NationStates Jolt Archive

What's your opinion concerning genetic engineering? This includes the various fields and uses of GE.

Gatatica was an excellent movie.

uber-supported><0rz

If used improperly, it will be the end of racial equality. It's one of the greatest threats to humanity there is.

I dislike genetic engineering because it disallows the idea of choice. Simply put, a fetus being engineered has no choice as to whether it wants whatever you are adding or removing from it. Additionally, people who aren't engineered have no hope of ever recieving it. However, minor things (long life, increased immunities) aren't too objectionable.

Yeah, you know, before I was born, I really wanted that gene that would cause me to die after my 1st birthday, you know?

Oh, and I am quite grateful that you reminded "Post and vote HERE." I almost voted in the "Atheism vs Agnosticism" thread and then posted on my front door, and that would have involved bending the nature of existence, something I can't do since I got my license to use omnipotence rejected at the local DMV.

I dislike genetic engineering because it disallows the idea of choice. Simply put, a fetus being engineered has no choice as to whether it wants whatever you are adding or removing from it. Additionally, people who aren't engineered have no hope of ever recieving it. However, minor things (long life, increased immunities) aren't too objectionable.

You can expect people to flame you to death about restricting the parents' right to "choose the genetic makeup of their child."

*sigh*

Oh, and I am quite grateful that you reminded "Post and vote HERE." I almost voted in the "Atheism vs Agnosticism" thread and then posted on my front door, and that would have involved bending the nature of existence, something I can't do since I got my license to use omnipotence rejected at the local DMV.

I made two threads by accident.

Yeah, you know, before I was born, I really wanted that gene that would cause me to die after my 1st birthday, you know?
I think this comment may have been directed at me, but I really have no idea what you're saying.
My point was that genetic engineering would only occur if someone else decided that you should have certain traits before you had a choice in the matter, or could even know what was happening, for that matter. It would mean that some lab worker somewhere actually owned you. Of course, with a culture that supports abortion, I suppose thats all you can expect.

I made two threads by accident.
Ah, now I understand. I didn't see the other thread at first and wasn't quite sure why you felt the need to append "(Post and vote HERE)."

Yes genetic engineering could be useful, to defeat disease and such, however increasing life spans would be a bad idea, as it would lead to overpopulation of the world.

In addition - babies have no choice as to how they come out anyway, plus I think having a tail or a couple extra arms would be handy. Also, your gene arn't what decide what you become, its a combination of that and the way you grow up. You could also decide what your child will become, add a couple extra fingers and their a pianist! Sort of like naming your kid Jeeves. Only one real job choice for a Jeeves. ;)

What's your opinion concerning genetic engineering? This includes the various fields and uses of GE.Genetic engineering has the potential to be an incredible boon to humanity. Plain old fashioned breeding has already done wonders with the plants we eat, but genetic engineering has the potential to be of great benefit there. We might be able to tweak, say rice, so it has more vitamins. In poor areas of the world this sort of thing could cause a great improvement in health. But this technology has a great potential for abuse. It also has the potential for causing environmental or health problems, but IMO this has been greatly overblown.

It would mean that some lab worker somewhere actually owned you.This I think is unlikely, they would just own your genetic code. But when it comes to GM crops, your vision is already coming true. Which will give the GM companies the clout to completely screw over farmers. Not good. I think the applicability of patents to GM needs to be severely curtailed. I think natural (preexisting) genetic codes should be public domain, and designed genomes subject to copyright on the specific genome, not patents on the general idea. There is a trade-off between encouraging innovation by creating monopolies under law (copyrights, patents), and encouraging innovation by allowing the free flow of ideas. Patents have their place, but in a number of domains they are far too freely granted. (Copyrights generally are not a problem).

Yes genetic engineering could be useful, to defeat disease and such, however increasing life spans would be a bad idea, as it would lead to overpopulation of the world.
If you defeated diseases, well that would expand lifespans as well.

In addition - babies have no choice as to how they come out anyway, plus I think having a tail or a couple extra arms would be handy.
But you'd have them forever, sans complicated surgery. I wouldn't particularly enjoy a tail being thrust upon my hindflanks, think about the problems you'd have with chairs.

