The Science Behind 'Genetically Modified Humans'
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 03. 2015
- The media have been talking about “genetically modified humans” and “designer babies.” But what they’re really talking about is germ-line engineering: a process that could help eliminate heritable diseases. So why do some scientists want to pause the research?
Hosted by: Hank Green
----------
Messages from our Subbable subscribers:
“Don't Forget to be Awesome!!” - Travis
“Proud supporter of SciShow! Yay science!” - Jeff Tucker
“Good frames won't save bad paintings.” - Will Snider
“SciShow: Life, the Universe, and Everything.” - B. Johnston
“Happy Birthday Joshua Hargrove!” - Margaret & Chris
"Handmade one of a kind bags: www.etsy.com/ca/shop/Sourbags..." - Sour Bags & Totes
“Hey Dooblydoo, how is life? Good to hear! Bye DFTBA!” - Jessica Howard
“I’m going to miss Subbable, it was a great idea” - Les Aker
“Love's a chemical reaction, and chemical reactions are gender neutral.” - Shaun Kirby
“For Danish Nerdfighters - Vi ses i København!” - Lasse Andersen
----------
Like SciShow? Want to help support us, and also get things to put on your walls, cover your torso and hold your liquids? Check out our awesome products over at DFTBA Records: dftba.com/scishow
Or help support us by becoming our patron on Patreon:
/ scishow
----------
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook: / scishow
Twitter: / scishow
Tumblr: / scishow
Instagram: / thescishow
Sources:
www.nature.com/news/don-t-edit...
www.technologyreview.com/featu...
www.technologyreview.com/revie...
• Genome Editing with CR...
This will be a hard sell. People are already screaming about genetically modified food. The other day a little old lady explained to me with great sincerity how she had lived gluten-free most of her life, because there was no gluten in wheat before "the GMO's got into the wheat supply."
lol
What a dumb bitch. Then again, forty percent of the US is creationist, so nothing surprises me anymore.
CorneliusSneedley But gluten is good for you... Gluten-free products are for people who developed an allergy to it. Gluten-free products have more sugar and fat in it as well.
Brandon Suen Perhaps you should read my post again. My point was not whether gluten is good or bad, but that people are often horribly misinformed when it comes to this sort of thing.
The woman in my example apparently thinks gluten is bad, and that genetically modified food is too, so she combined the two; she thinks one caused the other. In her mind there was no gluten in wheat before we started genetically modifying food, which is absurd, of course.
(Not to mention we began genetically modifying food somewhere near the dawn of agriculture.)
lmfao at "before the gluten got into the wheat supply"
your comment should have more likes
As a university student specializing in molecular biology and currently working a bio research company that utilizes technology such as CRISPR/CAS9, i can say that the media does a terrible job portraying its potential. To portray the technology as a means for designer babies is terrible, and detracts from its immense potential as a tool to treat many genetic disorders, major or minor. The efficacy of the technology will only get better as further research is done, but not if the public pressures wrongly to disband its use.
Yeah. Have you been as frustrated as I have with the current GMO debate?
PINGPONGROCKSBRAH Tell me about it, nowadays people are starting to believe that GMO = apocalypse, even though it will one of the most powerful tools in our disposal for facing pressing issues of climate change, food production and general health.
Roanemity hehe, isn't some food, specially fruits and vegetables, already modified through selective breeding and crossing some plants with other plants. I guess GMO will optimize this process to some degree and provides us with enough of an edge. And indeed, we need to adapt to enviromental changes and that could help a lot. I just hope that GMO wont be used to blindly capitalise markets for pure profit :(
Roanemity Well, it's not GMO itself that many people have a problem with, it's Monsanto.
***** I think that the Monsanto hate is way overblown. There's a bunch of big agriculture companies that do the exact same thing as Monsanto. Monsanto's not even the biggest. Yet for some reason it gets all the hate.
On the one hand, yay! No more heritable diseases! On the other hand, many parents already feel an excessive sense of ownership over their children's bodies (which lets them justify things like circumcision, or childhood piercings), and giving them direct access to their child's genome will only exacerbate that. Not sure if that's a good thing.
hence only use it to remove horrible hereditary diseases, and make other genetic modifications for non-vital purposes illegal.
