21 ms·
Scientists may have found a way to eliminate chromosome linked to Down syndrome
- wileydragonfly 1y agoThis will never go to human trial.
- shadowgovt 1y agoProbably not this specific method, no. Even the paper abstract notes that this is stepping-stone research.
- donsupreme 1y agoThey definitely will in China or Russia
- heavyset_go 1y agoWilling to bet money that it will, there's a ton of investment right now in what I'd call blatant eugenics. There are companies right now making bank on embryo selection based on genetics, the next step is modifying genes instead of rolling a crap shoot and hoping to get what they want. Funnily enough, such companies are funded by and led by some HN subcultures' favorite people, I would know because I was recruited by one of them who went out of their way to not mention that their marketing material to parents says they intend to let parents pick embryos based on perceived intelligence based on genetics. Tldr: there are monied parties that want this and they literally cite Gattaca as their inspiration
- Marciplan 1y agoprediction markets are your friend
- 123yawaworht456 1y agoout of curiosity, what's your stance on abortion? :^)
- wileydragonfly 1y agoPersonally? Not a fan. But also not a fan of enforcing my opinion on others.
- chrisweekly 1y ago"went out of their way to not mention" This construct is a bit of a head-scratcher that takes away from the rest of your comment; "failed to mention" would've done the trick. As for Gattaca as a source of inspiration for future parents... yikes.
- heavyset_go 1y agoWhen you're selling customers a big ticket item like that with one side of your mouth, and are failing to mention it to prospective hires, you have to go out of your way to dance around it. They emphasized certain genetic selections that sound good, but failed to mention that the leadership, investors, marketing and customers are actually really concerned with this one specific trait that sounds bad, that's selective omission.
- toast0 1y agoIt'a already possible to test for trisomy in a fetus. There's a newish method (NIPT) that does analysis on maternal blood which has very low risk (it's named non-invasive, but drawing blood is routine but not risk free). Having a treatment, if it's feasible, might be more (or less) paletable than ending the pregnancy when diagnostics indicate likely trisomy.
- tobinfricke 1y agoNIPT is non-invasive compared to amniocentesis
- renewiltord 1y agoIQ polygenic score companies do exist. Just look at the circle around Jonathan Anomaly and you likely will find them all. I know of a couple that are going to go full open this year. You have to be of the right genetic origin because of the source data, but the truth is it's very risky to do embryo editing. It's hard to tell which way things will land. For all we know, gametogenesis may arrive first. And if that happens, then selection will suffice.
- im3w1l 1y ago> You have to be of the right genetic origin because of the source data Can you explain what this means? After thinking it over, the most plausible reading to me is that they think the results will not generalize to other origins than the ones they have data for?
- renewiltord 1y agoYou’ve got it right.
- tptacek 1y agoDoes anybody believe IQ/EA PGS companies are a serious thing?
- heavyset_go 1y agoThey exist[1] and take themselves seriously even if the rest of the world doesn't. I met with Hsu before I realized who he was or what he was doing. A choice quote[2]: > Testing embryos, however, is hugely controversial, because of both the scientific limitations of such polygenic scores and the prospect of designer babies. Undeterred, a company called Genomic Prediction last year began to offer to test cells plucked from an IVF embryo for millions of DNA markers to produce risk scores for some common diseases and for "intellectual disability" or low IQ. Co-founder Stephen Hsu, a physicist at Michigan State University in East Lansing who has branched into genomics, says that for now, the company is not returning genetic scores predicting high IQ because "society is not ready for it." As for motivation: > In July 2012, Michigan State University named him vice president for research and graduate studies. At the time, Inside Higher Ed and Lansing State Journal described the appointment as controversial, due to Hsu's comments endorsing research into using genetic modification to increase human intelligence, and his blog posts describing human race categorization as biologically valid. And Hsu's cofounder[3]: > Laurent Tellier, the founder of startup Genomic Predictions, used the 1997 movie “Gattaca” as inspiration for a DNA screening method that scores embryos with risk estimates for diabetes, heart disease, and other illnesses – and gives a report card on their predicted height and intelligence. There's also Thiel investments in some people with questionable histories[4] when it comes to IQ PGS. If you look at who is pushing for this, a lot of them are LessWrong and IDW adjacent, and they're selling to their audiences who believe strongly in things like IQ, genetic determinism and race. They take it very seriously. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/oct/18/what-is-genomic-prediction-and-can-embryos-really-be-screened-for-iq https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/oct/18/what-is-geno... [2] https://www.science.org/content/article/screening-embryos-iq-and-other-complex-traits-premature-study-concludes https://www.science.org/content/article/screening-embryos-iq... [3] https://nypost.com/2019/11/09/genetic-test-aims-to-predict-an-embryos-intelligence-and-health/ https://nypost.com/2019/11/09/genetic-test-aims-to-predict-a... [4] https://undark.org/2023/10/27/consumer-genetic-testing-science/ https://undark.org/2023/10/27/consumer-genetic-testing-scien...
