predictions of intelligence.
Managers boasted their methods could produce a gain of more than six IQ points.
Experts say the development represents an ethical minefield.
The information has emerged from video recordings made by the campaign group Hope Not Hate, which went undercover to investigate separate groups of activists and academics. The Guardian reviewed the recordings and conducted further research alongside Hope Not Hate.
The footage appears to show experimental genetic selection techniques being advertised to prospective parents.
A Heliospect employee, who has been helping the company recruit clients, outlined how couples could rank up to 100 embryos based on “IQ and the other naughty traits that everybody wants”, including sex, height, risk of obesity and risk of mental illness.
The startup says its prediction tools were built using data provided by UK Biobank, a taxpayer-funded store of genetic material donated by half a million British volunteers, which aims to only share data for projects that are “in the public interest”.
Selecting embryos on the basis of predicted high IQ is not permitted under UK law. While it is legal in the US, where embryology is more loosely regulated, IQ screening is not yet commercially available there.…….
www.theguardian.com
==================
A US startup company is offering to help wealthy couples screen their embryos for IQ using controversial technology that raises questions about the ethics of genetic enhancement.
The company, Heliospect Genomics, has worked with more than a dozen couples undergoing IVF, according to undercover video footage.
The recordings show the company marketing its services at up to $50,000 (£38,000) for clients seeking to test 100 embryos, and claiming to have helped some parents select future children based on genetic predictions of intelligence.
Managers boasted their methods could produce a gain of more than six IQ points.
Experts say the development represents an ethical minefield.
The information has emerged from video recordings made by the campaign group Hope Not Hate, which went undercover to investigate separate groups of activists and academics. The Guardian reviewed the recordings and conducted further research alongside Hope Not Hate.
The footage appears to show experimental genetic selection techniques being advertised to prospective parents.
A Heliospect employee, who has been helping the company recruit clients, outlined how couples could rank up to 100 embryos based on “IQ and the other naughty traits that everybody wants”, including sex, height, risk of obesity and risk of mental illness.
The startup says its prediction tools were built using data provided by UK Biobank, a taxpayer-funded store of genetic material donated by half a million British volunteers, which aims to only share data for projects that are “in the public interest”.
Selecting embryos on the basis of predicted high IQ is not permitted under UK law. While it is legal in the US, where embryology is more loosely regulated, IQ screening is not yet commercially available there.…….
US startup charging couples to ‘screen embryos for IQ’
Heliospect’s services were marketed at up to $50,000 for 100 embryos, undercover footage shows
OP
OP
- Joined
- Jul 18, 1998
- Messages
- 24,981
- Reaction score
- 53,969
Offline
There is broad scientific consensus that intelligence is partly inherited and that genes play a significant role.
But pinning this incredibly complex trait down to precise contributions from specific genes is a far more thorny scientific challenge – and claims of being able to produce meaningful IQ “gains” in the context of embryo screening are widely viewed as contentious.
Despite the science being unsettled, it has emerged that at least one company, the US startup Heliospect, appears to be preparing to publicly launch a service that allows parents who have conceived several embryos through IVF to select those most likely to have “desirable” traits, such as height and IQ.
Complex traits, such as IQ, are not determined by a single mutation, but are influenced by the tiny contributions of thousands of genes that have only become detectable with the advent of vast genetic databases, such as UK Biobank.
The testing is done by taking samples of DNA and looking for patterns. In the case of an embryo, a few cells are extracted to provide DNA results, which a company like Heliospect would run through its prediction algorithm.
Scientists can use the data to seek out statistical correlations between genes and a person’s educational attainment (sometimes used as an IQ proxy), risk of psychiatric disorders and a whole host of other traits.
The genetic contributions can be summed up to give a so-called polygenic score. But these scores are based on probability, rather than being a guarantee.
Environmental and random biological variation also play a role. An embryo with a mediocre score could turn out to be a genius, and vice versa.
And, in the wider context of society, access to healthcare, education, and a supportive family environment can have as large an impact as inherited traits.
The company appears to have suggested that couples who use their service might expect to have a child who is, on average, six IQ points smarter than the child they would have had through natural conception.
This is significantly higher than the 2.5 IQ point expected gainestimated in a 2019 study, that considered this hypothetical scenario.
The validity of Heliospect’s claim is impossible to establish, although independent experts have expressed scepticism.…….
www.theguardian.com
But pinning this incredibly complex trait down to precise contributions from specific genes is a far more thorny scientific challenge – and claims of being able to produce meaningful IQ “gains” in the context of embryo screening are widely viewed as contentious.
Despite the science being unsettled, it has emerged that at least one company, the US startup Heliospect, appears to be preparing to publicly launch a service that allows parents who have conceived several embryos through IVF to select those most likely to have “desirable” traits, such as height and IQ.
Complex traits, such as IQ, are not determined by a single mutation, but are influenced by the tiny contributions of thousands of genes that have only become detectable with the advent of vast genetic databases, such as UK Biobank.
The testing is done by taking samples of DNA and looking for patterns. In the case of an embryo, a few cells are extracted to provide DNA results, which a company like Heliospect would run through its prediction algorithm.
Scientists can use the data to seek out statistical correlations between genes and a person’s educational attainment (sometimes used as an IQ proxy), risk of psychiatric disorders and a whole host of other traits.
The genetic contributions can be summed up to give a so-called polygenic score. But these scores are based on probability, rather than being a guarantee.
Environmental and random biological variation also play a role. An embryo with a mediocre score could turn out to be a genius, and vice versa.
And, in the wider context of society, access to healthcare, education, and a supportive family environment can have as large an impact as inherited traits.