You forget one thing. Genetic modifications are very specific and will just target cancer. We aren't talking about a parent choosing they want their child to be amazing in X so they have genetic changes made to that child so they are better at X. We are talking about stopping someone from suffering from Y so they can live a happier life.
Also I can say from experience circumcision doesn't really have any negative effects at all and forcing a child to get piercings can fall under under child abuse and can be dealt with. And a child getting an ear piercing is one of the LAST things we need to worry about. An inhabitable planet in 100-500 years should be more important, in my opinion at least.
***** you mean circumcision that drops the spread of aids so drastically, that they have instituted it as the number one way to stop its spread in poor countries. Those scientist are so superstitious, with their scientific method and they theory of evolution. Truthfully you sound more superstitious about circumcision then it really is, maybe read a scientific report rather then religious dogma on the matter.
Cuddles the Mighty haha ok, lets see some sources for that..?
Cuddles the Mighty Sure circumcision helps in third world countries. But there are far better ways to prevent STD's than genital mutilation, such as education on the subject, access to medical care and condoms.
Basically I say, if you can get it to 99% effectiveness and eliminate any significant threat of new mutation, go for it. Keep the research going no matter what though. The bar should be set really high for human testing though.
This is great aside from the fact that it would cost a lot to do it and if only rich people can do this, we'll end up in a society where the rich children are genetically modified and better suited for life and the poor people aren't. It'll just cause an even bigger disparity between rich and poor people.
Yes. This.
I'm fairly certain public health funds like the NHS would cover it since it costs less than treating genetic illnesses. Besides, even if it was expensive, that's no reason to not develop it and make it an option.
What you fail to realize is that everything that's new and on the horizon of technology is always going to cost a crap load of money till "they" can find a cheaper more efficient way of producing said product. Its just capitalism at its finest...which isn't a bad thing.
True, but rich children are already so much more advantaged, I don't see this making much of a difference. And hopefully with the direction the world is going in, we will soon have decent universal healthcare so that the health gap between rich and poor starts to go away.
Hahahaahaaaaa!!!!!! The rich will stay rich until another rich ass becomes even more rich, this "equality" you speak of is a fantasy at best, that's been proven to not work. Communism
Lets do it.
Why should human nature be left to the random devices of nature?
Why should we accept that our genetic blueprint is just the way it "is"
We should take our destiny into our own hands
Go science
You have no idea what you’re talking about
@@softdrink-0 this is the next step of evolution tho
@@softdrink-0 Now that its forced?
Clueless
@@softdrink-0 Why dont you explain it to me then mr Biology?
Always fun when you guys discuss stuff that I use in lab. You guys always do a great job making this understandable for the general public.
I think that Hank should do a video about eugenics. That should *really* get the comments section fired up :P
Welcome to 2021. Don't believe the media.
Hmm, the scientists want to include the general public in to the discussion? Unwise... The quesion is too important.
***** Its a damn shame too.
***** Or, we could attempt to educate the "general public" (which, by the way includes most of the viewers of this video), so that the proper decision is made, as opposed to criticizing people for ignorance, which they do not have control over.
IcarusRC Manic I'm all for thinking generously and imagining others complexly, but this is the sort of issue which will inevitably push a significant portion, possibly a majority, of the general public into stupid outrage. Mob mentality, false authority, we've seen it all before.
Those who want the general public to attend are the conservative ones who for their own reasons want to slow down the pace. Of course, they're also the ones creating fear, uncertainty and doubt by making hollow statements that sound reasonable to uninformed observers.
***** I agree that Scishow (judging by the comments section at least) has a relatively rational audience. However, the problem with not including the general public is that, as wonderful as the science is, it can really only tell us what's true and possible, not what we should or should not do.
Take Climate Change for example, scientists can prove it's happening, quantify who and what is doing the damage and even produce technologies aimed at reducing carbon emissions. However, it's ultimately up to politicians and you and I whether or not we are willing make the changes necessary to solve the problem. Unfortunately (or fortunately), scientists aren't legislators.
There is a massive moral grey area around what would and would not be acceptable when it comes to genetic modification e.g. Cosmetic facial deformities? Genes which may only be moderately harmful? Autism? It's not within the realm of science to make that decision.
One word:
Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!
Oh, and a question:
Is this "transhumanist"?
