4 ms·

ML methods and statistics are routinely used in genomics research. Luckily, the experimentation with the human genome is largely forbidden. The consequences o

ML methods and statistics are routinely used in genomics research. Luckily, the experimentation with the human genome is largely forbidden. The consequences of unbridled changes in genetic sequences include truly disastrous scenarios. I thought COVID would be a clear illustration that everyone gets but apparently this is not the case.

idiotsecant 4y ago
>Luckily, the experimentation with the human genome is largely forbidden. That taboo will certainly never be broken!
- 331c8c71 4y ago
  Let's start doing irresponsible things because we assume "the bad guys" will be doing them anyway?
- 331c8c71 4y ago
  On a more constructive note, I think non-germline targeted gene editing is OK-ish if 1) the goal is to cure or alleviate some really serious diseases, 2) the mechanism of the disease and the prospective treatment are widely believed to be well understood. Stepping out to do experimental genome changes based on outputs from some black-box "AI" is a recipe for a disaster if you ask me. Especially so if the goal is to find "enhancements" for perfectly normal human beings.
ajuc 4y ago
> Luckily, the experimentation with the human genome is largely forbidden. That just means singularity starts in some isolated dictatorship.
throwaway4aday 4y ago
I find the ban on experimentation with the human genome rather hypocritical. We already produce and consume a vast array of synthetic chemicals that have effects on our genome. We also expose ourselves to higher than normal levels of radiation for a variety of reasons ranging from medical treatment and diagnosis to air travel. We do try to mitigate these sources of mutation but we don't ban them. I don't think genetic experimentation on human cell lines should be completely unregulated but I also don't think it should be completely banned. We're going to have to do it at some point if we want to eliminate hereditary disease or go even further and prevent a lot of the misery caused by our blind evolutionary search history.
krageon 4y ago
COVID doesn't illustrate anything about human experimentation, because it has nothing to do with it.
- 331c8c71 4y ago
  Given the state of the science the humanity is not able to foresee the consequences of deliberate genetic changes in existing life forms. Covid just illustrates that such changes can have disastrous consequences independent of what triggered them.
  - 331c8c71 4y ago
    Not all changes are equal. One thing is to, say, patch a known disease-causing mutation (being sure no other changes take place). Inserting a new sequence or patching an existing sequence in a way not seen before is clearly different. Another important dimension is whether the introduced changes are heritable and would be passed to offsprings.
rowanG077 4y ago
I agree. We really desperately need to have experimental research in improving humanities genes. The next disease might not be so weak as COVID and could wipe almost everyone out.
- astrange 4y ago
  Gene editing doesn't seem likely to make you immune to all diseases. They get to evolve faster than you.
  - rowanG077 4y ago
    Not all diseases most likely. But if we can easily rewrite our genes it's easy to stay ahead. You can easily imagine changing your genes so much there is no path for an existing disease to evolve towards it.
    - astrange 4y ago
      Gene editing doesn't imply being able to rewrite all your own genes either! Isn't mostly about embryos? If you wanted to edit yourself you'd have the problems of reaching all your own cells, mistakes caused by edits, and what the editing process would do if it encountered a mutation in one of your cells, which of course are everywhere.
      - rowanG077 4y ago
        Currently, yes, it's only really feasable for embryos. But there are instances of biohackers using gene therapy to do interesting things. For example a guy cured his lactose intolerancy temporarily by gene therapy: https://hackaday.com/2018/02/14/biohacking-lactose-intolerance/ https://hackaday.com/2018/02/14/biohacking-lactose-intoleran.... Basically what I'm trying to say is that you don't need to reach all cells to cure something. You only need to reach the relevant cells.
PartiallyTyped 4y ago
> I thought COVID would be a clear illustration that everyone gets but apparently this is not the case. I thought my sarcasm was obvious but I suppose that Poe's law is at play here. I was making a bad joke about the two fields using each other to make progress. I am under the impression that as a species we may be reaching the limits of our capacity to solve complex tasks and understand the consequences of our actions.

idiotsecant 4y ago

>Luckily, the experimentation with the human genome is largely forbidden. That taboo will certainly never be broken!

331c8c71 4y ago
Let's start doing irresponsible things because we assume "the bad guys" will be doing them anyway?
331c8c71 4y ago
On a more constructive note, I think non-germline targeted gene editing is OK-ish if 1) the goal is to cure or alleviate some really serious diseases, 2) the mechanism of the disease and the prospective treatment are widely believed to be well understood. Stepping out to do experimental genome changes based on outputs from some black-box "AI" is a recipe for a disaster if you ask me. Especially so if the goal is to find "enhancements" for perfectly normal human beings.

ajuc 4y ago

> Luckily, the experimentation with the human genome is largely forbidden. That just means singularity starts in some isolated dictatorship.

throwaway4aday 4y ago

I find the ban on experimentation with the human genome rather hypocritical. We already produce and consume a vast array of synthetic chemicals that have effects on our genome. We also expose ourselves to higher than normal levels of radiation for a variety of reasons ranging from medical treatment and diagnosis to air travel. We do try to mitigate these sources of mutation but we don't ban them. I don't think genetic experimentation on human cell lines should be completely unregulated but I also don't think it should be completely banned. We're going to have to do it at some point if we want to eliminate hereditary disease or go even further and prevent a lot of the misery caused by our blind evolutionary search history.

krageon 4y ago

COVID doesn't illustrate anything about human experimentation, because it has nothing to do with it.

331c8c71 4y ago
Given the state of the science the humanity is not able to foresee the consequences of deliberate genetic changes in existing life forms. Covid just illustrates that such changes can have disastrous consequences independent of what triggered them.
- 331c8c71 4y ago
  Not all changes are equal. One thing is to, say, patch a known disease-causing mutation (being sure no other changes take place). Inserting a new sequence or patching an existing sequence in a way not seen before is clearly different. Another important dimension is whether the introduced changes are heritable and would be passed to offsprings.

rowanG077 4y ago

I agree. We really desperately need to have experimental research in improving humanities genes. The next disease might not be so weak as COVID and could wipe almost everyone out.

astrange 4y ago
Gene editing doesn't seem likely to make you immune to all diseases. They get to evolve faster than you.
- rowanG077 4y ago
  Not all diseases most likely. But if we can easily rewrite our genes it's easy to stay ahead. You can easily imagine changing your genes so much there is no path for an existing disease to evolve towards it.
  - astrange 4y ago
    Gene editing doesn't imply being able to rewrite all your own genes either! Isn't mostly about embryos? If you wanted to edit yourself you'd have the problems of reaching all your own cells, mistakes caused by edits, and what the editing process would do if it encountered a mutation in one of your cells, which of course are everywhere.
    - rowanG077 4y ago
      Currently, yes, it's only really feasable for embryos. But there are instances of biohackers using gene therapy to do interesting things. For example a guy cured his lactose intolerancy temporarily by gene therapy: https://hackaday.com/2018/02/14/biohacking-lactose-intolerance/ https://hackaday.com/2018/02/14/biohacking-lactose-intoleran.... Basically what I'm trying to say is that you don't need to reach all cells to cure something. You only need to reach the relevant cells.

PartiallyTyped 4y ago

> I thought COVID would be a clear illustration that everyone gets but apparently this is not the case. I thought my sarcasm was obvious but I suppose that Poe's law is at play here. I was making a bad joke about the two fields using each other to make progress. I am under the impression that as a species we may be reaching the limits of our capacity to solve complex tasks and understand the consequences of our actions.