Creating a Perfect Baby

[migtig]

I really have mixed feelings about this. Just because science makes it possible, should we do this? Part of me says yes, if I want a blue eyed dark haired little boy who would have no defects and perfect health, and I can afford this, then why shouldn't I have the perfect baby? Another part of me shudders and wonders what we will be breeding out of future generations. I think of 1984 and Brave New World and I'm frightened for our future.

Josef Mengele would say yes, we should create a perfect baby. After all, his research lead the way to make this possible.

IVF baby born using revolutionary genetic-screening process | Science | guardian.co.uk
Excerpt:
The first IVF baby to be screened using a procedure that can read every letter of the human genome has been born in the US.

Connor Levy was born on 18 May after a Philadelphia couple had cells from their IVF embryos sent to specialists in Oxford, who checked them for genetic abnormalities. The process helped doctors at the couple's fertility clinic in the US select embryos with the right number of chromosomes. These have a much higher chance of leading to a healthy baby.

The birth demonstrates how next-generation sequencing (NGS), which was developed to read whole genomes quickly and cheaply, is poised to transform the selection of embryos in IVF clinics. Though scientists only looked at chromosomes – the structures that hold genes – on this occasion, the falling cost of whole genome sequencing means doctors could soon read all the DNA of IVF embryos before choosing which to implant in the mother.

 

[kwillia]

There are a number of physically healthy and "perfect" people who are not "good" people and the world would be a better place if they were not born.

There are also a number of physically handicapped people who are such positive and "good" people that they've most certainly brought value to this world.

So bottom line... I don't care if you pick and chose your embryo to bring forth the most beautiful, physically aesthetic child into this world... if he/she is an evil being you've done us no favors.

 

[vraiblonde]

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this, since most people like to knee-jerk react and not really think about anything, but:

If we can ensure defect-free healthy babies, why wouldn't we?

Mig and Kwilly, I can usually count on you ladies to give me well thought out, objective discussion, so I'll direct this at you: What might we be losing out of future generations that would be a detriment to mankind and society by selective breeding?

 

[Vince]

In the distant future all will all be blue eyed, perfect physical condition, etc......and if a baby is born that doesn't meet the criteria? Not the right hair or eye color, too short, too tall.....they'll kill it.

 

[mv_princess]

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this, since most people like to knee-jerk react and not really think about anything, but:

If we can ensure defect-free healthy babies, why wouldn't we?

Mig and Kwilly, I can usually count on you ladies to give me well thought out, objective discussion, so I'll direct this at you: What might we be losing out of future generations that would be a detriment to mankind and society by selective breeding?

What's a defect? And who gets to pick out what should be considered a defect and what is normal?

 

[DEEKAYPEE8569]

I really have mixed feelings about this. Just because science makes it possible, should we do this? Part of me says yes, if I want a blue eyed dark haired little boy who would have no defects and perfect health, and I can afford this, then why shouldn't I have the perfect baby? Another part of me shudders and wonders what we will be breeding out of future generations. I think of 1984 and Brave New World and I'm frightened for our future.

Josef Mengele would say yes, we should create a perfect baby. After all, his research lead the way to make this possible.

IVF baby born using revolutionary genetic-screening process | Science | guardian.co.uk
Excerpt:
The first IVF baby to be screened using a procedure that can read every letter of the human genome has been born in the US.

Connor Levy was born on 18 May after a Philadelphia couple had cells from their IVF embryos sent to specialists in Oxford, who checked them for genetic abnormalities. The process helped doctors at the couple's fertility clinic in the US select embryos with the right number of chromosomes. These have a much higher chance of leading to a healthy baby.

The birth demonstrates how next-generation sequencing (NGS), which was developed to read whole genomes quickly and cheaply, is poised to transform the selection of embryos in IVF clinics. Though scientists only looked at chromosomes – the structures that hold genes – on this occasion, the falling cost of whole genome sequencing means doctors could soon read all the DNA of IVF embryos before choosing which to implant in the mother.

But whatever happened to deciding to have a child, having sex; if for no other reason than 'it feels good,' and then, if a baby comes along; accepting the child "as is" so to speak; and dealing with any anomalies that might be present.

