Gattaca is here!

[Judge Smails]

Breast cancer gene-free baby born (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7819651.stm)



The first baby in the UK tested before conception for a genetic form of breast cancer has been born.

Doctors at University College London said the girl and her mother were doing well following the birth this week.

The embryo was screened for the altered BRCA1 gene, which would have meant the girl had a 80% chance of developing breast cancer.


Sure, this may seem great on the surface but I can seee this easily being abused. Will this be available to everyone, or just the rich?

[lleeder]

I'll never understand what possessed my mother to put her faith in God's hands, rather than her local geneticist.

[lleeder]

We want to give your child the best possible start. Believe me, we have enough imperfection built in already. Your child doesn't need any more additional burdens. Keep in mind, this child is still you. Simply, the best, of you. You could conceive naturally a thousand times and never get such a result.

[lleeder]

You wanna know how I did it? This is how I did it Anton. I never saved anything for the swim back.

[Thomas Merton]

Love Gattaca. Show it to my seniors after reading "Brave New World". Uma is icy hot, totally a future uber chick

[Cybersoldier]

Breast cancer gene-free baby born (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7819651.stm)



Sure, this may seem great on the surface but I can seee this easily being abused. Will this be available to everyone, or just the rich?

Agreed it can be abused but it can prevent or even find curse if stem cell research improves, so many kids with even more serious illness can be spared the pain of going through life with such problems with could develop early or later in life

[Furtherman]

Abused how?

This is a great step in medical science.

[Syd]

if you watched gattaca you'll see exactly how it is abused; it's just another new way to make a slave

[Furtherman]

if you watched gattaca you'll see exactly how it is abused; it's just another new way to make a slave

OH of course! The movie is the example.

We better not give the monkeys wings either!

[Thebazile78]

OH of course! The movie is the example.

If you know nothing about eugenics (http://www.all.org/abac/eugenics.htm), it might not give you pause.

Movies (and books) that came about because of notions like eugenics (http://hnn.us/articles/1796.html) shouldn't be discounted automatically, simply because they're works of fiction.

There were very REAL programs in Nazi Germany, like the lebensborn (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/Lebensborn.html) and the way the mentally ill, mentally retarded/developmentally disabled and physically challenged (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/disabled.html) were treated, that have their roots in eugenics (http://highschoolbioethics.georgetown.edu/units/cases/unit4_5.html).

It's not that far-fetched that someone might raise a question or two about the appropriateness of genetic selection.

We better not give the monkeys wings either!

Those were sewn on. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winged_monkeys)

Duh.

[sailor]

Abused how?

This is a great step in medical science.

if the baby had the gene they'd have killed her? and this gene would give 80% chance or beast cancer. what if it was 63%? 44%?

if they had a way to modify the gene toward their goal, i could see that, but looking at it and then deciding whether to keep it or not can be seen by many as evil already. what next, screening for big blue eyes?

[boosterp]

Genetic screening is not new nor is selection such as if the child has Water Head (Down's) syndrome.

[Zorro]

Genetic screening is not new nor is selection such as if the child has Water Head (Down's) syndrome.

When you make a pronouncement it's usually a good idea to get it right. "Water head" (Hydrocephalus)and down's syndrome are two very different ailments.

as an aside...the question is not whether you genetically screen, but what you do with the information.

[Syd]

OH of course! The movie is the example.

We better not give the monkeys wings either!

movies can sometimes be thought experiments you cretin

[boosterp]

When you make a pronouncement it's usually a good idea to get it right. "Water head" (Hydrocephalus)and down's syndrome are two very different ailments.

as an aside...the question is not whether you genetically screen, but what you do with the information.

Eh, tried to add funny but I failed. :glurps:

And I know the difference from 17 years in the medical field.

[Thebazile78]

if the baby had the gene they'd have killed her?

Yes, depending on your definition of "baby." If it was determined that the embryo, as this kid is an IVF baby, carried the BRCA1 gene mutation, it was not deemed an implantable embryo.

In fact, they discarded the 6 out of 11 embryos created who had the BRCA1 gene, in addition to discarding other 2 others with "routine" abnormalities. (http://www.slate.com/id/2208633/)

I'm not saying that this type of testing is surprising in IVF, but rather I am simply pointing out that's what happened in this specific instance.

and this gene would give 80% chance or beast cancer. what if it was 63%? 44%?

Your risk increases as you age. (LINK (http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/statistics/age.htm): Table of risk assessment, from CDC.) A woman of 30, statistically, has about a 0.5% chance of developing breast cancer by the time she's 40 (10 years) while a woman of 50 will have about a 2.5% chance of developing cancer within the next 10 years.

If you have other risk factors, your risks increase.

It stinks.

But I don't agree that this is the best way to bring about a cure.

Only 5% of breast cancer diagnoses are due to genetic factors. The other 85% come from other sources; they're still trying to determine what those "other sources" are.

if they had a way to modify the gene toward their goal, i could see that, but looking at it and then deciding whether to keep it or not can be seen by many as evil already. what next, screening for big blue eyes?

If you haven't already, please read about eugenics. In fact, that Slate article/essay I linked earlier brings up some of the issues we're all reacting to - is this a step towards complete eugenics and is that a step we want to take?

[Furtherman]

movies can sometimes be thought experiments you cretin

DUUUUUUUUURRRR what?

I think you mean documentary, not a work of fiction, spastic.

[Thebazile78]

DUUUUUUUUURRRR what?

I think you mean documentary, not a work of fiction, spastic.

Fiction often colors the lenses through which we see the world, so I disagree with your total dismissal of the concept that, maybe, a film like Gattaca or a novel like Brave New World would be the immediate touchstone for someone's understanding of what's just happened with this baby in the UK.

Science fiction very often asks questions we're fearful of asking, or examines them in ways we may not have seen possible at the inception.

For example, novels like Frankenstein (or, The Modern Prometheus) and Jurassic Park have raised ETHICAL questions - if we had x, y, or z power/technology should we use it? Now that cloning has come leaps and bounds from its inception - in SCIENCE FICTION - we're actually asking those questions (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/science/20tier.html).

While the story itself may be fiction, and the science in it is likely imaginary on several levels, science fiction and science fact have VERY strong ties to each other. Just ask Dr. Lawrence Krauss (http://krauss.faculty.asu.edu/), whose book, The Physics of Star Trek was among my introductions to physics. While that was not a work of fiction, it used the real-world science (grounded firmly in Newton & Einstein) to explicate the possibilities of the technologies used in the Star Trek series and films. Dr. Krauss also got Dr. Stephen Hawking, who is probably one of the world's most brilliant minds (AND a Star Trek fan) to write the Foreword for this book.

Speaking of Star Trek, the History Channel ran a special called How William Shatner Changed the World (http://www.amazon.com/How-William-Shatner-Changed-World/dp/B000M9BSBO/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1231960317&sr=8-1) ... talking about the inspiration for a lot of our modern devices that have their roots in Star Trek tech.

And that's just Star Trek!