Also, your gene arn't what decide what you become, its a combination of that and the way you grow up. You could also decide what your child will become, add a couple extra fingers and their a pianist! Sort of like naming your kid Jeeves. Only one real job choice for a Jeeves. ;)
But with extreme genetic engineering, your genes would be the determining factor. Of course, I am assuming a Brave New World scenario here, in which people are selected at birth to be sewage cleaners, leaders, pilots, whatever.

Yes genetic engineering could be useful, to defeat disease and such, however increasing life spans would be a bad idea, as it would lead to overpopulation of the world.

Another question...do you think the human psyche would be adapted for a life significantly longer than what we live? (I mean, if lifespans got to be some outrageous number like 150 years or something.)

As for me, I support genetic engineering for curing of diseases that hurt a person's quality of life. I am all for things like eliminating Duchenne's muscular dystrophy, or cystic fibrosis, and so on.

I do not want people to do cosmetic modifications or things just because, for instance, they want an athletic child or a blonde child and so on. And I don't really think that correcting EVERY little thing, like nearsightedness that can be fixed with glasses or contacts, is necessary. There still needs to be some variation in the human race, for sure.

Of course I support it, how else will Bush amass his armies of loyal Clonetroopers if he can't engineer them to be fanatical and dependant on him? :D

Of course I support it, how else will Bush amass his armies of loyal Clonetroopers if he can't engineer them to be fanatical and dependant on him? :D
He could just offer free propeller beanies, that's how I always assemble my legions of doom. Of course, I generally end up with a few hundred third graders, a handful of crackheads, and some scraggly hobo who insists I call him Mayor McCheese.

He could just offer free propeller beanies, that's how I always assemble my legions of doom. Of course, I generally end up with a few hundred third graders, a handful of crackheads, and some scraggly hobo who insists I call him Mayor McCheese.

So, that's how it's done. I've always been using free snowcones, but apparently up here in the Chilly North it's not very popular...

So, that's how it's done. I've always been using free snowcones, but apparently up here in the Chilly North it's not very popular...
The only problem is that the third graders have to return home in time for dinner and the crackheads refuse to come out until after dusk. Mayor McCheese is there all the time, I don't know if I have ever seen him sleep. Damn, that guy creeps me out.
Needless to say, I have yet to conquer much more than a neighbor's cat, and even that was touch and go.

The only problem is that the third graders have to return home in time for dinner and the crackheads refuse to come out until after dusk. Mayor McCheese is there all the time, I don't know if I have ever seen him sleep. Damn, that guy creeps me out.
Needless to say, I have yet to conquer much more than a neighbor's cat, and even that was touch and go.

A mere cat? You lucky dog, try going after a Muskrat with just yourself, your "slow" cousin and a couple of stoned teens armed with less-then-pointy sticks, lost nearly half my force before I claimed lordship over his burrow.

A mere cat? You lucky dog, try going after a Muskrat with just yourself, your "slow" cousin and a couple of stoned teens armed with less-then-pointy sticks, lost nearly half my force before I claimed lordship over his burrow.
The cat put up quite a fight, but we brought it down with only a few (dozen) down. A real high point as only 3/4ths of our casualties were inflicted by my own soldiers. Alas, the cat had brought in allies and we were unable to defeat the organized flea resistance.

Genetic Engineering for crops, I'm fine with.

If used improperly, it will be the end of racial equality. It's one of the greatest threats to humanity there is.
"genetic engineering will only lead to a Gundam SEED future!"
(I get dibs as being Kira Yamato then!)

I agree it would be a threat to equality (prolly not racial equality, but you get my point) - the way I see it, right now it should only be used to cure/prevent disease.

If we were to try and augment out physical abilities/intellect with it, the only way I could not see it causing major inequality ourselves is if the whole world were to undergo said engineering - unfortunately there would be too many people opposed to genetic engineering in this case, so I think the world has to go a bit more to 'the left' before we even think of genetic engineering in this case.

If used improperly, it will be the end of racial equality. It's one of the greatest threats to humanity there is.

What are you on about now? Racial equality? How in the world could genetic engineering have any meaningful effect on racial equality? The real danger from genetically engineered organisms is that they would supplant native organisms and destroy the genetic diversity that has allowed life to continue to exist on this planet despite rapid and severe changes in conditions. In essense uncontrolled genetic engineer could wipe out all life on the planet, but it really couldn't do anything to further or retraction steps toward racial equality.

Another question...do you think the human psyche would be adapted for a life significantly longer than what we live? (I mean, if lifespans got to be some outrageous number like 150 years or something.)

