[ALERT] China Gene Edits Viable Human Embryo

This is cool and all, but what about the defective genes that gave birth to these defective genes?

I'm concerned that the defective genes that were responsible for birthing the other defective genes will get passed down.

and if we DON'T do it, they're going to produce a race of 10 foot tall superhumans who regenerate and have IQ's of 200 at the bare minimum. see the problem? we either do genetic experimentation or we become enslaved to those who do. there aren't any alternative scenario's. that is how this plays out.

What gives you more of a right to exist than these humans?

Bingo.

I don't care about your /pol/ memeword. You're the reason why only China could have done this.

this only works if the scientists+gov't themselves are also 10 foot tall superhumans.

no it fucking doesn't once you have a race of those things the rest of us are fucking FOOD.

but of course the race of 10 foot tall nuclear-chad's with IQ's of 200 will find it more easy to create the race of 20 foot tall psychic beings with iq's of 1200 than it was to create themselves.

>What gives you more of a right to exist than these humans?
Who are you quoting? What you said has literally nothing to do with what I said.

I am excited for gene engineering progress, I'm just curious whether they will manage to also fix passing down the defective genes or whether the will have to keep fixing them in embryos.

Based Chinks and their lack of ethics.

I actually think there is nothing wrong with gene editing embryos of course, but radical Christians in America would never let it happen. Radical liberals would probably hate it too because it would imply uncomfortable things about genetics.

Both sides of the aisle have been blocking progress on this. More proof ideology, whatever the flavor, is pure distilled retardation.

Thankfully Chinks will now force us into it.

I have nothing to do with that you idiot. The current ban is from right wing religioustards. The eugenics hatred at large in the west is from fucking hitler.

I know that. Why is it so damned hard to come up with a new word for something. So many things and concepts have multiple words for them, why can't this? Any time someone uses the word it sounds like bait.

That's your issue though, if you want words changed because they trigger you then there's a 3 letter acronym for that.

positive eugenics, or just don't describe it abstractly and just say "genetic screening" or PGD even for editing to sound better.

I'm not alone though. Whether you like it or not, small child, people will forever balk at the word just like they will forever balk at the use of the swastika symbol in public. It's permanently tainted and your /pol/ retardation doesn't change it. If this goes forward in the West, I'm almost certain that it will get a rebranding and a freshening of its image.

It works like this. Humans are scared of it until they see the first image of a cute little baby. IVF was unpopular and people considered the kids "soulless" until the first baby was born from it.

Once designer babies are available it will be a huge trend. People care far less about ethics and morals than they do about cute little babies. Once you have a cute looking baby all the retarded normies will fall in line and want one too.

Pirates costumes are a common sight during halloween. So are witch costumes.

I'm not going to humor your irrational ranting about who you presume I am.

>make retarded arguments
I presume you are an retarded

No one will associate genetic engineering with gas chambers. Even if you called it eugenics the technology will still advance somewhere without that hangup.

In parts of asia a "rising sun" type of image is considered pretty much equivalent to swastika but in America no one would give a fuck.

There are places, as evidenced by the fucking first post in this thread, where they don't care if this technology was literally called "nazi eugenics technology". It wouldn't affect their choices like it would ours.

If you actually talked to people once in a while you'd realize that most Americans have no idea what Eugenics is.

So, here's what we do: We call it "Eugenics" and "Genetic Engineering" and whenever people say "But what a minute, isn't that what H-" we quickly interrupt and say

>Yes, the Democrats practiced Eugenics when they engaged in mass sterilization and euthenasia to wipe out Blacks, Hispanics, and Indians. But this is being done by Republicans, so I don't believe in the mass murder of lesser races; hence, we're just getting rid of diseases and giving your cute babies nifty hair and eye colors.

Bam. Issue solved. Just don't let the Democrats sell baby parts to cosmetic companies and the actual Republicans won't complain.

>It wouldn't affect their choices like it would ours.
You're assuming the being you're talking to is capable of empathy. Reread the posts it made.

your argument is too complex

When someone argues with you, the best counterpoint is not an argument. Rather bring up a sob story that is emotional.

"This technology can help save poor african babies from sickle cell which causes a life time of pain. We have to do it so little Ashanti doesn't cry all night in pain as her poor mother tries to sleep."

Rational arguments are not proper for arguing with humans.

btw this has been proven by scientific studies. using rational or statistic arguments is the least likely to succeed and in most cases reinforces the opponent's views.

Hence you must understand human psychology and their shitty empathy. You need to create a story relating the cause to a single human being they can "connect with". Then you need to pose danger or some suffering on this person.

Example of good argument for targeting humans:
"We need this technology because otherwise Ashley will be told by her parents she only can expect to live to be 20 years old. That she will suffer immense pain throughout her life and never get to see her children grow up if she has any."

The above argument is perfect at targeting human thought patterns.

Rational arguments like the following: We can save 500 billion a year in healthcare spending and save 10,000 lives.

Do not work effectively on average humans aka not scientific and not above average IQ. It's a big mistake people make believing that rational arguments matter. Irrational is how you should frame all arguments and debate if you want to actually influence people and not just think "I had way better statistics and facts than them"

So who the hell here actually beleives what they learned from this wont be used to fuck everyone but the top 1%?

They will use what they learned so they can create a race of not super humans but a race of more obedient SLAVES.

Obedience has nothing to do with this shit. They can't use this to make the population slaves BUT they can use it to become better than the population.

This shit will be expensive as fuck and will be available only to the top 1%

having the top 1% be more intelligent would be fucking great.

Lower a populations general IQ and you get a ignorant and malleable population.

So... yes it has everything to do with it.

