CRISPR babies deemed "still too risky" by top researchers

[Anonymous No.15410953]

https://archive.is/9oZl1
However, there are some potential workarounds.
> There are newer variations on CRISPR-Cas9 editing that do not break both strands of the DNA helix. Base editing, for example, can convert one single DNA letter to another, and a technique called prime editing allows researchers to insert DNA sequences more predictably than CRISPR-Cas9 editing. Neither of these methods cause double-strand breaks, but they have not been as thoroughly studied and optimized as CRISPR-Cas9. At the summit, developmental biologist Yuyu Niu at the Kunming University of Science and Technology in China reported that one kind of base editor did not cause off-target DNA mutations in rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) embryos, but it did cause unwanted RNA mutations.
> An alternative to editing embryos would be to instead edit gametes, such as eggs and sperm, or the stem cells that give rise to them. This would also sidestep concerns that efforts to edit embryos might not succeed in all cells of the embryo, resulting in offspring that contain a mixture of edited and unedited cells. Several researchers at the summit reported progress towards generating gametes in the laboratory, but doing this with human cells destined for reproductive uses still poses challenges.
> The summit organizers urged that researchers continue to explore each of these options, even as policy makers and the public grapple with what restrictions should be placed on heritable genome editing.. “We are still keen that the research goes ahead,” said developmental biologist Robin Lovell-Badge of the Francis Crick Institute in London, who chaired the organizing committee for the summit. “In parallel, there has to be more debate about whether the technique is ever used.”

[Anonymous No.15411547]

>>15410953
When will it be commercially avaible?

[Anonymous No.15411611]

>>15410953
Human testing is necessary. If it suffers euthanize it.

[Anonymous No.15411612]

>>15411547
You can buy it already if youre multi-millionare. Of course its illegal but completely possible.

[Anonymous No.15411619]

>>15411612
Where? By whom?

[Anonymous No.15411703]

The world isn't ready.

[Anonymous No.15412010]

>>15411619
how hard could it be to isolate your own?

[Anonymous No.15412027]

>>15411612
Doesn't thought emporium use crispr in his videos? He's editing genes on a budget, pretty sure you can follow along and just diy

[Anonymous No.15413256]

>>15411619
if you are friends with rich people you would know but I guess you can contact companies that do this research and broach the subject with them

[Anonymous No.15413269]

CRISPR-Cas9
Give us a gene
Give us a miracle like that one Nazarene
‘Cause giving the lame their legs and the blind their sight is
In view for dystrophy and retinitis
But CRISPR-Cas9
What if you fall
Outside our power and inside us all
That really could incite a scene

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k99bMtg4zRk

[Anonymous No.15413850]

>>15413269
Sang this to Cher's "Sweet dreams are made of cheese" song.

[Anonymous No.15413974]

>>15410953
Who are these top researchers?

[Anonymous No.15413983]

I mean we barely understand how humans work. Sure we can probably adjust the DNA and then artificially inseminate someone but the tests haven’t even been done on primates where let’s say we bungled something and 10 years down the line the genetic encoding got messed up and cancer just spreads across the crisper baby
Needs more time in the oven

[Anonymous No.15414076]

>>15413983
Honestly I think at this point CRISPR could safely be used to treat/prevent genetic disorders caused by point mutations, like cystic fibrosis or haemophilia. I think ideal protocol would involve genotyping before and after the transformation. We're definitely very far from designer babies though, thank god.

[Anonymous No.15414178]

>>15414076
>We're definitely very far from designer babies though, thank god.
Beneficial by-point mutation do exist though, like MSTN or SP0535.

[Anonymous No.15414183]

>>15411619
That's on a need to know basis

[Anonymous No.15414207]

>>15410953
People watch too much scifi and capeshit.

>>15413974
Who are the top researchers who think they can improve upon pic related? Oh right, working for a company trying to sell a product.

[Anonymous No.15414215]

>>15414207
>this shit is happening inside our cells to make sure we take human form
This shit blows my fucking mind

[Anonymous No.15414216]

>>15414183
S. Hsu or J. Zhang?

[Anonymous No.15414234]

>>15414178
That's a good point. I imagine when lay folk think of "designer babies" they imagine being able to select traits like eye color, like an RPG character creator or some shit. But there are definitely a lot of optimizations that could presently be made in many populations.

