2 ms·
I can think of a couple of reasons. First, they think of themselves as companies that address diseases. They are concerned with the ill, rather than people seek
by Kalium 9y ago
I can think of a couple of reasons. First, they think of themselves as companies that address diseases. They are concerned with the ill, rather than people seeking cosmetic changes.
Second, I can see some potential for major backlash. Literally going into the business of designer babies? Ethically tricky. Doing it only for the rich, because it'll be incredibly expensive at first? "Tricky" doesn't begin to cover it. Public policy in first-world countries is not always noted for being far-sighted and even-handed, and a public backlash could easily shut down all gene therapies.
- king07828 9y ago>they think of themselves as companies that address diseases. They are concerned with the ill, rather than people seeking cosmetic changes Agreed. The joke being that black hair (or blonde hair or red hair) is a disease that can be "cured" by a different hair color :) >backlash ... [against] designer babies Agreed that this is an issue, especially if the treatment were marketed at unborn children. It may be better to focus on cosmetic treatments for adults to try and avoid this. I expect this technology will eventually become ubiquitous in our lifetimes, with the only question being the time frame for which it will come to pass