Ruudsch Ma' Hinda
It could be called trans-humanist, but that would be an entirely contextual distinction. A transhumanist would aspire to modify humans beyond their normal limitations, while here for the most part it is intended only for medical benefits. Thus the distinction being application, not the technology itself.
CyberizedFuture
on the star trek vein: you described the Borg. Resistence is Futile.
Dustin Noyfba
I wouldn't necessarily go that far. For example, just how different can two sentient species be? It easy to imagine something smart then ourselves, but considering that we don't even know how intelligence works, it may not even possible, and there's only "instinct based" and "reason based" as options, with only a small middle zone between the two for a species adapting into a category.
My point being, the idea that a group of humans becoming more advanced then the others forcing a "covert or die" situation is a rather large assumption. It would depend on just how different and in what ways before you could reasonable characterize it.
i was being quasi-facetious.
"Do you know what humanity's greatest weakness is? Humans consistently ignore the endless infinity of possibilities in favor of maintaining the status quo. People fear change, they settle with fine when they could have exceptional."
Getting desirable genes with this is anyday better than winning a genetic lottery.
"Hey guys! I found out how to remove like, every single disease ever from the human condition!" Said scientist 1
"What? How dare you play god!" Screamed the religitards.
"Don't mind them, is it an injectable? Gimme as much as you can. I'll randomly give it to as many people as possible. Let's get rid of ALS first." I interjected.
Meep Changeling "Slow down! you keep missing the vein and you stabbed Billy in the eye D:"..."FUCK YOU BILLY! XD"
I'm pretty sure that there are worse and more common diseases to wipe out than ALS...
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8
Haleigh
Yeah, who are these few scientists to decide for us?! Sure, the world is better than ever before, but who cares about facts!
If religious fanatics believed in logic and reason, there wouldn't be religious fanatics...
what it could be: "YAY! NO MORE CANCER! :D"
what it will probably turn into: "MY BABY'S WOLVERINE! :D"
Cancer is man made. Some few German scientists in the early 1900's created cancer.
@@AG-jq3kr can confirm as an eye witness
This came out the day after Insurgent was released. I don't think you were pointing the genetically modified humans plot of Allegiant (third Divergent book), but it still blew my mind.
"I'm not going to tell you what to think, but I will tell you what you need to know." Wise words.
I think that research (increasing our understanding and control of things) should always continue, but we should not operate on humans until we are absolutely sure we know what we're doing.
As someone with a genetic disorder (hemophilia) this is incredible news. I was worried about whether or not it would be ethical for me to have children and have them bear this disease but if scientists are able to "clean" my genes that would be great.
In my mind, using this technology to achieve beauty, strength, or intelligence should be banned, but removing harmful genetic diseases should be encouraged, if not obligatory.
why? What's wrong with wanting a beautiful, strong, intelligent baby? By the way, most would agree that strength and intelligence are traits formed by environment, not DNA
James Lee Why? Wouldn't it be fun if all of us have increased strenght stamina and speed?
Bashar Shierzaad The problem there is the "all of us" part. Those not wealthy enough to be able to pay for such a treatment would never see the light of that technology, not to mention their then not so beautiful and strong offspring. You'd create an unfair two-class-society.
James there is literally no logic behind that
Scoldpedia I think "most" would agree that those traits come from a mixture of both environment and genetics. I don't see how you could argue otherwise. Regardless I agree. There is no reason to hold back on something that will make our species better.
Everytime I watch scishow I level up. Cool thanks guys XD excellent foods for thought! Love the videos!
"i won't tell you what you need think but i will give you all the information you need to know" this is why i love scishow so much
Hank, how much information can you fit into that head of yours ?
He's most likely reading off a script.
Amarís Blackscale yeah he clearly is reading
Amarís Blackscale Most people could probably memorize the script, but it would take a lot of time (likely more time than they have before shooting the video).
its called a script
Approximately 4 minutes worth.
So now were playin pimp my fetus?
Lol
😂😂
lol
Thanks for this video,it helped me with my essay.
Thank you for explaining this in a way that made sense!
It's a good idea but it should only be used on actual human children if there are very little to no risks or side effects to it.
No one said this was a finished product. It's still in development.
