5 ms·

I think @reedf1 is talking about the long term damage to a population. With the gene drive technology, the modified gene is always inherited. the 750 million

I think @reedf1 is talking about the long term damage to a population. With the gene drive technology, the modified gene is always inherited. the 750 million number is there to speed up the process. (This my understanding from reading the first few paragraphs from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive)

Dylan16807 6y ago
Being always inherited, in humans, is no danger at all. Someone can develop a deactivation shot before the first generation to inherit the gene hits puberty.
- CGamesPlay 6y ago
  And then sell it, so only the wealthy can reproduce!
  - yowlingcat 6y ago
    Why do I get the sinking feeling that this will be commercialized "first as tragedy, then as farce"
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      I have to admit I don't really see the plan here. Mad geneticist injects 1000 people with a gene. 50 years later, 7500 people have to pay for the fix! The profits! And that's ignoring the failure rate of the initial shot. This is a worse return on investment than a maniacal scheme to infect people directly, and then 1:1 charge them for a cure.
abricot 6y ago
How exactly would they inherit the genes if it causes sterility?
- RcrdBrt 6y ago
  Sterility for only 1 sex type maybe?
- niea_11 6y ago
  Sterility is just one example of gene modification. A harmful modification that doesn't cause sterility will propagate across generations if the indivuals are able to reproduce. For example a scenario where we see the symptoms but we don't know that they are caused by a gene modification. And where individuals are still able to live and have children. And I'm not saying that the tech is bad. I'm sure that people can come up with a lot of good use cases.
  - mattmanser 6y ago
    That's not how evolution works. If it's harmful, it will get selected against, and will disappear rather rapidly. There's a reason why they need to release 750 million genetically modified mosquitos, and not just 1.
    - nelsontodd 6y ago
      Well i’d say the inability to understand probability is a harmful trait but you’re clearly still here and might even have kids. And everyone with asthma, type 1 diabetes, and a tiny dick would like a word with you. Idiot
      - mattmanser 6y ago
        I'm sorry, it must be tough having those three conditions, but unfortunately that has little to do with what we're discussing. With 6 billion people in the world today, even if our nefarious post-doc somehow gene-spliced 100 people with a 100% probability transmit of a "bad" recessive gene, it would take so many generations for any effect to be felt. By then, we can assume, it would be trivial to reverse the "damage" caused. Hence the eye-rolling at the idea that one post-doc could be any serious threat.
    - 6y ago

Dylan16807 6y ago

Being always inherited, in humans, is no danger at all. Someone can develop a deactivation shot before the first generation to inherit the gene hits puberty.

CGamesPlay 6y ago
And then sell it, so only the wealthy can reproduce!
- yowlingcat 6y ago
  Why do I get the sinking feeling that this will be commercialized "first as tragedy, then as farce"
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    I have to admit I don't really see the plan here. Mad geneticist injects 1000 people with a gene. 50 years later, 7500 people have to pay for the fix! The profits! And that's ignoring the failure rate of the initial shot. This is a worse return on investment than a maniacal scheme to infect people directly, and then 1:1 charge them for a cure.

abricot 6y ago

How exactly would they inherit the genes if it causes sterility?

RcrdBrt 6y ago
Sterility for only 1 sex type maybe?
niea_11 6y ago
Sterility is just one example of gene modification. A harmful modification that doesn't cause sterility will propagate across generations if the indivuals are able to reproduce. For example a scenario where we see the symptoms but we don't know that they are caused by a gene modification. And where individuals are still able to live and have children. And I'm not saying that the tech is bad. I'm sure that people can come up with a lot of good use cases.
- mattmanser 6y ago
  That's not how evolution works. If it's harmful, it will get selected against, and will disappear rather rapidly. There's a reason why they need to release 750 million genetically modified mosquitos, and not just 1.
  - nelsontodd 6y ago
    Well i’d say the inability to understand probability is a harmful trait but you’re clearly still here and might even have kids. And everyone with asthma, type 1 diabetes, and a tiny dick would like a word with you. Idiot
    - mattmanser 6y ago
      I'm sorry, it must be tough having those three conditions, but unfortunately that has little to do with what we're discussing. With 6 billion people in the world today, even if our nefarious post-doc somehow gene-spliced 100 people with a 100% probability transmit of a "bad" recessive gene, it would take so many generations for any effect to be felt. By then, we can assume, it would be trivial to reverse the "damage" caused. Hence the eye-rolling at the idea that one post-doc could be any serious threat.
  - 6y ago