4 ms·

Purebred are notorious for having plenty of health issues. see for example : https://www.petmd.com/dog/care/evr_dg_purebred_dogs_complications# https://www.pet

by seren 9y ago

Purebred are notorious for having plenty of health issues. see for example : https://www.petmd.com/dog/care/evr_dg_purebred_dogs_complications# https://www.petmd.com/dog/care/evr_dg_purebred_dogs_complica...

hycaria 9y ago
Yes, that's exactly my point. For maybe ten years there has been huge efforts thanks to genetic diagnosis to promote health with esthetic standard. Serious breeders test their reproducers against the common diseases in their breed and so on. It works rather well. As for production animals it has been going on for even longer, especially in cattle. And we've got good perfomance there too on mesurable metrics.
matte_black 9y ago
This happens if you just breed pure breds blindly and pay no attention to the underlying genes. We could do the same with humans, if two people want to have a child but have high risk genes, it would be cruel and irresponsible to conceive a child, perhaps even criminal. No child should have to endure a lifetime of suffering with a bad quality of life under a crippling genetic disease because of their parents ignorance or apathy. But of course, we have Anti-Vaxxers and whatnot in this world so maybe some people will just do it on purpose anyway because it’s “the natural way”. Sickening.
- seren 9y ago
  I believe genetic tests already exist for people at high risks to be sure that they are not(sane)carriers of deadly disease that could be passed on to their offspring. I don't think it is a wrong or morally reprehensible idea. However, in the long term, it might not be a good idea to select, and likely reduce the human gene pool, because you can not know what will be useful in the future. For example, the Spanish Flu of 2087. On the other hand, it is possible humans will become that good at genetic engineering that a small gene pool won't be an issue because we will be able to update and adapt it easily if new conditions arise.

by seren 9y ago

hycaria 9y ago

Yes, that's exactly my point. For maybe ten years there has been huge efforts thanks to genetic diagnosis to promote health with esthetic standard. Serious breeders test their reproducers against the common diseases in their breed and so on. It works rather well. As for production animals it has been going on for even longer, especially in cattle. And we've got good perfomance there too on mesurable metrics.

matte_black 9y ago

This happens if you just breed pure breds blindly and pay no attention to the underlying genes. We could do the same with humans, if two people want to have a child but have high risk genes, it would be cruel and irresponsible to conceive a child, perhaps even criminal. No child should have to endure a lifetime of suffering with a bad quality of life under a crippling genetic disease because of their parents ignorance or apathy. But of course, we have Anti-Vaxxers and whatnot in this world so maybe some people will just do it on purpose anyway because it’s “the natural way”. Sickening.

seren 9y ago
I believe genetic tests already exist for people at high risks to be sure that they are not(sane)carriers of deadly disease that could be passed on to their offspring. I don't think it is a wrong or morally reprehensible idea. However, in the long term, it might not be a good idea to select, and likely reduce the human gene pool, because you can not know what will be useful in the future. For example, the Spanish Flu of 2087. On the other hand, it is possible humans will become that good at genetic engineering that a small gene pool won't be an issue because we will be able to update and adapt it easily if new conditions arise.