Genetically modified babies given go ahead by UK ethics body

The Guardian ^ | 17 July 2018 | Ian Sample

[Heartlander]

Genetically modified babies given go ahead by UK ethics body

The creation of babies whose DNA has been altered to give them what parents perceive to be the best chances in life has received a cautious green light in a landmark report from a leading UK ethics body.

The Nuffield Council on Bioethics said that changing the DNA of a human embryo could be “morally permissible” if it was in the future child’s interests and did not add to the kinds of inequalities that already divide society.

The report does not call for a change in UK law to permit genetically altered babies, but instead urges research into the safety and effectiveness of the approach, its societal impact, and a widespread debate of its implications.

“It is our view that genome editing is not morally unacceptable in itself,” said Karen Yeung, chair of the Nuffield working group and professor of law, ethics and informatics at the University of Birmingham. “There is no reason to rule it out in principle.”

But the report drew immediate criticism from some quarters, with one lobby group accusing the authors of opening the door to the unrestricted use of heritable genetic engineering, and an age of genetic haves and have-nots.

Recent advances in genetic technology have given scientists the tools to rewrite the DNA bound up in living cells, letter by letter. With the procedures in hand, scientists can in principle tweak the genetic code in sperm, eggs and embryos, and change dramatically how future children develop.

[cuban leaf]

KHAN!

[NonValueAdded]

Funny, the EU is dead set against GM food.

[ETL]

[dfwgator]

Gattaca

[KC_Lion]

[deadrock]

...if it was in the future child’s interests and did not add to the kinds of inequalities that already divide society.

IOTW, no white males.

[originalbuckeye]

Ethics Board?? ETHICS??? This is just getting creepy now.

[FLT-bird]

I can understand getting rid of defects, susceptibility to diseases or genetic conditions, etc. I can even see getting rid of some bad genes that don’t cause disease but which are harmful....eg soft tooth enamel which runs in my family.

I’m a lot more leery of “improvements”. What if a boy is going to grow to a max height of 5’2’ and by tweaking something you can change that to 5’10’? I have no doubt that would help him with women, with job prospects etc. it would enhance his quality of life. Where does it stop though?

[Rebelbase]

So they’ve discoered the genetics that promote rape culture and honor killings?

[rightwingcrazy]

“morally permissible”

What informs their morality? Just curious.

[neverevergiveup]

A very, very slippery slope. We don't even know why the vast majority of people who develop hypertension have it. Not all things genetic are controlled by a single gene, or a few genes. Trying to genetically engineer traits like intelligence, or athleticism, etc. is not straightforward, and the ethical concerns of this are mind-boggling. Decisions on things like this should not be made by university-trained ethicists.

[SkyDancer]

I guess to go along with their genetically modified adult.

[mewzilla]

I suspect that the Royals have been doing this for a while now...

[I want the USA back]

They will soon be changing the sex.

[JayVee]

This, to me, is horrifying.

[ETL]

[Ciaphas Cain]

[MrEdd]

So we have you down as saying outright... that you only advocate a little bit of eugenics.

[originalbuckeye]

To me, too. Just appalling.