[ 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: 254 KB, 500x405, Screen shot 2011-03-10 at 12.28.24 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2730587 No.2730587 [Reply] [Original]

Question for /sci/fags

Let's say your wife and you fuck and your sperm penetrates her egg. Before it becomes an embryo, you realize the egg is damaged and the baby will come out retarded. Now you have the option to take the joined DNA out and put it in one of your wife's other eggs, essentially saving the genetic identity of the unborn child. Would you do it?

Secondly, would you do the same for a dying fetus?

>> No.2730600

Why waste so much time and resources? Take the pill, try again later.

>> No.2730604
File: 29 KB, 425x301, giantfaggot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2730604

OP understands nothing about genetics or human reproduction.

>> No.2730613

>egg is damaged
>TAKE THE DNA IMPLANT IN ANOTHER EGG
>child not retarded anymore

lol OP went full retard

>> No.2730615

>>2730604

Why do you say that?

I certainly don't know if a damaged egg would result in a retarded baby. Obviously the DNA in the egg would simply have the egg split over and over and the damaged section would become a moot point, but I simply mention it as example. I'm more curious about the theoretical approach and how people might consider the fetus more important than the egg.

>> No.2730620

>the egg is damaged and the baby will come out retarded
>saving the genetic identity
So, would I go to immense trouble and work for hours with biotech tools so instead of a retarded child I can have a.... retarded child?

Does not compute.

>> No.2730625

>take the joined DNA out and put it in another egg
>Would you do it?

I would, if I could, and if I succeed then it's at least a Nature cover and possibly a Nobel prize later on.

So line up your damaged eggs! I will suceed even if it takes me a thousand tries.

>> No.2730630

>>2730620

The egg is damaged not the genes. During meiosis, women have 4 eggs and 3 become dormant and non-functioning and the active one is released into the fallopian tube. Could be 1 out of 4 chance a genetic defect in the egg, but that clearly wouldn't be there in the second egg, unless the gene was recessive.

>> No.2730641

Slice and dice, what kind of sick fuck would give their own children a disease?

>> No.2730642

I'd sucker punch my wife in the stomach repeatedly.

/thread

>> No.2730651
File: 123 KB, 500x500, allowmetoeducate.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2730651

>>2730615
first of all, retardation isnt caused by a 'damaged egg'
a damaged egg just wont be able to be fertilised. and if it can be fertilised, then the fetus will grow as normal.

secondly, you cant take the joined DNA (containing fathers sperm and mothers damaged egg) and put it in another egg, thats 3 sets of genes, faher-mother-mother.

and there would be no point anyway, it is easy enough just to start again.
this: >>2730600

>> No.2730653

I'm curious as to how people would approach the fetus and the fertilized egg separately.

>> No.2730659

I divorce that bitch because I'm sterile.

>> No.2730662

>>2730651
see
>>2730615

I know the details aren't perfect, but I didn't come to /sci/ asking for advice or to get an education I already know about.

Also, the new egg would obviously have it's own genetic material taken out (maternity facilities already do this with third party surrogates.)

So take your faggotry elsewhere. That is one annoying thing about /sci/ half the posts are about "LET ME POINT OUT SOMETHING IN YOUR POST SO I CAN ANONYMOUSLY SEEM SMART" and it's like sometimes you completely miss the point of the OP.

>> No.2730669
File: 13 KB, 417x355, 12645648.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2730669

>>2730662
>tells me to 'see' the post that i was responding to, which i linked directly.

faggot.

>> No.2730671

>>2730662
Okay, you want an answer to your retarded question? I'll give an answer to your retarded question. No, I'd scrape the shit out of the retarded cells and try again.

A package of genetic data has no inherent value. It only has value in potentia, and since the process is so easy to repeat, the ptoential value has no real meaning.

>> No.2730685
File: 3 KB, 126x95, opisretarded.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2730685

The thread is pointless anyway, this guy is correct: >>2730620

if you are saving the genetic identity of the child, then part of its genetic identity is to be retarded which is what you are trying to stop happening. so you may as well just abort the fucker.
if the child is not genetically retarded, then there is no need to do anything anyway.
if the 'damaged egg' can still be properly fertilised and grow into a fetus that isnt genetically retarded, then just have the kid.

thread is pointless due to OP's stupidity and lack of knowledge as to how retardation is caused.

>> No.2730721

>>2730685

>implying the only way someone can be retarded is through genes

Take a developmental bio class faggot.

>>2730671

I want several answers, by people with different beliefs. I fucking have my own view of it. (I too think genetic material is inherently insignificant.) I'm just curious how other human beings with different value systems than mine view it you aspie piece of shit.

>> No.2730735

>>2730721
>several answers, by people with different beliefs

Yes.
No.
Depends.
Maybe.
Perhaps.

Now fuck off /sci/, you obviously haven't learnt any biology.

>> No.2730736

>>2730721
epigenetics is still genetics, you humongous cock-guzzler.

...and what the fuck did you expect to come from this thread???

atheist/sensible answer
kill it with fire, start again. nothing of value was lost

religious answer: IT ARE MURDAR! MURDAR ARE WRONG! YEW MUST HAVE THE BABY IN ALL IT'S RETARDED GLORY!!