I ask because when my Brother and I came along, Mom & Dad did not decide, 'well, I didn't sign on for all this' and then give us up for adoption. "All this" is a broad-stroke term for all the trips to G'town and Children's in D.C. and all the surgeries therein; for both my Brother and myself.

 

[vraiblonde]

What's a defect? And who gets to pick out what should be considered a defect and what is normal?

My understanding of the article is that they are talking about health issues, not superficial traits like eye or hair color. If a couple can choose a baby without Down Syndrome vs. one with, why would it be bad for them to do that?

 

[Vince]

My understanding of the article is that they are talking about health issues, not superficial traits like eye or hair color. If a couple can choose a baby without Down Syndrome vs. one with, why would it be bad for them to do that?

Now that I understand. But if they can do that, sooner or later they will start with the "imperfections." People are never satisfied.

 

[mv_princess]

My understanding of the article is that they are talking about health issues, not superficial traits like eye or hair color. If a couple can choose a baby without Down Syndrome vs. one with, why would it be bad for them to do that?

I'm not saying they can't, they do the test now where you can decide if that is what you want vs. not. So since they do this testing now and already what else would you be gaining?

 

[MarieB]

I'm not saying they can't, they do the test now where you can decide if that is what you want vs. not. So since they do this testing now and already what else would you be gaining?

What testing are you referring to?

 

[mAlice]

Don't forget Gattaca. Good movie.

 

[mv_princess]

What testing are you referring to?

There is a test now that can use for Down Sydrome, and I only know this because my girlfriend is pregnant and just had it done. It's a blood test and can let you know if the baby has it.
They have had this test for years if I understand right, they used to have to stick a needle in the belly to find out though.

I am not for or against testing, or creating a life of your coosing. I am just wondering who gets to pick out what is perfect and what isn't?

 

[Toxick]

I really have mixed feelings about this. Just because science makes it possible, should we do this? Part of me says yes, if I want a blue eyed dark haired little boy who would have no defects and perfect health, and I can afford this, then why shouldn't I have the perfect baby? Another part of me shudders and wonders what we will be breeding out of future generations. I think of 1984 and Brave New World and I'm frightened for our future.

Josef Mengele would say yes, we should create a perfect baby. After all, his research lead the way to make this possible.

IVF baby born using revolutionary genetic-screening process | Science | guardian.co.uk
Excerpt:
The first IVF baby to be screened using a procedure that can read every letter of the human genome has been born in the US.

Connor Levy was born on 18 May after a Philadelphia couple had cells from their IVF embryos sent to specialists in Oxford, who checked them for genetic abnormalities. The process helped doctors at the couple's fertility clinic in the US select embryos with the right number of chromosomes. These have a much higher chance of leading to a healthy baby.

The birth demonstrates how next-generation sequencing (NGS), which was developed to read whole genomes quickly and cheaply, is poised to transform the selection of embryos in IVF clinics. Though scientists only looked at chromosomes – the structures that hold genes – on this occasion, the falling cost of whole genome sequencing means doctors could soon read all the DNA of IVF embryos before choosing which to implant in the mother.

I not only think this is a great idea, I think it should be available freely to everyone - (fat chance, that).

In two generations - three tops - and we won't even need the technology any more. We'll cull out the weak and stupid genes, and voila, our species is saved.




We will once again deserve to be on the top of the food chain, rather than being there through past achievements and/or divine intervention.

 

[SoMDGirl42]

There is a test now that can use for Down Sydrome, and I only know this because my girlfriend is pregnant and just had it done. It's a blood test and can let you know if the baby has it.
They have had this test for years if I understand right, they used to have to stick a needle in the belly to find out though.

I am not for or against testing, or creating a life of your coosing. I am just wondering who gets to pick out what is perfect and what isn't?

Just to clarify, the test has been around for many years, I had it done with my oldest who will be 27 next month. However, it was not done through sticking you in the belly. It is a blood test to look for markers. If the markers come back abnormal suggesting you MAY have a child with down syndrome, then they begin further testing. The only way to know 100% is by an amniocentesis (drawing fluild from the amnio sac through a needle in the belly).