Yes. Most definatly.
I'm in full support of this and of therapeutic cloning as well.

Everyone seems to think that genetic engineering is only possible before birth. This is actually theoretically untrue. Many of the scientists working on genetic engineering are trying ways to genetically engineer those who have already been born with diseases. An interesting case was the SCIDS (bubble boy) patients they actually cured a few years back. Unfortunately, there were complications that led the the kids getting leukemia, but no before they had 3 years of completely normal lives (which is more than they would've had otherwise). Obviously, it still needs a lot of work - but it could be done. And I am all for it.

100% support because it can cure dieases and lengthen life.

What are you on about now? Racial equality? How in the world could genetic engineering have any meaningful effect on racial equality? The real danger from genetically engineered organisms is that they would supplant native organisms and destroy the genetic diversity that has allowed life to continue to exist on this planet despite rapid and severe changes in conditions. In essense uncontrolled genetic engineer could wipe out all life on the planet, but it really couldn't do anything to further or retraction steps toward racial equality.

well, who is more likely to have access to human ge, the rich in the post-industrial north or the poor in the global south? it won't be racial though, it will be class based.

but you are right, currently the big problems stem from plant ge and the possibility of further screwing our ecosystem with it (a pretty severe screwing at that). and the fact that it gives a few corporations direct ownership over the world's food supply, and they are already suing people for 'stealing' from them.

Honestly why not support it... i mean it could help alot of people in the end if we do it all correctly

:headbang: :sniper:

What are you on about now? Racial equality? How in the world could genetic engineering have any meaningful effect on racial equality?

Think about it. What if the rich genetically engineer their children to be smarter, stronger, etc.? GM would cost money, you know, and lots of it.

Honestly why not support it... i mean it could help alot of people in the end if we do it all correctly

because it can also kill us all, or at least fuck up the environment fairly significantly. and i don't trust the corporations behind all of this to do much in the way of protecting us from these possibilities as long as it is more profitable in the short term for them not to. or the government to do much better, being the tool of the capitalists that they are.

the risks are very significant, and the history of the principle actors should make everyone quite leery of them. given more trustworthy institutions, with the goal of safely helping people being fundamental and not secondary or a smokescreen, then ge would be more acceptable.

Yes. Most definatly.
I'm in full support of this and of therapeutic cloning as well.

I'm not so sure that the human psyche would be adapted for extremely long life (as in much longer than our normal lifespans). While there might be some people who could handle it, I am not sure that most people would be able to. I think that much time would have the potential to quite simply drive people mad. Death is a natural part of our existence, something that we are designed to expect, and I think that to be deprived it would eventually have damaging effects upon the psyche. Our entire existence is defined upon the fact that it will end, and I think that attempting immortality in physical form is something that we simply wouldn't be able to handle.

What's your opinion concerning genetic engineering? This includes the various fields and uses of GE.

You will have to be more specific. I am a biotechnologist and that sort of leaves me pro genetical engineering, but I would fight and die to avoid seeing the day it is used on the human race.

The problem with GE is that it will go the way of plant GM, with corperations calling the shots. Imagine a corperation which patents your genes...It wouldn't be used for the good of humanity, it would be used for the good of the rich. Just like cures for common diseases not reaching Africa, just this is much worse. GE is a whole can of worms which, given the precident, will only be used to help the rich - not humanity.

On a side note the human psyche could adpat to extended (not immortal) lifespans - not that long ago (relatively) people didn't like much past 45...

I would fight and die to avoid seeing the day it is used on the human race.

If you do die in that fight, at least you've guaranteed you won't see it used on humans ;).

Oh, and if you believe in some sort of afterlife or reincarnation wherein you can see what happens to living people, then you're annoying for ruining my clever observation.

I'm not so sure that the human psyche would be adapted for extremely long life (as in much longer than our normal lifespans). While there might be some people who could handle it, I am not sure that most people would be able to.
Oh please. How much longer do people live now, then just 80, 90 years ago? Adding 50-80 years to that won't have no big influence on the psyche.

Yah, well... I really don't know about GE, with our current level of knowledge and technology, GE is nothing less than dangerous...

Genetic engineering beyond the prevention of congenital disorders is pretty pointless because you can only give improvements to the next generation. Techniques that improve the physical conditions of humans after birth are the real treasure.