The company appears to have suggested that couples who use their service might expect to have a child who is, on average, six IQ points smarter than the child they would have had through natural conception.
This is significantly higher than the 2.5 IQ point expected gainestimated in a 2019 study, that considered this hypothetical scenario.
The validity of Heliospect’s claim is impossible to establish, although independent experts have expressed scepticism.…….
What is genomic prediction and can embryos really be ‘screened for IQ’?
A startup in the US, Heliospect, appears to be preparing to launch a service to enable parents to select ‘desirable’ traits
GeauxWhoDats
Insert Clever Title Here
Offline
If people would scan others for IQ before procreating a little better we wouldn't need tests like this.Guess this can go here
==================
A US startup company is offering to help wealthy couples screen their embryos for IQ using controversial technology that raises questions about the ethics of genetic enhancement.
The company, Heliospect Genomics, has worked with more than a dozen couples undergoing IVF, according to undercover video footage.
The recordings show the company marketing its services at up to $50,000 (£38,000) for clients seeking to test 100 embryos, and claiming to have helped some parents select future children based on genetic predictions of intelligence.
Managers boasted their methods could produce a gain of more than six IQ points.
Experts say the development represents an ethical minefield.
The information has emerged from video recordings made by the campaign group Hope Not Hate, which went undercover to investigate separate groups of activists and academics. The Guardian reviewed the recordings and conducted further research alongside Hope Not Hate.
The footage appears to show experimental genetic selection techniques being advertised to prospective parents.
A Heliospect employee, who has been helping the company recruit clients, outlined how couples could rank up to 100 embryos based on “IQ and the other naughty traits that everybody wants”, including sex, height, risk of obesity and risk of mental illness.
The startup says its prediction tools were built using data provided by UK Biobank, a taxpayer-funded store of genetic material donated by half a million British volunteers, which aims to only share data for projects that are “in the public interest”.
Selecting embryos on the basis of predicted high IQ is not permitted under UK law. While it is legal in the US, where embryology is more loosely regulated, IQ screening is not yet commercially available there.…….
US startup charging couples to ‘screen embryos for IQ’
Heliospect’s services were marketed at up to $50,000 for 100 embryos, undercover footage shows
OP
OP
- Joined
- Jul 18, 1998
- Messages
- 24,981
- Reaction score
- 53,969
Offline
Rickboy
Nom Nom Nom Nom.. me hungry for a SuperBowl
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Platinum VIP Contributor
Offline
There is broad scientific consensus that intelligence is partly inherited and that genes play a significant role.
But pinning this incredibly complex trait down to precise contributions from specific genes is a far more thorny scientific challenge – and claims of being able to produce meaningful IQ “gains” in the context of embryo screening are widely viewed as contentious.
Despite the science being unsettled, it has emerged that at least one company, the US startup Heliospect, appears to be preparing to publicly launch a service that allows parents who have conceived several embryos through IVF to select those most likely to have “desirable” traits, such as height and IQ.
Complex traits, such as IQ, are not determined by a single mutation, but are influenced by the tiny contributions of thousands of genes that have only become detectable with the advent of vast genetic databases, such as UK Biobank.
The testing is done by taking samples of DNA and looking for patterns. In the case of an embryo, a few cells are extracted to provide DNA results, which a company like Heliospect would run through its prediction algorithm.
Scientists can use the data to seek out statistical correlations between genes and a person’s educational attainment (sometimes used as an IQ proxy), risk of psychiatric disorders and a whole host of other traits.
The genetic contributions can be summed up to give a so-called polygenic score. But these scores are based on probability, rather than being a guarantee.
Environmental and random biological variation also play a role. An embryo with a mediocre score could turn out to be a genius, and vice versa.
And, in the wider context of society, access to healthcare, education, and a supportive family environment can have as large an impact as inherited traits.
The company appears to have suggested that couples who use their service might expect to have a child who is, on average, six IQ points smarter than the child they would have had through natural conception.
This is significantly higher than the 2.5 IQ point expected gainestimated in a 2019 study, that considered this hypothetical scenario.
The validity of Heliospect’s claim is impossible to establish, although independent experts have expressed scepticism.…….
What is genomic prediction and can embryos really be ‘screened for IQ’?
A startup in the US, Heliospect, appears to be preparing to launch a service to enable parents to select ‘desirable’ traits
This is such a slippery slope and I tend to agree with the current research that genetics only plays a part in IQ. But it should be stated that IQ testing has is foundation in eugenics movements that preceded the Nazis and their attempts at gaining a genetically pure race. Stuff like this gets you Khan. Do you really want Khan.
I love the chance to make a Star Trek reference.
Anyways, my personal experience comes from my own IQ testing and scores. I would say that, on the whole, my family’s history has been that of average to slightly above average IQ. I’m the outlier with a high IQ. I honestly think that a lot of my development came from my step Grandpa’s encouragement. After my childhood experiences, kinda hate IQ tests and how I was treated after being marked as ‘gifted’. IMO, having a high IQ kid isn’t all its cracked up to be. It can certainly be hell on the child. A person with average to slightly above average intelligence has a better chance in life if they develop good pattern recognition, emotional intelligence, leadership skills (there is no such thing as a born leader), and curiosity. Pattern recognition is really the only thing that put me ahead in terms of IQ. Everything else, including my curiosity, was developed through environmental factors.
Offline
I have a high IQ which proves IQ don’t mean ****
Online
It's one of my favorite non-action scifi movies
Online
i love it. it's one of those movies that if i see it on, I'm gonna stop and watch it
Online
low IQ doesn't make for worse parents. i know some higher IQ people that totally ruined their children and some lower IQ ones that turned out just fine..
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account on our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.