3 ms·
Are you even a biologist though. Knowing about the existence of unintended side-effects is not the same as predicting their frequency. Ultimately the reduction
by bordercases 9y ago
Are you even a biologist though.
Knowing about the existence of unintended side-effects is not the same as predicting their frequency. Ultimately the reduction of risk comes from hedging against an expected frequency of risk, something that we are still learning how to do, or else CRISPR would already be a widespread mode of therapeutic treatment.
It seems what you're actually trying to argue against is becoming bearish on new technology due to risk, but you're doing this with posturing that is ungrounded in both the details of the biology and the risk.
- klmr 9y ago> Are you even a biologist though. Yes. > or else CRISPR would already be a widespread mode of therapeutic treatment You underestimate how long it takes for anything to get from fundamental research to treatment. Not just because of risk. And CRISPR is already in extremely widespread use as a molecular biology tool.
- bordercases 9y agoIn vitro or in vivo?
- klmr 9y agoBoth.
- HackerThrow1337 9y agoLol it takes somewhere near an average of 30 years to get a drug/therapy approved.