Genetic engineering beyond the prevention of congenital disorders is pretty pointless because you can only give improvements to the next generation. Techniques that improve the physical conditions of humans after birth are the real treasure.
Well yes. And thats what they are working on as well.
Everyone seems to think that genetic engineering is only possible before birth. This is actually theoretically untrue. Many of the scientists working on genetic engineering are trying ways to genetically engineer those who have already been born with diseases. An interesting case was the SCIDS (bubble boy) patients they actually cured a few years back. Unfortunately, there were complications that led the the kids getting leukemia, but no before they had 3 years of completely normal lives (which is more than they would've had otherwise). Obviously, it still needs a lot of work - but it could be done. And I am all for it.

Well yes. And thats what they are working on as well.

Oh right, I didn't realise that kind of stuff was included (I have heard of it though).

Think about it. What if the rich genetically engineer their children to be smarter, stronger, etc.? GM would cost money, you know, and lots of it.

Ok... so "the rich" are now a racial group?

Ok... so "the rich" are now a racial group?
Didn't you get the memo?

Didn't you get the memo?

No man... my secretary is out sick and I've been so busy I haven't gotten anything from my box in like 3 days!</randomness>

No man... my secretary is out sick and I've been so busy I haven't gotten anything from my box in like 3 days!</randomness>
*sigh* It's so hard getting good help these days.

*sigh* It's so hard getting good help these days.

Oh don't get me wrong, my secretary is great... when she's here. But when she's not everything goes straight to hell.

Ok... so "the rich" are now a racial group?

They will be once they GM their children.

They will be once they GM their children.
i suppose then we shouldn't allow rich people to feed their children nutritious food, or use medically available techniques to screen for genetic diseases, or get their children gene therapies to save their lives. i mean, if poor people can't do it, then we shouldn't let ANYBODY do it, right? why the hell should those kids get to eat just because they were born in a rich family? their parents have no right to exercise their opportunities, because there are people in the world who don't have the exact same opportunities! how dare somebody work, earn money, and then use that money to invest in the health and success of their family!

Ok... so "the rich" are now a racial group?

You think the wealthiest 5% of the world is comprised of the same percentage by race as the other 95%?
No, the wealthiest 5% is overwhelmingly Caucasian.

i suppose then we shouldn't allow rich people to feed their children nutritious food, or use medically available techniques to screen for genetic diseases, or get their children gene therapies to save their lives. i mean, if poor people can't do it, then we shouldn't let ANYBODY do it, right? why the hell should those kids get to eat just because they were born in a rich family? their parents have no right to exercise their opportunities, because there are people in the world who don't have the exact same opportunities! how dare somebody work, earn money, and then use that money to invest in the health and success of their family!

I think they shouldn't. A genetically enhanced master race is not a good thing by any stretch of the imagination. I knew you had little concern for humanity and equality, but I expected better from you.

You think the wealthiest 5% of the world is comprised of the same percentage by race as the other 95%?
No, the wealthiest 5% is overwhelmingly Caucasian.

First of all, the wealthiest 5% of the population, while mostly caucasian is not universally so, and second of all, because most ultra-wealthy people are caucasian does not mean that most caucasian people are ultra-wealthy. Race relations between the vast majority of caucasians and others would change in no way if the ultra-wealthy ceased to exist, much less if they chose to genetically engineer themselves and their children.

To Letilia: It is silly to think that genetic engineering would result in the creation of a new race. Genetic modification would likely have no effect on the common characteristics of race while it would have great effect on things such as disease which effect all races.

I think they shouldn't. A genetically enhanced master race is not a good thing by any stretch of the imagination. I knew you had little concern for humanity and equality, but I expected better from you.

Equality at any cost. I think we should intentionally deprive foetuses of oxygen so that they become brain damaged because it happens to some and it's unfair that others get to live normally.

Yeah, why should some people have good lives and some have bad lives, when everyone can have horrible lives?

Equality at any cost. I think we should intentionally deprive foetuses of oxygen so that they become brain damaged because it happens to some and it's unfair that others get to live normally.

I will never understand why capitalists have such a callous disregard for equality. I don't propose making everyone the same.

To Letilia: It is silly to think that genetic engineering would result in the creation of a new race. Genetic modification would likely have no effect on the common characteristics of race while it would have great effect on things such as disease which effect all races.