Why only human children and Ye what he said it's not finished yet they have to make sure it has 0 side affects or 0 unfixable side affects
There will NEVER be no risks or side effects. There never is. You can't drink a cup of coffee without side effects. All you can do, is ignore the risks, and foolishly trust that they know what they are doing. Sneek peek: They don't. They are just toying with things and though they might "perfect" it, they will not have the slightest idea what they are doing in your lifetime. 100 years from now, they will look back at our medical technology and laugh at how stupid we were (are). We are not many steps away from drilling holes in our heads to cure a headache.
Adam, you're a moron. Comparing genetic engineering to drilling holes in people's heads? We know whay genes are and how they work. You provided no compelling argument to not engage in this research. Only rhetoric.
Nothing doesn't have side effects... doing anything has side effects... eating a banana gives the risk of catching a diseases taking out the trash gives the risk of kidnap. Risks must happen or nothing can happen.
I would love my kid regardless of any genetic faults they may have but being able to take out these faults would make life for them and life for me easier. I think that scientists should keep researching before testing humans though.
Agreed.
I mean yeah by their apperance I wont change them, as logn as they want to change themselves. But if its like a genetic gene which causes cancer, yeah Im modifying them.
What if.. those who are opposed to it... don't use it.
=o
"Survival of the FITTEST"
"Livin' la vida loca"
agree
whats the point of having a debate?
those of who are opposed to it, don't do it
It would be unethical not to use genetic modification, like parents who refuse to vaccinate their children, cursing their children to inherit vulnerable to diseases that should otherwise be eradicated
At the moment it isn't unethical not to (ohh the triple), as it's untested and not commercially available..
..but yes I think your vaccination analogy will be very accurate after gen modding becomes viable for sale to the public and has proven good results. Personally, I can't wait... seriously I volunteer my first born.
Did anyone else just watch a pre-roll advertisement with Hank singing about STEM?
AWESOME.
Does this mean there may be a cure for the Ginger gene?
HoldOnToYourTails Holy shit! You're right! We'll be able to ensure that no future humans are born without souls!
Whats wrong with Ginger ale?
It's called hair dye.
Whaaa? Cure for hair color? Dafaq?
I sure hope no one decides to do such a thing. I love ginger girls.
guess you've never seen the movie gattaca ... basicly every is genetically engineered since birth , and those who aren't , are giving the sewer and janitor jobs .. stuff like that , very interesting film haha a man who is "normal" tried to be as perfect as possible .. long story .. good film
good film? more like best fricking film ever. watched it twice in a row once and became ill but didn't regret it
haha XD i just had to watched the trailer for it seeing as i haven't watched it in years and the trailer doesn't do it justice but its definetly a good film ! but i would probably say The Shawshank Redemption is the best film ever haha
jacobjericho1 That is also the best film ever 😜
I am so glad you don't decide public policy. Deciding based on a movie? Grow up.
"We need to quadruple the entire military budget because I saw independence day! Dur!"
You sound that dumb.
i think that global conversations are a good thing to have in our interconnected always-on and happening world
This channel comforts my brain. :-)
Let's do it and don't debate it with the public, they can not handle this discussion. People will bring religion and their own biases into it and before you know it all research will be hampered.
I like the idea of using it to stop diseases, did not know about that, I had only heard about using it to pick eye color and things like that.
You have to start somewhere. You don't modify important genes first.
Diana Peña i like when they made glowing rats by changing the genes
Could you please do a video on the CRISPR technique?
Well done and informative
You'd be surprised what kind of risks people will take to surpass average humanity, or in the more misanthropic cases; divorce them from their human form. If you're willing to loose an arm to get a cyborg arm, then I can see where one would be cool with the risks of germ line therapy and more. Of course... This is coming from me, the one who continues to want a fluffy tail.
Well, perhaps we could one day go beyond fear, pain, death, and hatred.
+Paul Mahoney I just want a healing factor like Wolverine
Ooooh, i want wolf's ears....or a german shepard's ears would be cool too with my brown hair :D
+Paul Mahoney pain and fear are very essential to survival , fear prevents you from doing anything that might injure or kill you , and pain is your brain telling you to deal with imminent danger , if you have a dangerous disease , your inability to feel pain will make you less likely to spot it
Karim It is more complex than that, but yes, fear and pain are essential, but if we discover a way to become immortal, I wonder if it will still remain as essential... but that is a debate for those far ahead of us.... assuming we figure out the secret to immortality.
