3 ms·
I'd be more worried about subtle long-term mutations which won't have obviously observable effects at first but will severely disadvantage us in the long run. O
by IanSanders 7y ago
I'd be more worried about subtle long-term mutations which won't have obviously observable effects at first but will severely disadvantage us in the long run. Or only become enabled in combination with some future mutations. If a gene increases chances of a disease by 5%, how soon do you identify that?
Once a gene is widespread enough, good luck preventing gene carriers from reproducing. Most people won't care enough to screen potential partners, or even worse, it could create social tension.
- IanSanders 7y agoAlso, why this is worse than a similar mutation in the wild, is because it will be coupled with "branded" genotype, which will be treated specially. People will potentially want to pursue certain genotype (with tall height, blue eyes etc), not caring about health implications, which I can almost guarantee won't be properly disclosed, even if known. Just like dog breeding. And you can judge how much people care about appearances by the success of plastic surgery business.