If you think increased intelligence, disease resistance, strength, etc. are insignificant, you are a fool. Genetic engineering would kill what little social mobility there is left. It's hard enough for the average worker to move up as it is. I see no reason to make it harder.

I will never understand why capitalists have such a callous disregard for equality. I don't propose making everyone the same.

I never undersatnd why morons can be so confident in their convictions despite their complete lack of understanding.

If you think increased intelligence, disease resistance, strength, etc. are insignificant, you are a fool. Genetic engineering would kill what little social mobility there is left. It's hard enough for the average worker to move up as it is. I see no reason to make it harder.

If you think genetic engineering will result in increased intelligence or strength you are a fool. Disease resistance is the only real improvement that will result from genetic engineering today. You of all people should realize that increased intelligence and strength, even if they were made available to the ultra-wealthy, would do very little to further their position and would do nothing to prevent the social mobility of others. The whole points of being ultra-wealthy is that it doesn't matter how smart or strong you are, you can still live without working a day. The ultra-wealthy stand to gain little from genetic engineering and the money they poor into research will go almost directly to benifits for the poor who stand to benifit greatly from genetic modifications once they become cheap enough.

The whole points of being ultra-wealthy is that it doesn't matter how smart or strong you are, you can still live without working a day.

Never have I seen such honesty from a capitalist. Nonetheless, given the costs of ordinary medical treatment, I would be genuinely surprised if GM became cheap enough for the poor to benefit from anytime soon.

I support it to increase crop yeilds, reduce pesticide use, cure hereditary diseases and that's it.

Never have I seen such honesty from a capitalist. Nonetheless, given the costs of ordinary medical treatment, I would be genuinely surprised if GM became cheap enough for the poor to benefit from anytime soon.

Your steriotypes are faulty.

Do you recall a disease called small pox? The treatment wasn't cheap when it was first developed but over time it became cheaper and eventually the treatment was used to erradicate small pox entirely. Eventually (sooner than you think) genetic engineering will be a relatively cheap procedure and will be done for everyone and for the benifit of everyone. Too often people do not understand the way the world works, helping others often helps you because they are better able to work. The ultra-wealthy stand to benifit incredibly from an end to common diseases in the people who work for them.

I'm all for screwing with our DNA.

We should evolve, like grow extra arms.

Would be friggen awesome.

I would be happy with glowing in the dark.

I say keep the government from interfering, let science take it's path.

Let's start at the beginning:

I'm all for Genetic Engineering in all its multiple and beautious forms.

Currently, in most countries throught-out the known world, the is very little if any form of racial equality. Few people refer to "Racial Equality" outside of the Western European afflicted nations to include the United States of America. In nations like Somalia, it referred to as tribal issues. They judge you on wether or not you have curley hair, or a flat nose bridge. In the baltic region, its wether you ascribe to Orthodox, Roman-Catholic, or Islam. Still not a racial issue, though they claim that it is, and call it ethnic cleansing. Can you honestly opine that wether someone is Asian (be it Philipine, or Hindi) or Congolese actually matters to the poor people in the GE arena? The people who are claiming race issues are doing so out of ignorance, and social training. Equality, of any type, is in the heart, not in the skin color.

Some have stated that Human GE might suggest moving outside the realms of freedom of choice for unborn children afflicted by the procedure. As stated by others, few neo-natals have ever opted out of being born either with blonde hair, or dark skin. They don't have the option, nor the ability to make decisions. For that matter, neither do children, in most countries, up until the age of 18. Decisions that might be considered life altering, ie removal of tonsils, braces, even choice of education, are left up to the parents of all minors as far as can be controlled until deemed adequate or necessary.

Relegating the argument of Human GE to the idea that GE can only be preformed pre-birth is not only un-educated, but unquestionably against common sense. First off, once a zygote has begun to form as an individual, any change to that individuals genetic structure should be considered manipultion. It is called engineering when it has design and purpose. If the manipulation can occur after the initial phase of meitosis begins, is not limited in its initiation scope, only in the methods or delivery required to affect the change. In other words, if one can manipulate the genes after the individual is created, then there isn't a time limit on when it has to occur. The problem is intorducing the change to an individual without affecting harm, or death. Recently scientist have been experimenting with the use of viral vectors in the introduction of new DNA segments to chromosomes of fully matured individuals. Its called gene-doping. This qualifies as genetic manipulation, and has been shown quite capable of double muscle mass in the individuals exposed for the specific change. Therefore, though the majority of currently viable GE expressions are carried out on pre-zygote gene-structures, it can actually be used in two different forms.