In my opinion, this might be a crucial step to assure our evolution. It's obvious that natural selection doesn't really apply to humans anymore because of modern medicine etc. People with certain diseases or "bad genes" will now be able to survive and pass on their genes, where that would not have been possible earlier in our evolution. This means that "bad genes" will be passed on a lot more often. When both the male and female pass on their specific "bad gene", their offspring would have both. This might cause a weakening of our species, through our DNA. So yes, I think altering DNA and getting rid of disease-related genes will prove to be beneficial in the long run. My only fear is that it will be commercialised and people will be able to go to the hospital and decide what their offspring will look like (skin color, hair color, ..) and what they will be like for a price.
So in short:
For health purposes: YES, definitely!
For aesthetic/personality purposes: definite NO!
This is a really good point - a lot of diseases that used to kill people before they could reproduce are now treatable, but the underlying genetic issue gets passed on, as a result.
We should continue the researches and don't fall into fear. It was the same before when the scientists made experiments which weren't appriciated at the time but now we are greatful that they did it. ( for example Leonardo Davinci who did experiments on dead bodies and drew many organs unknown at the time and helped him to figure how they worked)
for deep-space exploration this is to 99% an absolute must to do, or else we shuld not expect getting much further then to mars, genetic modification is also one of the most likely things that we unavoidably must do if we ever wana live anywhere else then earth., so this is definetly to 100% a must area to further explore for the greater good of humanity in the long run.
At 2:25 there is a typo. "Scientists discovered thy could..." I'm guessing it was supposed to be "Scientists discovered they could..."
I'm so glad someone else noticed that as well.
So glad I wasn't the only one...
they still haven't fixed it, not even with an annotation....
I hope they continue to develop the technology.
I want to engineer the heck out of my offspring.
We can't really afford to keep playing a game of chance with the way society is progressing.
This was my topic for an argument speech in my english class a few weeks agp
Sound like we are not ready, but we should definitely use it when we are, preventing sickness is always best way to stay healthy.
Imagine all those Japanese people who will get their babies red and blonde hair.
XD
Also blue :)
+Ate Scaladferri More like green and blue hair with anime-style spikes.
Lmfao.
i don't get it… why even bring it up if it only works 20-40% of the time and can produce other mutations which could potentially be bad? Isn't it kind of out of the question until it works like 99% of the time…?
I assume that's why they want to do more research...
but I meant, why even bring it up?
Joseph Dember You know how research works? Its not that easy. Every organism is different, so if it works for monkeys it could totally fail by humans. Even if the rate of failure is very low in a similar species it still is possible that it fails in humans. To prevent that and invent new methods etc., tests on humans must be made to optimize it. And that is the point of this video and this topic in general --> Should we even try it humans? or if, when? What are the criteria for us to start? and of course, what are the consequences for the modified human beeing and its social surrounding especially if its a failure; do they have equal rights?
MANUakaSHUFFY I would imagine most, if not all, of these modifications are done in vitro. He specifically discussed germ cells (sperm and ova) meaning at most we are talking about modifications to a zygote. If it fails, they just destroy the cells instead of implanting it and allowing it to develop.
renaissanceexodus Yes, but for some things you can only say it has succeeded or failed if the subject is grown up enough. Some of the failures can be detected early, but by far not all. Plus because it is about working with potential lifes, many questions about ethnicity.
I think we should keep researching and developing but at a slower rate while they all figure out the do's and don'ts. That way when problems arise it will be more easy to implement the do's and don'ts as we go and as we gain that knowledge. There is a lot of viable data and knowledge to be gained from this line of thought that I am really interested in seeing and hearing about.
I hope I can hear the results of this! It's one of the fields I'm contemplating, and already my parents have recommended I take an ethics class. They're probably right...
Do modified humans have the same rights as regular humans? I sense a new civil rights movement!! Now everyone of this generation can feel important!!
It only we knew
Something way worse was brewing
I wouldn't put a moratorium on developing the technology. I just wouldn't allow its use on humans until it is perfected! A 20%-40% success rate is nowhere near high enough!!!
therein lies the problem, without human experiments we will risk even more death rates, but with them, we lose lives anyway.
Nicholas, I can see your point. However, who would you want having these experiments on? Science is amoral and human experimentation is generally frowned upon in cases like Genie and eugenics.
