/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15248805
Because we don't fully understand it, at least not yet and thus can not be certain enough as common sense dictates we need to be when the implications are something like potentially fucking someone over for a lifetime in really really bad ways.

>>15248805
>Why aren't there gene-edited humans yet?
Do you know for sure that there aren't any?

>>15248808
looks like illegal self experimentation is the only way forward

>>15248805
There are some in China.

>>15248805
>Why aren't there gene-edited humans yet?
There have been some of those for years, especially in China.
But it's brute force editing, more like selection.

They select the embryos for the best fit purposes gene wise.

>>15248808
Bollocks, there are genetic diseases that cause grave disabilities, such as physical deformities that cripple people, that are already being "edited" (more selected out) in some organisations.

>>15248869
Scientists in China have done actual gene editing on embryos already, though it apparently resulted in extremely serious chronic illnesses.

>>15248805
It's a thing and has been for a while. For surface level plebians there are stories about China, but none of those are on the cutting edge level that is going on behind the scenes.

They're more common thank you think

>>15248805
For one, it is mostly illegal, though some gene theraputics are now legal in some places and are in clinical trial.
But also, knocking out a gene is one thing, inserting one is a totally different manner. We can insert new genes, but the sucess rate is around 5% at most when it comes to CRISPR, so we do it on a bunch of fertalized cells, and then select the sucessfull ones, that's how we get transgenesis. Or you can use transposon systems, which are 100% effective, but they cause cancer.
TL:DR knockouts are in clinical trial, gene insetions are both illigal and very difficult.

>>15248805
Christcucks prevent the creation of the ubermensh by sneeding about it being unnatural and unholy, while socialistcucks sneed about the potential inequality

>>15248878
To be honest, the fact that they did anything at all to them is an achievement in itself.
But we're not even close to GATTACA tier editing.
And I fear by then cyberization would be happening to an extent, rendering it pointless. What's the point in editing if you're gonna be synthetic anyway?

We should be focusing more on healing ailments than working out what gene causes them though. Ailments are require constant attention and any breakthrough to helping treat them may render editing a mere luxury rather than a necessity as we think of it now.
That doesn't mean that we should ignore genes in the process, just that we should focus on preventing the end result more than the basal root cause if it is a genetic basal source.

Speaking of science fiction.
I'm more concerned about becoming "the many" with regards to mutations that happen on living people. Now that's terror.
Personally, I'd prefer SHODAN than the many. They come off as a cult and weirdly warped and demented (and this is compared to SHODAN).
Gene editing could be more terrifying than rogue AI in my opinion. You could end up with a grey goo scenario. At the end of the day, the tiny proteins and what not in our bodies are essentially organic nanomachines. People like to think of them less like machines, but the reality is that they are totally like machines.

>>15248980
GATTACA was screening not editing.

>>15249001
I haven't seen it in years man. I was like fucking 14 kek.

... it was so boring.

>>15249001
>>15249016
kek
Why did I assume in my dumb 14 yr old monkey brain that it was about editing?


I'm in shock.
Also steel is heavier than feathers.

>>15248805
Some chink literally went prison for it retard.

>>15249059
where are those kids now? they're like 5yo now right?

>>15248805
>Why aren't there gene-edited humans yet?
The better question is why are you not gene-edited yet? But then informational singularity is answers given before questions are fully formed. Because it's still tens of grands in price, so you have to be really rich or wait several years for it to become more affordable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScJNE0alsaQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxO9l8_UEuw

>>15248805
Gene edited mice all have to be destroyed after the experiment is done.
Gene edited animals can't intermix with normal animals, gene edited humans have to be infertile.
this is obviously unethical (not in a pozzed way). imagine if you were born an incel because scientists designed you to be so

>>15249247
>gene edited humans have to be infertile
Who on earth told you that! What a retarded statement or aspiration!

>>15248805
Because the people with the edited genes would seethe that that their genes were edit.

>>15248877
Pardon? Is this yet another conspiracy theory? Please name said 'organisations' and also please decide wether you are talking about gene editing or selective breeding? You don't seem to be too sure about the difference and this thread is concerned with gene editing. And just out of curiosity: Are agents of said 'organisations' in the room with us right now ?