Can't wait to see the transhumanist hellscape we craft for ourselves over the next 50 years!

[Anonymous No.15414248]

>>15414207
>Who are the top researchers who think they can improve upon pic related?
As far as I know, nobody is really trying to change how mRNA is transcribed from DNA and translated into proteins. CRISPR changes the underlying DNA sequence so that the output is different. The machinery your image depicts needn't change. I agree that they're going to profiteer like mad whenever functional therapies using CRISPR gain approval, though that's nothing new.

[Anonymous No.15414255]

>>15414248
>I am very smart and clever because I am being deliberately obtuse and semantic
Wow, you are so smart reddit.

[Anonymous No.15414266]

>>15414255
Guess I'm just not sure what you're getting at. Genetic engineering has been around for a while. It works. CRISPR is just a new, effective tool for it. We aren't going to be able to design novel genes or whatever anytime soon, but modifying existing ones or inserting transgenes is perfectly kosher.

[Anonymous No.15414709]

>>15410953
>deemed "still too risky" by top researchers
And who thinks that will stop the Chinese??

[Anonymous No.15414741]

>>15410953
I know this is a stupid question, but wouldn't be more safer and easier to genetically alter eggs and sperm than embryos?

[Anonymous No.15414868]

>>15411547
not before crispr actually does what it should do

you niggers don't realize how inefficient and unprecise crispr is.

[Anonymous No.15414874]

>>15414207
atheists believe this just made itself one day.

[Anonymous No.15414879]

>>15414709
Chinks can't innovate. If Europeans stopped publishing research tomorrow I'm not convinced that China would make any progress at all.

[Anonymous No.15414882]

>>15414741
People already do that in secret.

That's how most genetic diseases showed up in the past century.

[Anonymous No.15415569]

>>15411703
For some it is.

[Anonymous No.15415589]

>>15410953
Wish we were working primarily on editing for grown adults, who for one thing can consent. A much harder problem though to be sure.
>>15415569
I hate India so much sometimes.

[Anonymous No.15416230]

>>15411703
5 years too late.

[Anonymous No.15417394]

>>15414879
They can still do experiments and make huge mistakes with disastrous consequences.

[Anonymous No.15417416]

>>15414879
>Chinks can't innovate. If Europeans stopped publishing research tomorrow I'm not convinced that China would make any progress at all.
Luckily through gene editing the Chinese will make their entire elite population European (by selecting for intelligence-causing SNPs).

[Anonymous No.15417435]

>>15417416
The interesting thing about this is that, since physiognomy is real, as a group (e.g. chinese) selected for SNPs mediating creativity, empathy, motivation, and other traits found in anglos, their facial structure would begin to resemble that of europeans, too.
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/03/Face-brain-development-tightly-linked-study-finds.html

[Anonymous No.15418505]

>>15414879
They would probably be satisfied if they could clone particularly productive people.
And has anyone thought about safeguarding te genetic data for the greatest scientists? You don't need much tissue to get enough DNA for unscoupled people to give it a try.

[Anonymous No.15418511]

>>15417435
>Researchers at Stanford and KU Leuven have identified more than 70 genes that affect variation in both brain and facial structure. The genes don’t influence cognitive ability, further debunking beliefs that intelligence can be assessed by facial features.

How is this possible? Is it really credible that all genes that code for the brain that also relate to the face have zero impact on intelligence?

[Anonymous No.15418522]

>>15418511
Goes without saying that that disclaimer should be ignored. Jew-controlled academia would not allow such information to be published otherwise.

[Anonymous No.15418529]

>>15417435
It's fascinating that they allowed a study about that to be published in a journal. It's similar to the research in animal domestication that when behavior is the only selection criteria, it's correlated with coat color.

[Anonymous No.15418570]

>>15410953
>CRISPR babies deemed "still too risky" by top researchers
great, my experience in the field is that there are too many retards who think there is nothing wrong with this system
>There are newer variations on CRISPR-Cas9 editing that do not break both strands of the DNA helix. Base editing, for example, can convert one single DNA letter to another
this would 100% activate DNA repair mechanisms and lead to dsbreaks
> An alternative to editing embryos would be to instead edit gametes, such as eggs and sperm, or the stem cells that give rise to them. This would also sidestep concerns that efforts to edit embryos might not succeed in all cells of the embryo, resulting in offspring that contain a mixture of edited and unedited cells.
The major concern with CRIPSR is still off target effects, not this.