 

[kwillia]

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this, since most people like to knee-jerk react and not really think about anything, but:

If we can ensure defect-free healthy babies, why wouldn't we?

Mig and Kwilly, I can usually count on you ladies to give me well thought out, objective discussion, so I'll direct this at you: What might we be losing out of future generations that would be a detriment to mankind and society by selective breeding?

I most certainly understand your point. I often times find myself questioning why parents with known genetic malformations chose to bring a child into this world knowing they would be faced with a lifetime of hardships and discrimination.

But on the other hand, I also recognize the slippery slope. Who gets to decide where the line is drawn as to what genetic predisposition will be acceptable? And the the genetic screening won't reduce the azzholes in life so wouldn't that give us a future full of jerks moreso than what we have today? Again, many a brilliant mind has been born into a frail or disabled body. Who the hell are we to decide whether or not their life is worthy? You and I most certainly don't get to decide this for them.

 

[MarieB]

There is a test now that can use for Down Sydrome, and I only know this because my girlfriend is pregnant and just had it done. It's a blood test and can let you know if the baby has it.
They have had this test for years if I understand right, they used to have to stick a needle in the belly to find out though.

I am not for or against testing, or creating a life of your coosing. I am just wondering who gets to pick out what is perfect and what isn't?

But having a marker test after you are pregnant is not the same

 

[vraiblonde]

Again, many a brilliant mind has been born into a frail or disabled body. Who the hell are we to decide whether or not their life is worthy? You and I most certainly don't get to decide this for them.

But on that note, how many geniuses, inventors, and potential leaders are we allowing to be washed away because nature chose the genetically damaged egg/sperm instead?

My understanding of this procedure is that they fertilize a number of eggs, then test each for health defects. The winner gets implanted. This way the Down Syndrome or diabetes or whatever embryo doesn't even get that far, which will eliminate the need for abortion should the parents decide they cannot raise a child with a birth defect.

I'm curious why you think there will be more jerks in the world? Just because someone has a physical defect doesn't make them a good person or have anything to offer the world. The severely retarded and crippled among us bring nothing to the table, and we've heard any number of cases where a mentally retarded person committed a terrible crime - rape or murder or child molestation. In fact most violent criminals are of low IQ.

 

[vraiblonde]

Who the hell are we to decide whether or not their life is worthy? You and I most certainly don't get to decide this for them.

We wouldn't decide - their parents would decide. My understanding is that it would be choice, not mandatory, before they are even a true embryo.

 

[kwillia]

But on that note, how many geniuses, inventors, and potential leaders are we allowing to be washed away because nature chose the genetically damaged egg/sperm instead?My understanding of this procedure is that they fertilize a number of eggs, then test each for health defects. The winner gets implanted. This way the Down Syndrome or diabetes or whatever embryo doesn't even get that far, which will eliminate the need for abortion should the parents decide they cannot raise a child with a birth defect.

I'm curious why you think there will be more jerks in the world? Just because someone has a physical defect doesn't make them a good person or have anything to offer the world. The severely retarded and crippled among us bring nothing to the table, and we've heard any number of cases where a mentally retarded person committed a terrible crime - rape or murder or child molestation. In fact most violent criminals are of low IQ.

We don't need a world full of just geniuses, inventors and potential leaders... we need a bigger blend than that... I liken it to the boards. We have a mixed bag of posters here... geniuses as well as those with obviously lower IQs. We have rational and irational folks. We have conservatives and liberals... etc. I would not be here on the forums every day if only the "gifted", "normal", "healthy" people posted.

I trust in yin and yang... seemingly opposite or contrary forces are interconnected and interdependent in the natural world. They give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another.

I have no problem with parents having this as an option. None whatsoever. But I would have a problem if it was made manditory for the "betterment of society and the human race". And as for my point regarding having more jerks in the world... I believe that would happen because we would be screening for all sorts of things but not for personailty thus eventually increasing the odds of jerks mating with each other turning out more jerks.

 

[kwillia]

We wouldn't decide - their parents would decide. My understanding is that it would be choice, not mandatory, before they are even a true embryo.

I have no issue with a parent chosing this option. Just as I have no issue with parents chosing the option of abortion. Their reproductiveness (or not) is a personal issue and none of our business.