Mobafire League of Legends Build Guides Mobafire League of Legends Build Guides
's Forum Avatar

Research help :S

Creator: TinyStar
April 18, 2013 3:13pm
30 posts page 1 of 3 Forums » Off Topic » Research help :S
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by TinyStar » April 18, 2013 3:13pm | Report
Okay,so I'm writing a research paper on "Designer Babies." If you have no clue what this is,you can basically pick you child's genes. I want opinions,but please please please DO NOT talk about a religious point of view. Some people may not have the same view point on you when it comes to God. If religion pops up I will have this locked bc I don't want people getting really upset. I just want opinions,and why it should stay legalized here in America.


Thank you

*edit*
I just need your opinion to add in. I also need to print this to show proof >.>
TinyStar's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
TinyStar
<Altruistic Artist>
Posts: 792
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2012
Rep: Established (113)
Blog   |   Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by DillButt64 » April 18, 2013 3:20pm | Report
http://www.mobafire.com/league-of-legends/forum/off-topic/mobafire-homework-central-22297

try posting this here you might get more help from others, also explain what you need to know and what needs to be in the paper
Thanks to TheNamelessBard for the signature
DillButt64's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
DillButt64
<Editor>
Posts: 4244
Joined: Aug 3rd, 2012
Rep: Established (102)
Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by Satella » April 18, 2013 3:24pm | Report
Choices:
  • Conceive "naturally" and risk all sorts of genetic defects like TOF/asthma/diabetes/mental ******ation/hormonal disorders that affects your child for life.
  • Embrace scientific advances in developmental biology and raise a child who won't suffer from cogenital complications.

Easy decision. Not sure what's there to debate.
Rewriting Riven Guide Useful Programs Thread Sig making
Satella's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
Satella
<Scout>
Posts: 1836
Joined: Nov 23rd, 2012
Rep: Prominent (177)
Blog   |   Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by TinyStar » April 18, 2013 3:44pm | Report
Satella wrote:

Choices:
  • Conceive "naturally" and risk all sorts of genetic defects like TOF/asthma/diabetes/mental ******ation/hormonal disorders that affects your child for life.
  • Embrace scientific advances in developmental biology and raise a child who won't suffer from cogenital complications.

Easy decision. Not sure what's there to debate.



I'll answer you in a private message as to why its always debatable
TinyStar's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
TinyStar
<Altruistic Artist>
Posts: 792
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2012
Rep: Established (113)
Blog   |   Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by lifebaka » April 18, 2013 4:02pm | Report
Satella wrote:

Choices:
  • Conceive "naturally" and risk all sorts of genetic defects like TOF/asthma/diabetes/mental ******ation/hormonal disorders that affects your child for life.
  • Embrace scientific advances in developmental biology and raise a child who won't suffer from cogenital complications.

Easy decision. Not sure what's there to debate.

Put another way, the choices are:
  • Don't mess with a system that, more often than not, works.
  • Totally screw with a system we don't understand and probably break things massively worse than nature is ever remotely likely to.
Again, easy decision. Not sure what there is to debate.
OTGBionicArm wrote: Armored wimminz = badass.

My posts may be long. If this bothers you, don't read them.
lifebaka's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
lifebaka
<Scout>
Posts: 1126
Joined: Dec 12th, 2011
Rep: Prominent (151)
Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by jhoijhoi » April 18, 2013 4:16pm | Report
^That's terrible. When things are genetically engineered, they're not "broken". Are you saying my cousin, concieved via IVF is "broken"? Is she worse than what nature intended/was likely to produce naturally? You're not giving thought at all to parents with Down Syndrome, or parents who can't conceive.

Some disabilities have close-knit cultures, like deaf people. They embrace their lifestyle and want children who are also deaf.

Other disabilities are not as easy to live with, like spinal bifida. Would you RISK the chance your child will be inflicted with a painful defect? Would you want them to go through what you did as a kid in high school, when instead they could be "normal"?

There's a difference between "designer babies" and "healthy children". If given the choice, yes, I would certainly want to ensure my child had the best possible genes from me and my partner. I have asthma and he has his own problems - I would MUCH prefer being able to ensure my child does not have either of these "defect" genes. Asthma is not who I am. But it has reduced how fast and hard I can run, and this was a huge issue when in primary school. I would NOT wish that sort of problem on my child, so if given the option to ensure no "asthma gene", I'd do so.

And I'm sure people who've had multiple cases of breast/ovarian cancer in the females of their family AND testicular cancer in the males of their family, would LOVE the chance to ensure their children won't have the chance of developing hereditary cancers.
jhoijhoi's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
jhoijhoi
<MOBAFire Mother>
Posts: 13961
Joined: Mar 20th, 2011
Rep: Exalted (1943)
Blog   |   Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by Bioalchemist » April 18, 2013 4:27pm | Report
lifebaka wrote:

Put another way, the choices are:
  • Don't mess with a system that, more often than not, works.
  • Totally screw with a system we don't understand and probably break things massively worse than nature is ever remotely likely to.
Again, easy decision. Not sure what there is to debate.


to give you the view point of a biochemist who has studied gene manipulation and performed some myself.

