Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22
Like Tree4Likes

Thread: Are you in favor of us genetically altering our bodies?

  1. #1
    Yes
    Yes is offline
    Senior Member Yes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    472

    Are you in favor of us genetically altering our bodies?

    I read recently the US supreme court upheld a decision to not allow pharmaceutical companies to patent DNA as its a product of nature.
    Well thank heavens for that bit of common sense.

    I wondered what BM's think about genetically engineering our bodies.Designer babies,vat grown organs,screening out genes,cloning, the whole nine yards.

    Do you think this is messing with nature?

    Do you think we are part of nature and this is a logical next step?

    Do you think this is dangerous because we don't know enough about long term effects.

    I personali think that if we can do it,we will do it.

    When you look at a billion dollar industry like cosmetics or plastic surgery.

    There is no way we are going to turn down options to stabilize your age or rejuvenate back to looking 25 from 60.

    Would you buy a pair of Zeeiz icon 20 20 new eyes if the old ones are fading?

    Or have I just been redding too mut too mut science fiction?

  2. #2
    Senior Member slampay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,642
    Nano surgeons....

    They'll let the little fuckers loose on our bodys and 'presto', all is better now!

    The future is going to be absolutely crazy when it comes to 'rejuvenating' procedures.

  3. #3
    Yes
    Yes is offline
    Senior Member Yes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    472
    Yes talk about opening Pandoras box....nice girl Pandora I enjoyed opening her box

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    930
    "Do you think we are part of nature and this is a logical next step"

    Sums it up pretty well.
    If we can make life better for people why would we not?

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,267
    Is making clothes and wearing them messing with nature?
    Is making cars and driving them messing with nature?

    I think you have to be rather narrow minded and very religious to think that gene therapy or other ways of altering our bodies in a good way is bad.

  6. #6
    Senior Member geir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Ranong
    Posts
    4,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatdane View Post
    Is making clothes and wearing them messing with nature?
    Is making cars and driving them messing with nature?

    I think you have to be rather narrow minded and very religious to think that gene therapy or other ways of altering our bodies in a good way is bad.
    Agree 100%, but history have a way to tell us that it's not always used in a good way. Hopefully they wont mess with it in a way to get better soldiers or/and equal mindset(religion is taking care of that part)........

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    The cold Wong
    Posts
    1,591
    Animal Farm - George Orwell

  8. #8
    Senior Member slampay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,642
    LIL is going to need a oxygen mask for this thread..55

  9. #9
    Super Moderator LivinLOS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14,153
    Quote Originally Posted by slampay View Post
    LIL is going to need a oxygen mask for this thread..55
    Is breathing into a paper bag messing with nature ??

  10. #10
    Senior Member Waharoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,207
    Quote Originally Posted by LivinLOS View Post
    Is breathing into a paper bag messing with nature ??
    used to be messing with glue...
    geir, LivinLOS and WarProfiteer like this.

  11. #11
    Senior Member WarProfiteer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,031
    Quote Originally Posted by Waharoa View Post
    used to be messing with glue...
    *E-highfive!*

  12. #12
    Senior Member WarProfiteer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2,031
    Also, yeah, I'm in favor of implants and when the times comes, if I need an artificial kidney or lung I'll be hoping they have them in stock at Wal-Mart or Tesco. I'm sure they'll be one of those behind-the-counter items though...

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    682
    I think a better question is... How do you intend to stop them?

    I think that manipulation at the genetic level is a long way off, but once it's here and the knowledge is commonplace and the technologies readily available akin to today's elective procedures... How would it be policed if the Powers That Be decide it must be restricted.

    Personally I think it cant be controlled if it ever reaches that level. Once the knowledge is common enough even if restricted it will still be practised in backyard clinics and nations that dont enforce those kinds of rules (yep, tell me about how prostitution in Thailand is illegal again).

    As for me, I'm for it. I doubt we're going to pray ourselves into a better people. But as I said I think that kind of genetic manipulation is a long way off. Even something as simple as correcting congenital defects like Motor Neurone, Alzheimers and male pattern baldness will be difficult to accomplish, let alone make massive changes to our biology (I.E. strength, intelligence, looks... basically the entire S.P.E.C.I.A.L range). But as long as we dont wipe ourselves out, regress into another dark age or unleash that Zombie virus the KGB cooked up in the 80's we'll get there. That being said, I think Bio-tech and Nano-tech are growth industries and we'll have non-biological or semi-biological augmentations available before wholesale genetic re-writing.

    Oh and and whilst we're on the subject, Jessica Alba in Dark Angel was damn hot.
    Dark-Angel-tv-09.jpg

  14. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    10
    My take on genetically modifying our bodies is that we should be able to choose whatever we want to do. At the same time though people should be expected to pay for it themselves and not be a burden on the public purse (country).