The use of GE to cure disease, extend life, or fix cosmetic function, is the first, and most easily accessable route. Not all myopic parents wish the same upon their little Suzies and Billies. If a person has the choice to make their own progenies lives easier, few choose another path. Only sadistic and uncaring people prefer to have the young suffer in ways that can be avoided by lessons learned in a previous generation. This holds true for all society with the rare exception of the Luddites and Amish derivative cultures. But, even these cultures, though not allowing advances in technology, still pass wisdom along of past mistakes, and successes to future generations, by-passing the need for completely reinventing the wheel every few years. I submit that only the book-burning, witch-hunters like McCarthy want to keep a populace in the dark.

Many true benefits have been uncovered lately in the fields of plant GM. These include the ability to grow rice and soy crops that can recover from nearly an entire month of drought, high-vitamin yeilding base crops, and extreme yeild food sources. Almost everyone one of the crop improvements is done within the boundries of GM friendly third-world nations who immediatly benefit from the crops themselves. Local farmers can't tell imported american, $3 an ear corn, from locally cheaply grown GM strains, they all look miraculously healthy and vibrant in comparison to measly native crops. You will find that the majority of protesting nations to the growth and encouragement of GM crops comes from nations who stand to lose from the loss of exports to the nations whose populations will be freed from the starvation by new strains of healthier produce.

I rarely hear complaints about the strain on the native flora and fauna caused by the importation to Ireland from South America of the Potato. Yet, the idea of the introduction a vibrant agricultural plant to a local causes an unprecedented out-rage from both of the more extreme and fanatic sides of the political spectrum. The recent vandalism and destruction of more than 3 million pounds-sterling of experimental corn crops in Great Britain is example enough. Not a single person was prosecuted, and no renumeration is forth coming. How is it then, that no one is hunting sea-gulls, and other migratory birds who's gauno introduces more non-native species to foreign soil than any other animal species barring humans?

The extension of human life expectancy, is a natural out-growth of our advancement within all sciences. But, the use of GE/GM to extend our life-spans is not only useful and obvious, but required for near-future endeavors of the human race. There is currently too much knowledge for any single person to learn, and manipulate within any one single 75 year life-span. As our knowledge base grows, more and more time is taken in the pursuit of simply learning how to become a functioning member of this society, let alone a productive one. As GE increases the number of years that people are able to enjoy and use the knowledge they have acquired in life, the quality of that life will continue to improve. It will not only be the addition of years to short pieces of ones genetic code that bring about these increased life-span, but also the elimination of viral, bacterial, and prional diseases, increased resistance to accidental harm, improved reflexes, stress-management, and more open and complex think processes. All possible through genetic manipulation and enhancement.

Though this research is carried out by the more affluent and capable levels of society, the actual benefits will carry to the population at large. Not more than 15 years ago computer at home were toys for the rich. Now just about every american household employs a computer as a toy within the home, and most use unseen computers throughout their homes and vehicles on a daily basis without thinking of them one iota. Though electrical computer technologies were first engineered in the 1940's, it took 50 years for the then restricted and feared advancements to reach the average consumer in the nation that pioneered them. GE can be assumed to progress in much the same manner. Yet given today's faster paced gobal environment and the immense advantages that macro GE can confer, someone, somewhere will find a faster, cheaper, more within reach method to bring these technologies to the consumer at large.

Oh, I'd love to have large scale GE done to myself, butmostly it would be done to make sure that my children and theirs wouldn't be at risk for minor defects like tendencies towards varicose viens, cardiac arrest, or epilepsy. Extension or addition of senses would be prety darn spiffy. I'd love to see in the infrared.

Not sure, but I actually think that the highest per capita racial/ economic divide exists with middle eastern chromosome bearing groups. This includes so called Israelies, Bahrainies, Suadiis, and Syrians. Though the list of the top ten rishest people in the world contain 6 americans (who may or may not contain genes from the russian/ caucus region) the remaining 4 members are of Hametic ancestry. As te populations of many of those nations live well above the poverty line in state funded incomes, though not in quality of life, it may be said that some large portion of the upper echelons of the wealthy are not Caucasion or even more correctly of western european decent, but middle eastern.

Uplift - excellent post. As such, I will try to be as serious as I can in my response.

