Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Error free genome editing made possible by breakthrough.

funky_vibes (664942) writes | about 10 months ago

4

funky_vibes (664942) writes "The method, which is being called "Crispr" has been described as "jaw-dropping" by one Nobel scientist, and has stirred up intense excitement among DNA experts around the world.
A pre-programmed RNA molecule is inserted into the body of the organism. Using a special enzyme called CAS9 it will attach and cut the target DNA, whilst inserting data in between. It can be used for both adding and subtracting DNA at any chosen point.
The scientists also claim that the method causes no errors at the insertion points.

What will this new breakthrough be used for first? Penis or breast enlargement? You decide."

Link to Original Source

cancel ×

4 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

My vote (1)

pregister (443318) | about 10 months ago | (#45396089)

I'm voting for one penis enhancement,just for proof of concept, followed by as many breast enhancements as are requested.

What's wrong with "designer babies"? (1)

mi (197448) | about 10 months ago | (#45396815)

TFA frets about the "danger of designer babies" — and mentions, that the technique is already banned in Britain for fear of such babies appearing.

What, exactly, is wrong with designer children? Is it just the class-warfare nonsense all over again — the envious thought of "the rich" improving their offspring even before birth, while the poor remain at the 21st-century level — or is there more to it?

Re:What's wrong with "designer babies"? (1)

funky_vibes (664942) | about 10 months ago | (#45398845)

It's a hard question to answer.
But I believe the threat of designer babies was in a theoretical world where parents are able to design babies, but there still isn't a method to correct any kind of mistake retroactively. The child would be at the mercy of their parents whim for the rest of their life.
Seems to be a non-issue with Crispr since the child could later just edit themselves back.

How much this kind of stuff is going to cost, is another problem. I believe that this kind of therapy, because of immense popularity, will quickly hit a hard resource constraint problem.
Some physical resource will run out and drive costs much higher than initially believed

The cat's out of the bag now. I just hope our software is up to the task, or we might be looking at an extinction level event if we unknowingly create nasty genetic viruses.

Re:What's wrong with "designer babies"? (1)

mi (197448) | about 10 months ago | (#45399431)

The child would be at the mercy of their parents whim for the rest of their life.

Not much different from the current state of affairs, is it — the childhood treatment (by educators and, especially, parents) determines a lot about adults.

I believe that this kind of therapy, because of immense popularity, will quickly hit a hard resource constraint problem.

Does not seem like the procedure is particularly resource-intensive... Not any more so, than, say, vaccination — and less so, than appendix-removal.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>