[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 8 KB, 277x182, index.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10773769 No.10773769 [Reply] [Original]

Just to play devil's advocate, if we killed every person with genetic diseases, we wouldn't have to study genetic diseases at all.

>> No.10773777

>>10773769
I'm with you, but for most cases there's no need to kill them, it's enough to forbid them to reproduce.

>> No.10773778

>>10773769
Studying genetic diseases advances our understanding of genetics in general. They're not just studied because some researchers felt bad for some downies.

>> No.10773781

That's not how genetic diseases work. Many people carry recessive genes that express themselves as a diseases given the chance. You would have to kill them as well - which would probably leave no one left.

>> No.10773790

Would that include epigenetic, viral and somatic induced genetic diseases? If so you may as well just kill everybody.

>> No.10773793

>>10773769
You should start with yourself

>> No.10773799

>>10773781
This. Plus everyone has a genetic disease to some degree (such as minor allergies, slight color blindness, and UV sensitivity) so such diseases would have to be graded on how bad they are and then the people killed would be based on their grade, or you set back humanity to pre-agriculture populations (or to extinction).

And then there's the issue of grading such things. For example, sickle cell disease is generally seen as a bad thing but carriers of it do enjoy a resistance to malaria that non-carriers do.

>> No.10773829

>>10773799
>sickle cell disease is generally seen as a bad thing but carriers of it do enjoy a resistance to malaria that non-carriers do
>implying the benefit matches or outweighs the cost in a first-world country

>> No.10773851
File: 18 KB, 480x489, 1559092905349.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10773851

>>10773793
We all should start with ourselves

>> No.10773870

>>10773769
The need to study would still exist, but you would have no subjects and it would take much longer to learn anything
Retards are basically lab rats for science if you look at it that way

>> No.10774915

we've lost the 40% child mortality that people of the victorian era had that purged most of the harmful mutations like autism
developed countries are carrying a massive un purged deleterious load

>> No.10774990

>>10773769
We wouldn't have to study communicable diseases either if people would stop spreading them.

>> No.10775001

>>10773769
yes we would because the small genetic differences you can see now would be considered diseases instead of simple traits

>> No.10775021

>>10773769
Consciousness itself is a genetic disease.

>> No.10775043

>>10773769
Wrong. Viruses and bacteria mutate and still will adapt. Also random mutations will still cause problems.

>> No.10775075

>>10773769
we would, to define exactly who dies and who lives. don't be a brainlet.

>> No.10775350

Assuming you had even a middle school education of genetics which you clearly don't, chemical castration is more than enough

>> No.10775506
File: 132 KB, 633x758, 1522296801136.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10775506

>>10773769
>If you killed everyone with cancer, you wouldn't need to study cancer

>> No.10775511

>>10773769
>>10773777
>>10773781
We already practice the reasonable forms of eugenism : most fetuses with genetic diseases are aborted, mentally disabled need to be sterilized to be placed in institutions,ect...

>> No.10775539

>>10775511

None of what you have said is reasonable to a right-thinking person, and "eugenism" isn't a word.

>> No.10777655

>>10773781
But surely eventually you end up with a bunch of non-dominants, sure it'll still randomly happen but nowhere near the rates it does now. Then you just screen and abort, the next one should be good

>> No.10777657
File: 106 KB, 600x600, 1560272367168.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10777657

>>10775506
Love that wojak picture.

>> No.10777661

>>10773769
Then who would get grants to study them? Checkmate, atheists

>> No.10777688
File: 32 KB, 600x600, 7ef.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10777688

It wouldn't work, because not every genetic disease is inheritable.

The most obvious example of a genetic disease that is not inheritable is Down's Syndrome, as demonstrated by the picture in the OP

>> No.10777694

>>10775506
Cancer isn't intrinsically hereditary you fucking moron