[Anonymous No.15418594]

>>15418570
Scientists with limited ethical drive will see no problems in just bringin up 100 eggs and then cull the ones that didn't pan out, even if at a very late stage.

[Anonymous No.15418757]

>>15410953
So what perform trials on guinea pigs and kill them if they dont function properly

[Anonymous No.15418830]

>>15418594
Cool, get it done already. Ethics is fucking gay. If you can rip a baby out of the womb a few weeks prior to birth and spike its brains legally then you should definitely be allowed to fiddle with fucking embryos until birth. Fuck science sois.

[Anonymous No.15419321]

>>15410953
>Prime editing is a 'search-and-replace' genome editing technology in molecular biology by which the genome of living organisms may be modified. The technology directly writes new genetic information into a targeted DNA site. It uses a fusion protein, consisting of a catalytically impaired Cas9 endonuclease fused to an engineered reverse transcriptase enzyme, and a prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA), capable of identifying the target site and providing the new genetic information to replace the target DNA nucleotides. It mediates targeted insertions, deletions, and base-to-base conversions without the need for double strand breaks (DSBs) or donor DNA templates

[Anonymous No.15419378]

>>15418830
>. If you can rip a baby out of the womb a few weeks prior to birth and spike its brains legally then you should definitely be allowed to fiddle with fucking embryos until birth
Unbelievably based!

[Anonymous No.15419383]

>>15418830
Unironically yeah. We could also use Jewish embryos for this.

[Anonymous No.15419399]

>>15419383
Nah, all that inbreeding has fucked up their genes. Just clone a bunch a eggs from the general populous. They kill embryos all the time for stem cells in china, yall ameritards are falling behind.

[Anonymous No.15419436]

>>15419399
>Nah, all that inbreeding has fucked up their genes.
Not that anon, but that especially makes them willing to modify their genes. They already got a pre-scan program ongoing to prevent diseases.

[Anonymous No.15419892]

>>15419399
If the Wikipedia article is to be believed, Jews are some of the largest groups to gain massively by gene editing. Tay-Sachs is no fun, and there is a lot more.

[Anonymous No.15421173]

Bump

[Anonymous No.15421703]

[Anonymous No.15421717]

>>15414266
>modifying exsting ones or inserting transgenes is perfectly kosher
you’re absolutely wrong! we just don’t know the consequences changes in our genetic code, even for benign and “simple” things, could potentially have.

[Anonymous No.15421723]

>>15421717
Oh, there will definitely be disasters along the way. And do you think this will stop China? Their moral values differ, they have a lot to gain, and they have even published that they are willing to go far.

[Anonymous No.15422119]

>>15414215
Really makes you think who we're just automata for

[Anonymous No.15423456]

>>15421717
Why wouldn't it be as simple as just selecting for the desired SNPs?

[Anonymous No.15423467]

>>15422119

Only to people who do not understand the relationship between fractal and spiral structures found in the products of natural processes, and procedural generation / naturally occurring optimizers known to produce exactly that type of complexity like evolution, crystallization, erosion, etc.

[Anonymous No.15423471]

>>15414874
Look at this idiot trying to start shit

[Anonymous No.15423513]

>>15414874

You may have noticed that fractals and spirals occur throughout nature. These patterns are always present in the result of an optimizing process working against constraints, seeking the path of least resistance. Erosion for example, which is why river layouts and landforms obey fractal math. It’s like the procedural generation also used to generate landscapes in games, not coincidentally also the only source of complexity simple enough, itself, to naturally occur as a confluence of physical laws (ala natural selection).

The layout of snowflakes is another good example. It’s fractal because crystallization is also a form of naturally occurring procedural generation. Do you believe God manually sculpts every snowflake as it descends from the clouds? Or that they self-assemble into hexagonal fractals because H2O consists of 3 parts, so covalent bonding unites them into hexagonal molecular lattices when water freezes? And that crystallization proceeds against the fluctuating external constraint of air temperature on descent, explaining both the fractal layout and why no two are alike?

If we can agree these properties are naturally occurring in snowflakes for non-supernatural reasons, why would the same not be true of the fractal complexity observed in the anatomy of humans, plants and other organisms? Which are also products of a natural optimizing process, working against environmental constraints.

