4 ms·

With apologies for the somewhat flip turn of phrase, if we outlaw human genome editing, then only outlaws will edit the human genome. States in general do not

With apologies for the somewhat flip turn of phrase, if we outlaw human genome editing, then only outlaws will edit the human genome. States in general do not have a good track record at preventing things that can take place in a small room, with inexpensive equipment and few personnel. Consider the kinds of equipment, and its associated cost, needed for genome editing -- and compare to that required for development of nuclear weapons. The collected might of the western world has occasional challenges in preventing development of nuclear weapons; it's not clear to me how anyone expects to be able to enforce a "ban" on editing the human genome. And for a glimpse of what an unenforceable ban looks like, look at the drug war. The whole thing is empty posturing. Genome editing is coming, like it or not. Bans won't prevent it; they'll just prevent open discussion on how and where it's being used.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- logfromblammo 12y ago
  An ethical moratorium doesn't outlaw the tech outright, but it does influence sources of funding, availability of laboratory facilities and capital, and the diversity of personnel willing to advance the state of the art. It would be similar to the impact that an executive order by G.W.Bush had on stem cell research in the U.S. It was delayed by a few years, and some research moved overseas, but then the issue largely became moot when the tech progressed past the need for embryo harvesting. At most, this would slow down gene mod tech for a few years, as the pressure in the djinn bottle builds. As long as we don't annihilate our civilization, it is practically inevitable that every human will one day have ready access to cheap gene mod tech, in the same way that they now have ready access to networked computer resources. The only way to reasonably keep this tech out of the hands of the irresponsible public is to convince scientists to not develop it in the first place. And that's what this is. I question the motive behind the suggestion, but that's my foil hat talking.
clusterfoo 12y ago
Agreed. This is the crux of the problem: if we're worrying about this leading to an "underclass"... does anyone think its illegality will prevent the ultra-wealthy from funding this technology? And who will be overseeing the research? If it must be conducted in the dark and on a budget, does anyone doubt that human experimentation will take place? No thanks. Ethical or not, the cat is out of the bag and the only way is forward.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

logfromblammo 12y ago
An ethical moratorium doesn't outlaw the tech outright, but it does influence sources of funding, availability of laboratory facilities and capital, and the diversity of personnel willing to advance the state of the art. It would be similar to the impact that an executive order by G.W.Bush had on stem cell research in the U.S. It was delayed by a few years, and some research moved overseas, but then the issue largely became moot when the tech progressed past the need for embryo harvesting. At most, this would slow down gene mod tech for a few years, as the pressure in the djinn bottle builds. As long as we don't annihilate our civilization, it is practically inevitable that every human will one day have ready access to cheap gene mod tech, in the same way that they now have ready access to networked computer resources. The only way to reasonably keep this tech out of the hands of the irresponsible public is to convince scientists to not develop it in the first place. And that's what this is. I question the motive behind the suggestion, but that's my foil hat talking.

clusterfoo 12y ago

Agreed. This is the crux of the problem: if we're worrying about this leading to an "underclass"... does anyone think its illegality will prevent the ultra-wealthy from funding this technology? And who will be overseeing the research? If it must be conducted in the dark and on a budget, does anyone doubt that human experimentation will take place? No thanks. Ethical or not, the cat is out of the bag and the only way is forward.