I would say lifebaka has an edge here. There are clear advantages to gene manipulation to remove potential genetic disorders this is true from the standpoint of when i see someone who was born with a genetic defect i simply can't understand it and feel bad that really the child did nothing to deserve the additional challenge they will face; however, given the track record of scientific discovery and technique usage i would say that currently we are not prepared to attempt it for a couple reasons: no long term study on how mutation of genetic material during initial conception aka sperm + egg has been performed (the body has so many proofchecking abilities it is possible that even with a change in genes a repair mechanism could be triggered resulting in unknown consequence) and slippery slope of usage....we tend not to do a good job controlling things (numerous examples of this from when we randomly introduce species into places they shouldn't be such as snakes to kill birds but than the snakes eat all the rabbits and all the birds and the balance of that area is destroyed)...if this became an attempt to make a perfect race we would most likely choose our desired genes based on societal trends which may not be the best for human survival. have you ever asked why there are different blood types? the answer is to avoid a particular virus or bacterial infection wiping out the human race: blood type, along with a number of other genetic diversity within our species, protects us from the event. this is why we are running a thin line with crop mutation to achieve greater harvest...luckily there is a back up system if a plague were to hit crops but depending on how quickly the infection spread it would be harmful->devastating even with a backup.

i will make another argument based on the shift of scientific research and industry: why has the vast majority of economic growth in the chemistry field gone in the direction of biochemistry/green chemistry? because A) green chemistry is trendy due to the attempts of parts of the scientific community (and al gore...wtf al gore) that is pushing for sustainability and the slowing of global warming B) biological processes that have been established through evolution/adaptation are far more efficient and well designed than any artificial program/material we can make. if this is the case why would we mess with pregnancy/natural birth that has been adapted and refined through years of breeding. most likely we can conclude that its current process is the most effective method for reproduction with the genetic diseases included (this is also a strong argument against birth control pills but that is a whole different argument).

in any case those are a couple points for you to examine.


Bioalchemist's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
Bioalchemist
<Editor>
Posts: 2633
Joined: Feb 5th, 2013
Rep: Prominent (155)
Blog   |   Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by lifebaka » April 18, 2013 4:28pm | Report
jhoijhoi wrote:

^That's terrible. When things are genetically engineered, they're not "broken". Are you saying my cousin, concieved via IVF is "broken"? Is she worse than what nature intended/was likely to produce naturally? You're not giving thought at all to parents with Down Syndrome, or parents who can't conceive.

My post is a pretty clear mirror of Satella's that says the exact opposite of Satella, in order to show that his reasoning is massively flawed. I thought that was obvious. I was wrong. My post isn't strictly representative of my thoughts on the subject.
OTGBionicArm wrote: Armored wimminz = badass.

My posts may be long. If this bothers you, don't read them.
lifebaka's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
lifebaka
<Scout>
Posts: 1126
Joined: Dec 12th, 2011
Rep: Prominent (151)
Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by GrandmasterD » April 18, 2013 4:29pm | Report
@lifebaka: First of all, that's the worst argument ever. "Don't fix what's not broken" is like an excuse to not do anything. Second, just because you do not understand genetics doesn't mean scientist don't. Lot's of genetic defects are already located (chromosome, locus, etc.)

@jhoijhoi: I'm pretty sure he meant that things can be broken easily rather than are broken by definitiion.

Personally I see no problem in this, in chance it will allow us to almost eradicate certain genetic defects and create a stronger human race. If you use this for "designing" your own baby or fixing genetic defects such as Down's Syndrome or Huntington's Disease. As jhoi pointed out, disabilities do not define people.

Saying that nature should do what it always does means that we should pretty much ignore the brains we have and not use them. Which means, go extinct.
GrandmasterD's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
GrandmasterD
<Member>
Posts: 7950
Joined: Sep 26th, 2011
Rep: Renowned (531)
Blog   |   Profile
Permalink | Quote | PM | +Rep | Commend by TinyStar » April 18, 2013 4:36pm | Report

@lifebaka: First of all, that's the worst argument ever. "Don't fix what's not broken" is like an excuse to not do anything. Second, just because you do not understand genetics doesn't mean scientist don't. Lot's of genetic defects are already located (chromosome, locus, etc.)

@jhoijhoi: I'm pretty sure he meant that things can be broken easily rather than are broken by definitiion.

Personally I see no problem in this, in chance it will allow us to almost eradicate certain genetic defects and create a stronger human race. If you use this for "designing" your own baby or fixing genetic defects such as Down's Syndrome or Huntington's Disease. As jhoi pointed out, disabilities do not define people.

Saying that nature should do what it always does means that we should pretty much ignore the brains we have and not use them. Which means, go extinct.



I agree 100%. I believe this is a great why to stop a lot of "bad traits". I think it would be nice if another human didn't have to break the news to their family they have cancer, and such things. I will reply later to other people. I'm about to go into a match
TinyStar's Forum Avatar

Awards Showcase
Show more awards
TinyStar
<Altruistic Artist>
Posts: 792
Joined: Aug 23rd, 2012
Rep: Established (113)
Blog   |   Profile

Quick Reply:

Guest commenting is currently disabled, please log in or sign up to respond!