• FOXP5
  • Excerpts
  • Reviews
  • Authors
  • Science
  • Contact
  • News And Views, Ours and Yours

Genomic Science

GMO is easy compared to Syn Bio

1/31/2017

0 Comments

 

 If you see GMOs as a big disruptive force and the most complex issue in bio-ethics, you are out of date. Synthetic biology makes GMOs look simple.

In synthetic biology technology creates entirely new genes and genomes--one's that do not exist in nature. Craig Venter, one of the most respected names in genomics, has warned that we do not have the institutions and laws to evaluate and regulate these new products. see:
 

​http://techonomy.com/…/graduating-gmos-can-regulators-keep…/

0 Comments

Designer Babies

1/9/2017

0 Comments

 
Have no doubt that humans of the near future will be genetically modified organisms--either by gene editing or gene splicing or both. Having healthy childen has become more and more certain, but what child will emerge from preganancy still has a large element of risk and chance.

Not only healthy children, but children with certain characteristics and advantages is a demand that will break through legal, regulatory and ethical barriers. That's just the way human history happens.

Below is some of the latest news relevant to this issue.

From Disease to DesignJan 09, 2017CRISPR, like IVF and other technologies before it, raises the specter of the creation of "designer babies," writes Philip Ball at the Guardian.
Though CRISPR/Cas9 is being explored as a way to modify disease-causing genes, there's the concern that the tool could be used for non-therapeutic purposes, he adds. But a number of researchers and ethicists don't think CRISPR-driven human reproduction will be a concern anytime soon as it's too expensive and has unknown health risks.
Instead, Stanford University's Hank Greely tells Ball that pre-implantation genetic diagnosis coupled with embryo selection is the current most plausible route for the development of "designer babies." Such an approach is already used by a small percentage of couples seeking in vitro fertilization to screen for diseases like thalassemia or cystic fibrosis. Even this approach, though, isn't a good way to "design" babies, Greely tells Ball, as it requires egg harvesting, which is risky and doesn't yield that many eggs. However, he adds that will change with developments in the field and with cheaper genome sequencing.
Still, Ball notes that many traits have turned out to be more complicated than initially assumed — numerous genes influence, for instance, diabetes risk and little is known about genes that may affect intelligence. Designing, then, may be limited and give probabilistic predictions like that a child would have a 60 percent chance of being in the top half at school, he adds.
While Greely predicts it'll take a few decades for gene editing and reproductive tools to be used for genetic enhancements, Alta Charo from the University of Wisconsin tells Ball that it may never become common for people who aren't facing serious diseases or infertility. "[W]e already have evidence that people do not flock to technologies when they can conceive without assistance," she says.
https://www.genomeweb.com/scan/disease-design 
 
Reproductive Health
0 Comments

    Author

    Wallace Kaufman regularly updates science and News and Views. David Deamer writes an occasional blog, Science2.0.  Join the Revolution. Send us your comments.

    Archives

    February 2018
    July 2017
    May 2017
    January 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    August 2016

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • FOXP5
  • Excerpts
  • Reviews
  • Authors
  • Science
  • Contact
  • News And Views, Ours and Yours