- nice_byte 1y agopreventing down syndrome is "eugenics"?
- shadowgovt 1y agoTechnically no, but only in the technical sense that makes the idea a little useless. Technically, 99% of Down's cases aren't hereditary (it's a spontaneous mitotic change), so you don't "improve the gene pool" by excluding it; as far as we know, basically anybody can have a kid with Down's syndrome if the mitotic dice come up snake eyes. (But in the sense most people understand the term? Yes.)
- SoftTalker 1y agoSeems close enough to look like it if you squint a little. As it's more of a genetic error than an inerited trait, maybe not quite the same.
- vtbassmatt 1y agoYes.
- throwaway342334 1y agoYes, modifying genetics to select for "desirable" traits and remove "undesirable" ones is essentially modern liberal eugenics. Just because something is labeled "eugenics" doesn’t automatically make it bad or good—outcomes depend on how ideas are applied. Historically, eugenics didn’t have genetic tools, so efforts focused on social policies, like promoting abortion or family planning, to influence who could reproduce.
- heavyset_go 1y agoGenetic conditions are how they make it palatable, meanwhile they're telling race realist parents that selecting for/modifying X, Y, and Z genes will let them raise ubermensch.
- moomoo11 1y agoI don't really understand what it says. As a layman in this topic, I'm curious if modifications like that can cause other effects?
- shadowgovt 1y agoHard to say with 100% certainty without a human trial, but the short answer is "probably not." This is a situation where a person has three copies of chromosome 21 in every cell. Shutting one copy down would, hypothetically, leave someone with two working copies. I don't think we have any reason to believe that trisomy is masking some other phenomenon that we won't see until a fetus with this treatment applied fully develops into a newborn. (And that's of course assuming human trials were authorized. Probably not for this treatment in my lifetime, at least not in the US).
- derektank 1y agoIt says that they've developed a way to identify the extra chromosome(s) passed to a child by a malfunctioning germ cell, specifically chromosome 21 though presumably this method could be reproduced for other trisomy diseases. This could, most immediately, lead to a therapy that allows a couple that is going through in vitro fertilization to repair a zygote that has trisomy by correcting the number of chromosomes it has, and preventing the resulting child from having Down's syndrome. This is relevant especially for older mothers, who are most likely to produce malfunctioning eggs that result in Down's syndrome
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- kbelder 1y agoAt that point, wouldn't they just use a different egg? I'd expect that to be far less costly and less risky than this treatment.
- notimetorelax 1y agoOlder women may not produce that many eggs, if any at all. And each harvest costs multiple thousands, so it’s not all that clear cut.
- juujian 1y agoThis is interesting news, for the lack of a better word. I've met more than one person with downs syndrome. They have definitely enriched my life and shown me a different way of looking at the world.
- whatshisface 1y agoWhat's better for them should be the overriding concern and that's to have a normal development.
- RajT88 1y agoI am not advocating any course in particular. But I will observe that when such treatments become available, such conditions become a marker of lower socioeconomic class and the people with the conditions get treated less well by society. This is why we need a better healthcare system.
- loeg 1y agoIt's hard to imagine a treatment cost so high that it wouldn't be worth the USG paying for it. Down syndrome kids and adults have some quantifiable economic cost; normal adults are worth some other quantifiable economic benefit; the difference is going to be significantly more than the cost of treatment.
- puppycodes 1y agoInteresting, I wonder what else this might lead too! Encouraging we might be getting somewhere. I used to live near a Down syndrome center where a bunch of folks lived and I remember this one lady who was kitted out with Britney Spears everything, lunchbox, t-shirt, hat, and headphones. Everyday I passed by the bus stop she would be dancing her heart out to a Britney track waiting for the bus and it made my world a little brighter.
- mathgeek 1y ago> Everyday I passed by the bus stop she would be dancing her heart out to a Britney track waiting for the bus and it made my world a little brighter. As someone who absolutely loves to "be weird", I often wish the world was so much friendlier to folks like this (other than in a token manner).
- creakingstairs 1y agoIs it just me or do I feel like the society is way more accepting nowadays? I had to pretty much hide who I was during school due to fear of bullying/ not fitting in but most kids these days seem to be able to be themselves in many ways. I agree we can be friendlier though!
- OJFord 1y agoIt's just fashion I think - for the last 10-15 years the idea of being a nerd who works for Google or whatever has been relatively cool.
- hilsdev 1y agoYou’re right the world is a lot more accepting. No matter how much things improve and how positive the trajectory though, there will be someone online who tells us it’s not enough
- phs318u 1y agoYes, and there will be others rolling their eyes and calling out all this "woke" acceptance. On a serious note, if the world is a lot more accepting, it's mostly because the youngest generations are a lot more accepting, and the more bigoted among us (which tend to skew older) are slowly dying off.
- aaron695 1y ago[dead]
- issafram 1y agoI read the abstract but I'm still a bit confused. Will this help people who have down syndrome? Or is it a way to help future pregnancies?
- drknownuffin 1y agoFuture pregnancies.
- OldfieldFund 1y agonot pregnancies in the traditional sense but IVF, as far as I understand. Many of my friends who are wealthy are doing only IVF to screen for negative genotypes
- arjie 1y agoThe realistic reading is that: In the future, a treatment based on this technique could help parents going through IVF rescue more embryos from trisomy-21. Considering that scope, the people for whom this could be useful are those who have very few embryos, one or more of which have trisomy-21. With a young couple, they will have many embryos and preimplantation genetic testing will reveal trisomy-21 early enough that even if they have fertility issues they can just run more rounds of IVF. With an older couple or one with severe fertility issues, they may only have one or two embryos to work with. This is all science-fiction, though, since a technique like this will require a lot of work (both in development and in regulation) before it can go live.
- politician 1y agoThis comment and the original question ought to be pinned to the top of this discussion.
- Romanulus 1y ago[dead]
- SegfaultSeagull 1y ago[flagged]
- Barrin92 1y agoit wouldn't, if the implication of you wondering is supposed to be if someone will find and treat a "gay gene". Homosexuality is (like almost all complex traits[1]) influenced by thousands of genes in addition to environmental, social, cultural factors etc. [1] https://www.quantamagazine.org/omnigenic-model-suggests-that-all-genes-affect-every-complex-trait-20180620/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/omnigenic-model-suggests-that...
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> Homosexuality is (like almost all complex traits[1]) influenced by thousands of genes in addition to environmental, social, cultural factors etc. Homosexuality is also preserved across practically all social animals [1], and–I believe–absolutely all that form monogamous pairs. That isn't true for Down syndrome [2], which manifests much more like a disease. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals [2] https://allthatsinteresting.com/animals-with-down-syndrome https://allthatsinteresting.com/animals-with-down-syndrome
- hankman86 1y agoI have been wondering how culturally conservative societies would use future medical interventions that could shape people’s sexuality. Not necessarily the government requiring expecting mothers to subject the unborn child to some sort of “cure” for gayness. But parents doing this voluntarily and on their own. Even western couples might then be tempted to travel to countries permitting these treatments. At the same time, it seems unlikely in the near future. It so happens that western societies will not fund this kind of research. And that culturally conservative countries do not have the scientific prowess to conduct research in this regard. Also, their scientists are busy developing nuclear bombs.
- didip 1y agoThis is fantastic news!
- daemonk 1y agoThe haplotype phasing strategy is the key method here. The phasing method is described in a previous paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-022-01049-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s10038-022-01049-6
- zxczxc2 1y ago[dead]
- SJC_Hacker 1y agoIt was well on its way to being eliminated in much of the First World through screening during pregnancy at around 2-3 months. Alot of mothers were electing to terminate the pregnancy and perhaps try again. Especially much of Europe which didn't quite have the moral objections against abortion that the US does, save for a few countries who still have substantial observant Catholics such as Ireland and Poland. Here's a story about Iceland https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-01/iceland-prenatal-testing-down-syndrome-ethics/103781058 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-01/iceland-prenatal-test...
- zarzavat 1y ago> Some bioethics experts are concerned I do have to wonder what goes on in the minds of these people. My sister-in-law has a child with Down's syndrome and the situation basically ruined her life. She can no longer work, so they now struggle on a single income, if her husband were to leave her she would be completely screwed. To what end is that in the continuance of ethics?
- decremental 1y ago[dead]
- orbisvicis 1y agoI do wonder if the elimination of all genotypes with Down's Syndrome would also result in a significant reduction in beneficial or benign genes. I've had smart pets. I've never had children. I sometimes envision smart pets as like an X-year old child with Y-year old trait, almost as a person with a disability. If a child can't achieve independence and a life of their own, why let all parties suffer through that ordeal?
- vtbassmatt 1y agoWhy do you think people with Down syndrome can’t “achieve independence and a life of their own”? And what makes you think they, or their families, see their existence as suffering?
- 90s_dev 1y ago[dead]
- appleaday1 1y agointeresting.
- iaaan 1y agoHear me out: what if instead of subtracting one we added another one to even it out?
- dimensional_dan 1y agoCan we remove the down side but keep the joy?
- teaearlgraycold 1y agoI doubt that’s possible. Is it not simply ignorance is bliss?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- dragonelite 1y agoYou can be joyous right now, just remove one self from all the negativity.
- searine 1y agoFunded by Japanese taxpayers via 3 grants.
- RamblingCTO 1y ago[flagged]
- tomhow 1y agoPlease don't post sneery, ideological flamebait on HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Scrounger 1y agoIf I already have down syndrome, would this still work as an adult?
- bobsmooth 1y agoMaybe if crispr gets really good.
- nicman23 1y agoprobably not as a lot of genes are not really used to the extent they were
- dragonelite 1y agoHow would that even work, it feels like the body/brain would have to be reshaped?
- vicnov 1y agoI think it is worth a separate research that modern definition of progressive thought considers eliminating/treating a genetic malfunction "unethical".
- nicman23 1y agoUS progressive thought
- lurk2 1y agoThis is not an attitude exclusive to progressives. The chief grievance here is that the historical “solution” to the “problem” of Down Syndrome has been abortion. Opposition comes from the pro-life movement (which is generally conservative) and disability advocacy groups (which are generally liberal). A novel therapy that does not result in the termination of the pregnancy might satisfy the conservatives, but it does nothing to satisfy the disability advocates, who point out that these kinds of technologies fundamentally normalize the idea that they should never have been born the way that they are.
- Tade0 1y agoHailing from a particularly conservative country I can tell you right now that it's not going to satisfy the conservatives, as their core belief is that the world is zero-sum and tampering with that, in their view, wrong.
- throwaway342334 1y agoAs a conservative, my position on genetic intervention is about ethics, human digniity, and the sanctity of life and not some kind of blanket opposition to treating genetic disorders. I have no moral problem with a therapeutic intervention that improves a life by treating a debilitating disorder with no cost of life. I will have moral problems when those ideals are inevitably twisted and loosened over time to not just treat disorders, but pick attributes like intelligence, strength, skin color, attractiveness, etc.
- vicnov 1y ago
- bjornnn 1y agoThis would only be applicable to in-vitro fertilization, in which case there's no point in trying to remove the extra chromosome when you could just find another sperm donor that doesn't have Down Syndrome.
- eleveriven 1y agoUsing subtle sequence variants to distinguish and eliminate only the supernumerary chromosome, without harming the normal ones... I think that precision is a technical marvel
- svara 1y agoDown syndrome presents in different ways. I wanted to respond to multiple comments with the touching speech of Frank Stephen (a man affected by Down syndrome) before the US Congress in 2017, so I'm posting it to the top level instead. It's a complex issue but I think listening to Stephen will add a valuable perspective. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vtS91Jd5mac&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vtS91Jd5mac&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5t...
- gizajob 1y agoOne person’s “cognitive impairment” is another’s empathy enhancement.
- Huxley1 1y agoThis research gives me a bit of hope. Although it’s still early and far from clinical use, it’s encouraging to see new treatment ideas emerging. I really hope we see more progress like this in the future that can truly help patients and their families.
- RamblingCTO 1y agoThe comments on this here make me a bit scared tbh and shows yet again what a bubble this is. You people need to get out more and socialize with actual people.
- jedimastert 1y agoNo for real, the amount of people desperately trying to work in the fact that they think eugenics is fine
- shlant 1y agojust because something is "eugenics" doesn't mean it's bad or shouldn't be discussed.
- RamblingCTO 1y agoNo, I think discussing anything that essentially boils down to "some human lifes are not worth it" is not ok, no. There's always the slippery slope to consider. Especially if you're from Germany like me, that's one too far. History, you know. We also would do good if we'd learn from books like 1984 or brave new world.
- shlant 1y ago> "some human lifes are not worth it" do you give the same worth to a human "life" at 10 weeks as you do at 9 months?
- rbanffy 1y agoI’d love to get a Star Trek future, but I’d rather skip the Eugenics War.
- lo_zamoyski 1y ago[flagged]
- sersi 1y ago> the moral case against acting on same-sex attraction is strong Explain to me exactly how the moral case against acting on same-sex attraction is strong without using religion (since not all people believe in religion). You start off with premise that you expect everyone to agree "It's immoral" without explaining why exactly it's immoral. Without justifying your point how can you expect "liberal spirited" people to discuss with you?
- tomhow 1y agoWe detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44680817 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44680817 and marked it off topic. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html