3 ms·

Viruses are the only way to change the DNA of a living human, and that's the only way you're ever going to cure cancer, or fix things like diabetes, or ... Plus

by waps 13y ago

Viruses are the only way to change the DNA of a living human, and that's the only way you're ever going to cure cancer, or fix things like diabetes, or ... Plus it would allow for far more effective treatments for nearly any disease. If you ever want to be immortal, or even 150, it's an infection with a virus that'll make it possible. This research is definitely a net positive.

NAFV_P 13y ago
> This research is definitely a net positive. I couldn't agree more, but that knowledge can be abused.
vacri 13y ago
Viruses are the only way to change the DNA of a living human Radiation can also change the DNA, and radiotherapy can also be used to cure some cancers.
- TeMPOraL 13y ago
  There's a difference between "change" as in "modify in a precise manner without killing the organism", "change" as in "mutate stuff randomly", and "change" as in "breed, irradiate, let the weak die, repeat until you have a population with characteristics you want". Viruses can do the first one; radiation only the latter two.
sanxiyn 13y ago
Won't CRISPR work in the future, instead of using viruses? It's almost there.
ericd 13y ago
You're assuming that humans attaining immortality is a good thing. That's anything but a foregone conclusion.
- vdaniuk 13y ago
  What?! Could you please point to a logical system of views and values that would not assume indefinitely prolonging human life is a good thing?
  - waps 13y ago
    First, there does not exist a known logical system that is more complex than first order logic. In order for such a system to exist, it would at the very least be able to prove it's own consistency, otherwise it's merely a wild guess whether it's "logical" or not. Since that premise itself violates logic (a proof exists that the only consistent logical systems that prove their own consistency are wrong). So when it comes to "a logical system of views and values", that does not exist. When it comes to systems of views and values that do not assume indefinitely prolonging human life is a good thing : 1) all religions (meaning this is what > 6 billion people on this planet think) 2) when it comes to people over 75 or so, I find it very rare to find ones that don't want to die. It baffles me that I actually know people that old other than my grandfather. I'm getting old. Oh well. 3) various atheist systems of views and values, all boil down to malthusianism of course, but they include : socialism (communism/marxism/leninism and "other" socialist views), nazism, libertarians (to some extent, according to wikipedia), conservatives, "free market enthousiasts", feminists and human rights advocates. [1] 4) economics would have a few words to say on the subject. I don't think it's as simple as you propose. I may or may not chose to become immortal ... but I'd still like the option. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism
  - ufmace 13y ago
    For prolonging life 'indefinitely', I'd say it's anything but a foregone conclusion. Possible issues: The world population is getting bigger and bigger. AFAIK, we don't have a real solid idea how many people the Earth can really support. Growth seems to be tapering off a bit now, which is probably a good thing. If we keep the same birth rate and massively decrease the death rate, the population will boom fast. I have to doubt that our society is equipped to deal with these issues well right now. A great deal of social advancement seems to come from older generations dying off, and taking their prejudices, grudges, and viewpoints with them. What will our society look like if large numbers of people stop dying off eventually? I have nothing solid here, but it's something we ought to look at real hard before we go around extending lifespans indefinitely.
yareally 13y ago
> Viruses are the only way to change the DNA of a living human Not entirely true. Radiation exposure will also alter one's DNA. It may not be the desired result, but it will alter one's DNA nonetheless.

by waps 13y ago

NAFV_P 13y ago

> This research is definitely a net positive. I couldn't agree more, but that knowledge can be abused.

vacri 13y ago

Viruses are the only way to change the DNA of a living human Radiation can also change the DNA, and radiotherapy can also be used to cure some cancers.

TeMPOraL 13y ago
There's a difference between "change" as in "modify in a precise manner without killing the organism", "change" as in "mutate stuff randomly", and "change" as in "breed, irradiate, let the weak die, repeat until you have a population with characteristics you want". Viruses can do the first one; radiation only the latter two.

sanxiyn 13y ago

Won't CRISPR work in the future, instead of using viruses? It's almost there.

ericd 13y ago

You're assuming that humans attaining immortality is a good thing. That's anything but a foregone conclusion.

vdaniuk 13y ago
What?! Could you please point to a logical system of views and values that would not assume indefinitely prolonging human life is a good thing?
- waps 13y ago
  First, there does not exist a known logical system that is more complex than first order logic. In order for such a system to exist, it would at the very least be able to prove it's own consistency, otherwise it's merely a wild guess whether it's "logical" or not. Since that premise itself violates logic (a proof exists that the only consistent logical systems that prove their own consistency are wrong). So when it comes to "a logical system of views and values", that does not exist. When it comes to systems of views and values that do not assume indefinitely prolonging human life is a good thing : 1) all religions (meaning this is what > 6 billion people on this planet think) 2) when it comes to people over 75 or so, I find it very rare to find ones that don't want to die. It baffles me that I actually know people that old other than my grandfather. I'm getting old. Oh well. 3) various atheist systems of views and values, all boil down to malthusianism of course, but they include : socialism (communism/marxism/leninism and "other" socialist views), nazism, libertarians (to some extent, according to wikipedia), conservatives, "free market enthousiasts", feminists and human rights advocates. [1] 4) economics would have a few words to say on the subject. I don't think it's as simple as you propose. I may or may not chose to become immortal ... but I'd still like the option. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism
- ufmace 13y ago
  For prolonging life 'indefinitely', I'd say it's anything but a foregone conclusion. Possible issues: The world population is getting bigger and bigger. AFAIK, we don't have a real solid idea how many people the Earth can really support. Growth seems to be tapering off a bit now, which is probably a good thing. If we keep the same birth rate and massively decrease the death rate, the population will boom fast. I have to doubt that our society is equipped to deal with these issues well right now. A great deal of social advancement seems to come from older generations dying off, and taking their prejudices, grudges, and viewpoints with them. What will our society look like if large numbers of people stop dying off eventually? I have nothing solid here, but it's something we ought to look at real hard before we go around extending lifespans indefinitely.

yareally 13y ago

> Viruses are the only way to change the DNA of a living human Not entirely true. Radiation exposure will also alter one's DNA. It may not be the desired result, but it will alter one's DNA nonetheless.