Designer babies of the future

[Murvin]

For just an extra few thousand dollars, women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) could one day choose to have a baby boy with perfect vision, an aptitude for sports and a virtual lock on avoiding colon cancer. Fertility clinics in the U.S. currently offer not only to screen for diseases, but also to choose gender. They are not yet offering any further customization, but that could change as genetic mapping gets faster and easier.

Last year, a California company said it could screen for hair and skin color, but soon retracted the claim amid a firestorm of protest. (Research like this has prompted Pope Benedict to condemn “the obsessive search for the perfect child.”) The best screening test on the market is called preimplantation genetic diagnosis. PGD, developed to prevent births of children with severe disorders, screens chromosomes from one or two of an embryo’s cells for abnormalities. Depending on the results, the IVF embryo is either implanted in the mother, donated for research or destroyed.

Now, researchers at the privately run Genetics & IVF Institute in Virginia have developed a test called karyomapping. The new procedure compares the genetic maps of parents and embryos to detect 15,000 known genetic disorders. It could also be used to choose traits including intelligence or skin color.

“The future of genetic screening will really depend on what people want,” Elizabeth Ginsburg, the former president of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, says. “If that means creating so-called designer babies, we’re going to need a lot more regulation.”

Three Ways Babies are Born to Specifications

Savior Siblings: Parents with children who suffer from leukemia or anemia and who could benefit from stem cell treatment can order up a sibling with the right genetic material. DNA from an embryo is analyzed to find a human leukocyte antigen gene match between an embryo and the child. Nine months later, when the baby is born, the stem cells are retrieved from umbilical cord blood.

Pink or Blue: A 2006 survey conducted by the Genetics and Public Policy Center found almost half of U.S. fertility clinics offered non-*disease-related sex selection through PGD embryo screening. A new technique in clinical trials may offer a less expensive method. Originally developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for use in cattle, the new method analyzes sperm instead of embryos and uses color and fluorescence to sort male chromosomes from larger female ones.

Disease-Free Guarantee: Parents with a family history of diseases such as cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia and muscular dystrophy have a significant chance of passing the gene mutation that causes the disease on to their children. PGD can screen embryos for those conditions. It can also screen for genes that don’t guarantee illness, but which are associated with higher risks of breast and colon cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.

Source:http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/4340490.html

[Alex E]

Hmm well I think people shouldn't be so fast in judging this, after all it could well be seen as the next step in evolution! Maybe evolution itself is now evolving, as in that it's becoming a lot faster! Wouldn't it be great if all your little aches and insecurities about appearance and such would be over, so that you can focus on more important and more fun matters?

Still, that's only one way of viewing it. If a lot parents start doing this, other parents who don't like the idea will be forced to also do this, otherwise the child could have a disadvantage...
And, would a child still feel like 'your own child'? Then again, same goes for adoption and we've all accepted that too...
Of course another matter to think about is; without the natural hardships we have now, how would a child mentally develop itself? "We acquire the strength we have overcome." ~Ralph Waldo Emerson. And how do you figure this out exactly..?

An option could be to take an amount of spermcells of the man and eggs of the woman, and see what combinations could come out of it, so that the child gets the best benefits, yet still with only the genes of the parents (so there would be selective combining of genes, but no additional altering afterwards).



Lots of issues to think about, but unlike some people seem to think, I don't see that as a reason not to at least see what it could bring us!

[skitoles]

I see the good and bad in this, but i wouldn't keep this out of my mind if i was expecting a child. Who wouldn't want a guaranteed disease-free child born, especially if the family has a long line of illness?

[AustralianGQ]

what bad is there? that religious people dont like it? ah fuck em.....

[Seb Astían]

Well if this could give us healthier children, the why not? Maybe we will se more ''options'' in the future, but I don't think many parenst would want to design their own baby entirely.

[Alchemist]

what bad is there? that religious people dont like it? ah fuck em.....

You always seem to make hateful comments against religion, no one cares, keep it to yourself, you need to have some respect.

[lyonx]

what bad is there? that religious people dont like it? ah fuck em.....

religious or not I dont think its a good idea for parents to choose how their child will look like,its just wrong man, against the way of life.

this could be usefull to prevent hereditary deaseses, and have healthy children.
but to choose how ur child's appearance and behavior will be, thats total madness, ur child isnt ur toy. go play sims if u wanna do that

[Alex E]

You always seem to make hateful comments against religion, no one cares, keep it to yourself, you need to have some respect.

You're not really the king of unpredjudiced posting yourself either

religious or not I dont think its a good idea for parents to choose how their child will look like,its just wrong man, against the way of life.

Well why exactly?

this could be usefull to prevent hereditary deaseses, and have healthy children.
but to choose how ur child's appearance and behavior will be, thats total madness, ur child isnt ur toy. go play sims if u wanna do that

For the benefit of the child, why wouldn't you?

I know it's quite long, but try reading my post (it's post #2)

[2030]

If the resulting children are healthier, yes... And beauty is subjective so if parents decide to mess with genes for that purpose, its not like all the kids will look the same. Well, except the Chinese

As AusGQ pointed out tho, alot of religious ppl (others also) could have problems with it... its "playing god" after all. So they can choose not to do it. If theres going to be laws stopping this, they should not be based on such narrow minded notions tho

[Darren]

Do scientists really understand the changes they are creating through gene manipulations in every respect?

The thing that concerns me is that I doubt whether humanity is smart enough to play god yet. Could there not be secondary, tertiary effects from these fundamental changes? You also have to consider you are changing the entire evolution of man / woman effectively here. Gene changes pass on, do we have people with scope enough to see and plan the big picture here?

I am all for the eradication of disease here but this is a dangerous game. Not only that but in many cultures there is a strong favour towards one sex. We would need legislation to soon come in otherwise we will have an imbalance in that respect among I predict others.

These procedures will ultimately become more advanced, it doesn't take a genius to see that there is both a demand here as well as a huge amount of money to be made. The incentive is there for medical industries to fund huge projects on this. I just want them to understand the issues with looking at the short term rather than the long.

The way I would implement this is to have future parents screened for genetic makeup. Doctors could forecast issues and then only use this technology to remove genuine life threatening medical conditions. I don't think people should be given the choice to change small factors such as hair colour etc.

Of course through legislation you also create a black market. New technologies open up new areas for abuse.

[Alchemist]

You're not really the king of unprediced posting yourself either

I predicted that you'd make that post O_o

:P

[Alex E]

I predicted that you'd make that post O_o

:P

Well I'm sure you didn't predict the stupid mistake

[Alchemist]

Well I'm sure you didn't predict the stupid mistake

No, I prediced it

[AustralianGQ]

we dont need to live in a society where religion tell us how to do things or behave....if parents want to give there kid a better life by giving them specific genetic traits then let them....its an advantage for them....

[Darren]

we dont need to live in a society where religion tell us how to do things or behave....if parents want to give there kid a better life by giving them specific genetic traits then let them....its an advantage for them....

Far as I was aware we didn't live in a society like that

Sure there is pressure but religion doesn't dictate law.