I was joking about adding tails or arms, however this is a likely effect of introducing Genetic Engineering into our mass society. When we live in a world when people will tattoo themsleves so they are blue, and get horns surgically implanted into their heads - true story - we will of course get people who will want a mutant baby.

Also, gene-doping may or may not be a good thing. Although it has good intentions, it might unwittingly give an extended life to its recipient. This would be due to the fact that many people believe that it is the breakdown of cells that causes us to age. Having a virus-type thing go through with perfect DNA in it would therefore cause the person to rejuvenate physically.

One of the best mass effects of increasing life-spans to such a great effect is in Mars series by Kim Stanley Robinson, specifically in blue I believe. A treatment to make us live longer would hypothetically cost money. Poor people would therefore have no way to increase their lives, and the fear of death would drive them to revolt and get the treatment for themselves.

Although curing currently uncurable diseases would increase the general population, it would not do so to the effect that life increases would. Example: Today, most families have three generations still living, sometimes four, and rarely five: Great-Grandparents, Grandparents, Parents, Children, Grandchildren. This is with a genral lifespan of 75-80 years. Now double that age, and you would have 10 generations of a family alive in some cases. Now add those up assuming each generation has two children, who have two children, etc : 2+2+4+8+16+32+64+128+256+512 = 1024 people alive in one direct blood linked family, as opposed to a general max of 2+2+4+8+16 = 32. That is 32 more people for each single person in today's world, a whole lot more than would survive if disease was simply eliminated. It is even likely that age would be tripled or quadrupled in these cases, and even in simply doubling it we would run out of room very quickly.

It is this logic that I use when saying that increasing lifespans would be an extremely bad idea, so I hope that scientist can see the logic as well.

Life Span Lenthening :mp5:

I'm waiting for my commercially available Hitlerthulhu clone. That sums up my moral stance on genetic engineering.

I agree with the premise of the numbers... but lets see what I can pull out here instead...

If I'm 20, and I have two children, (lets say they are twins), and my wife and I still have both parents (40), and they both grandparents (60), and great-grandparents (80) then I am a lucky man. I've never known death.

I agree with the numbers so far.

The problem I have is that you are adding at least a generation to the computation for the extended life-spans. I come up with 512. Still alot of folks. You are also assuming an extremely prolific family that simply doesn't seem to have learned over 160 years, how to keep it in their pants.

My Grandmother was 93 when she died 6 years ago. She'd be 100 next month, and my only son just turned 1. Plus, there can't be any accidental death going on in these families either. Last point is that with only two children, you are only holding status quo. Each person matches up with their pair somewhere in the world. Anyone that dies an accidental death, or deosn't meet his/her mate decreases the surplus population.

Over-population might becaome an issue if proper food production and distrobution methods were not maintained. But, if that were the case, and distrobutions systems failed, the strongest (ie the Manipulated) would survive. As in all thing in nature, even the strogest most fit individual can be taken out by chance, and or random catacalysmic event. War also works wonders.

:sniper:

Uplift - I was just counting direct descendants of the first couple, 10 generations of them in all. And of course some people will die, or never marry, so that would take out several, but some people would also have more than two kids, my parents have 4 and 5 brothers and sisters. So I was going with a perfect case scenario, assuming noone forgot protection one night, and noone turned out single, just for arguements sake.

Also, I was going more with actual living space than anything else. We would all end up living in huge apartments and such. The approximate world population right now is 6,395,187,010 - (x32 by my estimation = 204,645,984,320). Population is on the rise as it is, now throw in the fact that most people wouldn't die for 100 or so more years, and the population would increase by leaps and bounds. I am sure that food distribution could keep up, but I would hold off on giving out life treatments until we have the ability to travel to another planent and terraform it, simply because Earth would have to turn into one giant city - and I like trees and lakes and water and that sort of thing.

You could never build enough ships, or large enough ships to move a large enough sector of the population to event dent the growth rate, you just spread the disease to another planet.

My calculation of the 10 generations says you come out to 180 years old... am I correct? I was just going off doubling the lifespan of 75-80. Sorry if I misunderstood.

And I think I worked it out one time, and if there were 10 Billion people on the surface of the earth (land surface only) there would stll be enough room for everyone to have 2 acres apiece. Plenty of room for trees, though it would take management, and would basically be just one large park.