[Anonymous No.15423585]

Humans are going to be genetically modified to make men small and super athletic, and women tall and super fecund. At least as a base, then other things will follow
4 foot men and 6'5" women

[Anonymous No.15423591]

>>15423585
2 more weeks, right?

[Anonymous No.15423604]

>>15423591
No not that soon.
I've been posting on /v/ because in the new zelda game, zelda is noticeably larger than link, so it's been fun to use that to make threads and then start pushing the extreme size dimorphism stuff

[Anonymous No.15423810]

>>15417435
>“We were astonished to find 76 genetic regions that affect both face and brain shape in the human population,” said Joanna Wysocka, PhD
>"However, nothing in our data suggests that it’s possible to predict behavior, cognitive function or neuropsychiatric disorders like schizophrenia or ADHD simply by looking at a person’s face.”
>The reason is that these regions are not the same as those that determine brain structure in ways that affect cognitive function.
>It’s an important distinction, if only to once again discredit the idea that a person’s intelligence is reflected in their facial features — a belief that’s been used to promote racial and ethnic discrimination.
> But our study shows it would be wrong to think you can predict someone’s behavior or cognitive abilities by looking at their face. The association just isn’t there.”
I can hardly imagine that the Jews could arrange for four separate disclaimers. One or two maybe, but not four. I guess physiognomy really is fake after all.

[Anonymous No.15423814]

>>15419436
If you modify their genes back to correct functionality, they stop being Jews.

[Anonymous No.15423823]

>>15423810
You can't alter brain shape and structure without affecting cognition. They just have to keep repeating it to appease faggots like you who would complain otherwise.
>a belief that’s been used to promote racial and ethnic discrimination.
Yes, races have the exact same mental faculties -- of course. I personally think the next Mozart will be an australian aboriginal.
https://youtu.be/_tOkb1y7hEs?t=85

[Anonymous No.15423841]

>>15423810
>But our study shows it would be wrong to think you can predict someone’s behavior or cognitive abilities by looking at their face. The association just isn’t there.”
Don't you love it when research papers come to conclusions that are proven wrong by the most basic human experience? We've all met people who looked like stupid idiots and turned out to be stupid idiots.

[Anonymous No.15423893]

>>15423841
>We've all met people who looked like stupid idiots and turned out to be stupid idiots.
Patrick Stewart being the classic exception to this rule.

[Anonymous No.15425247]

>>15417435
Do they even know which genes affect cognitive abilities? For if they do, I can see a can of worms coming up...

[Anonymous No.15426204]

>>15425247
>Do they even know which genes affect cognitive abilities?
Yes. The genes responsible for the development of the brain are fairly well grouped together, though their effects aren't all completely understood. The genetic causes of aggression and crime in particular are surprisingly well studied for such a taboo topic.

[Anonymous No.15426870]

>>15411619
Go to china, befriend shady american scinetists in china who will get you in contact with shady chinese scientists, find what you need.

[Anonymous No.15427952]

>>15410953
mmmm crispy

[Anonymous No.15428091]

>>15417416
>>15417435
what cope is this when the highest iq are asians and jews?

[Anonymous No.15428203]

>>15428091
East asians have high nonverbal IQ compared to europeans, but slightly lower verbal, significantly lower creativity (especially chinese), lower drive/motivation, and overall a completely different spirit.
Ashkenazi jews have high IQ, especially verbal, but have a propensity towards lying, greed, depravity, aren't capable of understanding morality, are highly neurotic, etc.
It's the overall mental profile that matters, not just intelligence. Even australian aboriginals have spatial recall of 120 despite having an extremely low average IQ of 62.
It's generally agreed upon that the ethnic group with the most favorable combination of mental features is English, specifically the kind of English elites that partly comprised American founding stock. They have highest oxytocin (empathy), creativity, motivation, and high intelligence as well.
This is also the reason why anglos are the most attractive/have the best physiognomy: Beautiful on the outside means beautiful on the inside, and naturally the inverse is true as well.

[Anonymous No.15428459]

>>15411611
What do you think the mrna-vax was?

[Anonymous No.15428696]

>>15428459
I wish.

[Anonymous No.15429182]

>>15410953
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mziOfnCWJzA

[Anonymous No.15429501]

>>15426204
That is surprising.
And how about genes for imagination/creativity? I think it was Einstein that said imagination was more important than knowledge, and increasingly I feel he was right.

[Anonymous No.15430762]

b