    My problem with it would be if it became the norm to expect the public purse to pay for modifications of a dubious nature or of a short term gain. In situations of payment by third parties, a decision needs to be made as to contribution by whom. Of course as individuals when in need, we want all to be done to help us regardless of who pays. Human Nature!

    To illustrate,$250k spend on genetically modifying a person for 6 months increase in lifespan vs. $250k spend on treating 60 kids with grommets to correct ear (pain and hearing problems), whilst at the same time saving the State considerably more at a later date on special education etc. as a result of early age learning difficulties with ear problems. What is the preferred option?

    The flip side of this is that all technology is initially very expensive and more so that of a medical nature (that is why drug companies get 20-25 year patents for new products). Of course technology can become relatively inexpensive with time depending on public acceptance, uptake etc. If we don't allow it or even encourage the use of it (Genetic modification), are we then stifling or preventing the public good that may become of it? Who knows?

    At the end of the day I still think, If you can pay for it then go for it. If your financial contribution helps others in the long run through mass production of technology, thus decreasing costs to a publically acceptable level at a later date, then consider it part of your contribution to the betterment of Mankind.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,267
    Quote Originally Posted by dave0569 View Post
    My take on genetically modifying our bodies is that we should be able to choose whatever we want to do. At the same time though people should be expected to pay for it themselves and not be a burden on the public purse (country).
    But it will not always be a burden. If you cure a decease with gene therapy, the public purse may very well save money in the long run. I think you should do it the same way as with other treatments. If it is as a cure the state pays, if it is cosmetic you pay yourself.

  16. #16
    Senior Member faultytowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,496
    Genetics - This century's 'magic bullet' is still a long way from being clinically practical or financially feasible . There is a vast difference between what can be "theoretically" done in a laboratory and what is actually going to end up as viable in real life situations.

    As with all medical research , the press picks up on the headline grabbers but ignores the fine detail .

    I used the term "magic bullet" to highlight how the 'miracle cures' can turn out to cause problems further down the line. The prime example of this is antibiotics , the good they originally did is now turning nasty due to over/inappropriate use (they paint ships hulls with antibiotic impregnated coatings !).

  17. #17
    Senior Member Lightemup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by mjwx View Post
    Visible hipbones, love it

    If we could make that feature standard, then Im all for it.
    Waharoa likes this.

  18. #18
    Senior Member billpay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    2,046
    Quote Originally Posted by mjwx View Post
    I think a better question is... How do you intend to stop them?

    I think that manipulation at the genetic level is a long way off, but once it's here and the knowledge is commonplace and the technologies readily available akin to today's elective procedures... How would it be policed if the Powers That Be decide it must be restricted.

    Personally I think it cant be controlled if it ever reaches that level. Once the knowledge is common enough even if restricted it will still be practised in backyard clinics and nations that dont enforce those kinds of rules (yep, tell me about how prostitution in Thailand is illegal again).

    As for me, I'm for it. I doubt we're going to pray ourselves into a better people. But as I said I think that kind of genetic manipulation is a long way off. Even something as simple as correcting congenital defects like Motor Neurone, Alzheimers and male pattern baldness will be difficult to accomplish, let alone make massive changes to our biology (I.E. strength, intelligence, looks... basically the entire S.P.E.C.I.A.L range). But as long as we dont wipe ourselves out, regress into another dark age or unleash that Zombie virus the KGB cooked up in the 80's we'll get there. That being said, I think Bio-tech and Nano-tech are growth industries and we'll have non-biological or semi-biological augmentations available before wholesale genetic re-writing.

    Oh and and whilst we're on the subject, Jessica Alba in Dark Angel was damn hot.
    Dark-Angel-tv-09.jpg
    I agree 100% (About Jessica Alba)55555

  19. #19
    Yes
    Yes is offline
    Senior Member Yes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    472
    ^She got some great jeans,

  20. #20
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatdane View Post
    But it will not always be a burden. If you cure a decease with gene therapy, the public purse may very well save money in the long run. I think you should do it the same way as with other treatments. If it is as a cure the state pays, if it is cosmetic you pay yourself.
    Yes Greatdane, my fourth paragraph did hint at this and I can agree. Even today with new drugs, the State (AUSTRALIA in my case) does not come on board until the worth of the drug is clinically proved; up until that time patient pays for drug, sometimes on a 50:50 basis with the drug company. An example of this is one of the drugs used for the treatment of bowel cancer, 5 years ago a last resort, now treatment of first choice, now considerably cheaper. We agree, I think.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •