3 ms·
If they are successful I assume this will likely not result in a way to improve the intelligence of existing individuals though gene therapy because their brain
by networked 14y ago
If they are successful I assume this will likely not result in a way to improve the intelligence of existing individuals though gene therapy because their brains are already wired a certain way and unlike other cells of the body the neurons in the brain do not regenerate rapidly. Is this a correct assumption?
- xaa 14y agoIf they find specific genes or non-coding RNAs with relatively strong associations (a big if), drugs could be designed to alter the expression levels of those transcripts. Since it is unclear how much of IQ is determined by the "macro" structure of neurons and synapses and how much is caused by intracellular events, it is really impossible to say how much an intervention could do to increase intelligence. The current state of the nootropics field, however, is not very encouraging. In any case, I would not pin my hopes on gene therapy. The hurdles that would be required for regulatory approval of "cosmetic" gene therapy (as this would be classified) are nearly insurmountable.
- networked 14y ago>"cosmetic" gene therapy (as this would be classified) Since higher IQ (at least up to a point) correlates positively with good health and other desirable characteristics including overall happiness [1] would this really be considered "cosmetic"? [1] https://journals.cambridge.org/action//displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=8698047&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S0033291712002139 https://journals.cambridge.org/action//displayAbstract?fromP...
- xaa 14y agoPersonally, I agree with you, but the NIH does not. So far, "stupidity" is not a disease (nor is aging, for that matter).