Coming up, GM people

Updated much on 4/26.

The ethical debate is just the secular priesthood talking itself into being comfortable with this.

Chinese scientists genetically modify human embryos

Pay particular note to the bits about the biological implications of germline modification.

Social acceptance begins with the promise of removal of tragic genetic disorders.

So far as that goes, this is going to be a very expensive and socially unnecessary means of enabling people who cannot otherwise have undisordered children to have at least one undisordered child, a child whose progeny will perhaps also be undisordered.

This is not about some once and for all fix that would ensure all of the children of "fixed" parents would be undisordered.

Who benefits?

Parents who will, by having a procedure, be able to have undisordered children that are biologically theirs, flesh of their flesh, rather than disordered ones or none at all, perhaps settling for adoption.

Future society that will not have to deal with disordered people who would otherwise have been born.

Will there be any individual person who would otherwise have been disordered but who will not be, thanks to this intervention?

Yes, a child C of parents having the procedure will so benefit if (1) there is an embryo that would, unaltered, be allowed to develop into a disordered individual A but, because of the alteration, will instead develop into an undisordered individual B, and (2) B is the same individual as A, but without disorder, rather than an entirely different person, and (3) C is the same person as both A and B.

(1) is almost certainly false, leaving it practically unnecessary for us to puzzle out (2).

Remoter descendants of a couple who had the procedure would also personally benefit provided they, the same individuals, will exist and be undisordered if the original couple have the procedure but will exist and be disordered if not.

For an ontology without immaterial souls, (2), above, is necessary for this, but not sufficient.

And even apart from that, again for an ontology without souls, it seems if there were some such descendants of a couple who had the procedure - identical individuals who will descend from the original couple whether or not they have the procedure - there could not be many and there would be none, for example, if the couple would have no children if they did not have the procedure.

But in any case that is not where the real impact will be felt.

Eventually it will all get to be a lot more interesting than that, and there is a real chance this science will produce - intentionally produce - diverse races (strains, varieties, variants) of humans for diverse fates.

Let your sci-fi imagination go.

Cui bono?

Mitochondria editing tried in mice

Here's the bait.

Dr Marita Pohlschmidt, at charity Muscular Dystrophy UK, said: "We welcome this exciting new technique, which could benefit thousands of women worldwide who risk passing on mitochondrial disease to their children."

They will go there.

But not without resistance.

And David King, of the group, Human Genetics Alert, had his own warning.

"This research is unethical. It threatens to usher in the future of genetically modified designer babies.

"We must extend the ban on human genetic engineering to create a global treaty."

Meanwhile, other research from China involving separate technology on the more abundant DNA found in the nuclei of human cells, has led scientists to question how far such technology should ethically go.

Jonathan Glover has the jump on this one.

30 years ago he wrote a book asking what sorts of people should there be.