As a firm believer in the beautiful field of science, I believe that germ line engineering is an fantastic thing. It has so many benefits!
I really like the new intro!!
I want a Lobster Claw for a hand
Mr. Krabs?
American Horro Story?
Why not Zoidberg?
Slaanesh can give you that.
GATTACA?
yus
+Richard Lin Loved that movie
Okay, but that basically assumes that any and all gene editing is allowed. (I mean adding fingers to each hand? That's just playing silly buggers.) Should the technology become reliable enough, legal code is obviously going to be written about it, and it would be incredibly simple to restrict its use to just editing out identifiable (perhaps even specifically approved) genetic diseases.
David L. Oh, come on! Do you have any idea how handy it would be to have a thumb on both sides of your hand? Answer: not a lot. But still! And what about people who want to be natural (insert hair color here)s? Sure, dyes are getting less and less harmful to your hair by the day, but you know some people would apreciate a more permenant solution to having to redye it every (timeframe here) because they're hair keeps growing.
And some hipsters are probably gonna want snake irises...
***** and changing humanity is a bad thing...why?
Really good episode!
I understand why this research is so controversial and i agree that something like this should not be rushed into clinical trials yet however research on a subject like this should definitely not come to a halt. Wether or not germ line genetic modification becomes usable we will learn so much from the research and it will overall beneficial to the feild of genetics and biology in general. Another controversial topic that is very similar to this is gene therapy using viral vectors such as adeno-associated virus, adeno virus, lenti virus, and retro virus.
I want elf ears,a foxy tail,a snake tounge,horns,skin between my toes,hawk eyes.Dunno anymore :)
Stop saving people lives! Just pray guy in the cloud and everything will be OK!
Thank you for your inputs. The world 🌎 is moving that way super fast 💨 now during this covid19 issue.
i wouldnt say pause development but if accuracy is like 20% or so it needs improvement before human testing
This will never happen in america wide scale; religion is too prevalent here.
haha, he sounds like Hitler in the intro
Can you do a video on the difference between synthetic vitamins and whole vitamins? The synthesis process from food vs chemicals. Thanks!
I don't think this research should be halted. As long as everyone involved knows the risks, further development can only refine our understanding of the science. The call for a moratorium seems partly designed to stop uninformed politicians from stepping in and drafting legislation that bans a broad spectrum of related research. I think that's a valid concern, but that suggests the real problem is in a largely uninformed public producing uninformed politicians and not in the research itself.
I think there should more research done on these enzymes because it does in fact have great potential. I have seen information about this on the news and in biology. I believe the technology to perfect it is near but there may be certain things that would be unethical and ergo should be restricted.
The wheels of progress are unstoppable.
The research should never stop. Only through better understanding can a truly educated decision be made.
I would have liked it, if you coud have talked a little bit more about the mechanisms behind the possible failures of Crsip9. It would have helped a lot. :)
Now I have to look up the nature paper. ^^
I recently went to a lecture given by Nicole Vincent, a bioethicist at GSU. She talked about what she called "the new normal," as it relates to cognitive enhancing drugs (like adderal). The idea is that if we can improve ourselves and become more efficient (in this case, at thinking clearly), then if left unregulated it would only be a matter of time before those improvements became effectively mandatory, since competition would allow only those with the enhancements to thrive. I think a similar concept works here. If we just let this technology be used indiscriminately, it's only a matter of time before it becomes a ethically necessary to use it. The thinking is that if you have a way to significantly mitigate risk to your unborn baby for a serious illness and you don't, then you are at least partially responsible if it gets that disease, by way of negligence. So while it would seem to be a personal choice, to modify or not, soon enough you'll be expected to have it done or be a bad mother. Since this process seems like it could be expensive and even dangerous, we may be right to continue this moratorium until such a time that we can make it available to everyone cheaply and safely. Otherwise, we would be putting a huge burden on the poor to genetically modify their babies. However, if it could be done cheaply and safely, then it would become just another part of standard care for expecting mothers. Let the research continue. But when is it enough? It's hard to draw a line without being arbitrary. 60% efficacy? 90? Who foots the bill?
THANK YOU HANK
Myostatin-related muscle hypertrophy would be one good candidate for genetic engineering with current levels of technology as it would only need to involve replacing the existing gene with the "superhuman" MSTN gene this would grant drastically increased strength and hasn't been linked to any harmful side effects, the gene mutation already occurs in many animals including humans, whippets and belgian blue cattle
Can you make a video about GM food? And also why is uranus colder than neptunes?
I believe research should continue. The more we understand this process, the more informed the decisions we make are.
I love the new intro!
First, I'm wondering what sort of alternative genetic mutations were discovered and could those mutations be of any current use? If not then, is it off to biohaz or will they preserve those cells until they can find a us for them. Personally, I have no issue with human experimentation so long as it's completely voluntary.
a great movie on that theme,showing the possible issues that come from it is "gattaca" it makes you rethink your position,embryos engineering is not all good
How might the future of genetics raise ethical issues that relate to the world Vonnegut creates in “Harrison Bergeron”?
is it possible if this genetic mutation, can lead to life of a plant? that you only need sunlight to feed?
Just wondering, are any of you guys joining in at the American chemical society 249th annual meeting in Denver?
Getting all Partials series up in here....
As someone who has a high chance to get Alzheimers or Dementia the idea that I could remove that chance for my kids is amazing, for me having this chance is a bit bittersweet, the medical marvels that we're discovering are helping people live longer than ever, but for me after 80 I'm probably not going to be sane enough to actually benefit from it. The chance to let my kids not need to deal with this is something that would be amazing. So do more trials with animals, make things more precise, make it more efficient, this technology could help the lives of millions (and when counting their offspring, possibly billions)
More research is needed.
Eugenics and germ-line human-guided manipulation go hand-in-hand. The elimination of "diseases" needs to be done (imho) one at a time lest we cross that threshold between eliminating diseases and engineering people. This topic is very involved and decisions need to be made carefully and soberly.
I'm a studying biochemist and I'm all for this. Science +1
Is that a dalek flying around in the beginning of the intro?
Question: With the advanced forms of medicine we've had for some time possibly lead to the survival of less 'fit' human genetics? And could the fact that the caucasian population in some places having had medicines like this for longer (at least in places like North America) be contributing to the (so it seems) many diseases and other problems that they [we/I] experience more frequently compared to other populations?
A a ethical question. That needs to be discussed. As all it could be used or abused for profit.... Is a big topic.
bumped down: the thing latches on to the bad thing and the other thing replaces that thing in the thing to make the thing not a bad thing, but a good thing... or a normal thing. so that the baby thing can be a healthy thing and not have any cancers in its things. hope this helps
This is humans V. the expansive universe. We are going to need all the help we can get. Continue research on germ-line engineering and once it reaches a more stable place, start human trials.
i think the research should go on while the laws for how it should be applied are still being made just it should not be applied to humans until the laws are actually made so which ever way is found to work the best will have laws for it when it actually is useable and has a success rate of over 80% hopefully over 90% but i currently think that is a little ambitious for this stage of it but still hoping that we will get there
What is an ion engine?
I heard that the space engines are real and are being used on research vessels?
this is going to be awsome! hope i live to see it! lets see... ive got about 80-60 years left in my life. maybe.
It sounds to me like the development of this technology does not immediately require actually creating a living organism with the results of the engineered materials. If a sperm or egg are germ-line engineered, it should be possible to check the sperm or egg for failure BEFORE it is used. Thus, I don't see the immediate cause for a moratorium.
Eventually, a living human organism would be one of the steps in the process, but let's wait until the odds of success are closer to 100%.
For a fictional examination of possible social consequences of germ line modification, check out Robert Heinlein's "Friday".
"I won't tell you what to think, I'll just tell you what you need to know." -Hank Green
This is what separates theists and atheists.
"i am not going to tell you what to think" best line ever reason i love this show :D
What about "Cellular Memory", if it actually occurs than a specimen could possibly remember that missing segment of dna.....what do you think Hank?
There are so many good seeds for a killer science fiction novel in this video
i think this will help alot in saving lives and getting out these problems that stick with people forever. problem is when people will start choosing something like make my daughter pretty or make my boy an Einstein here where humanity will seriously going to start having problems
Rather then opinion,I have question :are there any positive mutations?anything scientifically recorded mutations improving/enhancing some functions in living surviving humans or other animals ?