Was actually just going by the max 5 generation thing, forgot all about age. However that is assuming that the lifespan will just double, and not triple or whatever. However if we do assume that it would go up to 10th generation, which it would probably do, and more that would make 204 billion people approximatly - 102 with 9 generations. Hopefully this will not come to be before we are able to start ruining other planets too. However if we put them all in sleep pods and just shot them over to other planets with a big cannon in space...sounds like great entertainment too.

It would definately call for war then with 204 billion people. But what a war it would be too.... great, brilliant GE enhanced strategists, planning these immense battles to take out as many people as possible while leaving the arable land pristine. It'd be almost as stunning to watch as putting people to slep and launching them into space on a rail-gun. We can take turns inputting incorrect coordinates into the system and watch them burn to cinders as they cross the suns path.

Couldn't we just modify people to take up less space, and consume less food?

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_8_31/ai_58381560

This is an awfully nifty topic to explore, especially considering there's a UN resolution in NS on this.

I'm all for it, but I guess that's why it passed, eh?

I'm not so sure that the human psyche would be adapted for extremely long life (as in much longer than our normal lifespans). While there might be some people who could handle it, I am not sure that most people would be able to. I think that much time would have the potential to quite simply drive people mad. Death is a natural part of our existence, something that we are designed to expect, and I think that to be deprived it would eventually have damaging effects upon the psyche. Our entire existence is defined upon the fact that it will end, and I think that attempting immortality in physical form is something that we simply wouldn't be able to handle.

Good point! I would also be concerned that society itself might "ossify," as the number of genetically-engineered people rose. When you are virtually guaranteed a long life, barring accidents, I think most people would become far too cautious and stodgy. Preventing both accidents and change would become the standard for behavior, and risk-taking ( of whatever sort ) would become a thing of the past. Not exactly the sort of world I would like to live in.

Preventing both accidents and change would become the standard for behavior, and risk-taking ( of whatever sort ) would become a thing of the past.

I'm not sure you can actually claim this. If you look back in our recent history, the longer people seem to be living the riskier the chances people seem to want to take. Besides, if people get genetically altered, they may be more inclined to test the limits of the alterations, or earn a quick buck dazling people with the use of their prehensile tail.

GE has been around longer than mankind. Heck, we are the result of genetic engineering- What do you think evolution is anyway? The only difference now is that humans have some control to influence it.
Approved or not, people with mess with it because they can. Better its legal and out for public debate. I am all for GE.

Good point! I would also be concerned that society itself might "ossify," as the number of genetically-engineered people rose. When you are virtually guaranteed a long life, barring accidents, I think most people would become far too cautious and stodgy. Preventing both accidents and change would become the standard for behavior, and risk-taking ( of whatever sort ) would become a thing of the past. Not exactly the sort of world I would like to live in.

That's an interesting ramification of the longer lifespans that I didn't even think of myself! :-)

I'd been thinking more of the sorts of extremes that ennui could drive people to...that is, you'd hit a point where after having seen and done so much, very few things would be satisfying anymore. Some people might feel driven to seek very extreme things for some sort of emotional stimulation. Others might simply break with reality.

Ge!!! Ge!!! Ge!!! Gooooo Ge!!!

Ge!!! Ge!!! Ge!!! Gooooo Ge!!!

Unless this is a reference to Talking Heads lyrics, I've no idea what you mean by this.

I like GE too, but we still have much research to do if it would actually benefit us, although it looks that way rite now.

And Letila, just come out and say you don't want a Gundam SEED future!You'd want a Trigun future!

Unless this is a reference to Talking Heads lyrics, I've no idea what you mean by this.
I mean I'm all for Genetic Engineering.

And Letila, just come out and say you don't want a Gundam SEED future!You'd want a Trigun future!

Hey, good one. I'm not too fond of a Ghost in the Shell future, either.

Hey, good one. I'm not too fond of a Ghost in the Shell future, either.

Oh come on, cybernetics is much less dangerous than genetic engineering.

Oh come on, cybernetics is much less dangerous than genetic engineering.
Terminator, anyone?

Well there's an inherited risk to any form of technology so w/e

Oh come on, cybernetics is much less dangerous than genetic engineering.

Both are dangerous, but I find the idea of 99% of my "body" being owned and dependent on a futuristic police station to be quite creepy.

Cybernetics also tend to be a lot more disfiguring than GE. Lacus Clyne was attractive, but the borg (except presumably for 7 of 9) aren't.