Ever hear of a Retrovirus? You don't need a willing population for that shit.

yeah africa is so much more stable

What? Where did I say a lower IQ is a good thing?

there is no incentive to have a stupid population. It's imaginary. higher IQ means less crime and less strain on government in general. The ghettos and drug dens are a side effect of low IQ and even the rich would be pretty happy with higher IQ middle and lower class.

What about the defective genes responsible for birthing those defective genes

>lol r u triggered m8
Eugenics is a historical term with obvious negative connotations, you fucking scrub. Eugenics has nothing to do with science, it's about breeding humans based on muh blonde hair and blue eyes.

Correcting genetic mutations is unethical.
This proves that China has no boundaries.

Based China.

>10 foot tall

waste of resources, the future belongs to manlets

the most general definition of eugenics is literally just "making genetics better"

In that case you have things like positive eugenics which don't involve gassing people or sterilization.

It's definitely a loaded term you would never use in public debate or etc. It's fine for Veeky Forums because the audience.

Nice, when can we do this at home for under 50k?

Your post has been visited by the spirit of egregious ethical standards.

Please reply THANK YOU BASED CHINA to expedite the development of category 2 superhumans.

But how long until

I want basement human experiments NOAW

How much time until we develop Evas?

>Evas

?

He was talking about Neon Genesis anime. The one show that tries to act deep with a pussy 14 year old MC.

Anyways. Congratulations, China. Hopefully if the country doesn't go into a civil war anytime soon they can continue making progress and use it to increase their shitty quality of life in the country.

If i understand right, we can just edit people living right now? can this work to make us live forever? (Theoretically) the same as lobsters ect?

PLEASE ANSWER I AM DUMB

Genetically engineered cat girls inbound >.

BUT FUCKING WHEN

DOES NOBODY ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS OR WHAT?

the defective genes are edited away, that's the whole point, brainlet
>eugenics
call it genetic engineering

you falling down and dying is eugenics too, but it isn't genetic engineering, and carries connotations

...

see, you start as a single cell,
the single cell divides into new cells that specialize and you is born. DNA gets copied in all cells

the only way to fix a living person is to affect all his cells - can't happen

you have to edit the dna in the original single cell that was you

>the only way to fix a living person is to affect all his cells - can't happen

Isn't that literally what crispr is though?

yes, but the living person must consist of 1 cell

So, technically, with all the right equipment, i can spawn my own super-humans?

I read a little. This technique seems like serious business.

I had no idea it's this doable.

Theoretically yes. Its just a very large task and hassle to do.

>with all the right equipment
you'll need eggs to fertilize
and you'll need women to carry the fetuses

describe your super-humans

>A team in China [math] [claim] [/math] it has corrected genetic mutation

I instantly distrust all research coming out of China. As you should to.

>Its just a very large task and hassle to do.

How much money would you estimate to do all the work?

Obviously i can temp a woman to grow a superhuman, and by superhuman i mean edits across the board to just make them physically and mentally stronger, eradicating genetic mistakes forever ect

>physically stronger
why
it's a waste in more than 1 ways

You don't have to add it if you don't want too

it's impossible to take a living human and change their dna in all their cells
that procedure would kill the person

fucking hell these captchas are next level

why have 2 smart (and strong humans) when you can have 3 smart ones for the same price (resources)

Unfortunately, this is only applicable to a single cell. Doing this for an entire adult organism is utterly impossible right now and by the looks of it won't happen for a good few decades, maybe not even in our lifetimes.

The only ways to give any real impact using this kind of technology is either to edit embryos at the single cell stage, resulting in every cell developing from that cell having the modification. Alternatively you can reprogramme a cell of a person into an induced pluripotent stem cell, which can become any type of cell, then edit that in the way you want and then you can grow, say, a new organ or tissue to replace damaged or diseased ones and stuff.

With regards to ageing, telomere decay/hayflick limit and also replication errors and general accumalated mutations inexorably cause us to age and develop cancer. We could potentially use to mechanisms in place which protect gametes, and also stem cells to an extent, from this to try and protect the rest of our cells but even that would just slow ageing down, albeit significantly. Sorry turned into a bit of an essay lol.

I should also say that induced pluripotent stem cells come with a host of unresolved issues but they are quite promising.

>WHEN

It's anybody's guess really.
Technologically we can be there within the next 30 years, but the larger hindrance is certainly that of ethics. Good luck trying to conduct research into this scientific sector in Western countries without starting a SJW shitstorm. Getting this stuff to be accepted within American culture would be the equivalent of trying to restart the eugenics movement in America; it won't happen unless the sheepel can get suckered into supporting it.

That being said, it's really up to China to do the majority of the research, so the major developments in human-genomic modification will be dependent on them. It's a shame really, as I would love to contribute to this field, but I'm sure as hell not moving to China.

>black people fast twitch muscles and speed
>Asian people IQ
>white people firearm accuracy

Lol you guys we're gonna die

You can fix it without harming anyone by making the gene correction a dominant trait and seeding the correction amount different social circles. That way people can continue to breed normally, but the corrected trait spreads throughout the population quickly enough, probably 3 to 5 generations if seeded well enough. It's been done in mosquitoes.

I believe the correct terms are negroid, mongoloid and caucasoi
racoid science is so awesome

>The ghettos and drug dens are a side effect of low IQ and even the rich would be pretty happy with higher IQ middle and lower class.

Not him but ghettos and drug dens are a side effect of finite resources, economic exploitation and civil strife resulting in a stratified social pecking order. They are not the result of low IQ.

Case in point both China and Japan have populations with IQ averages over 100. Yet they both still have ghettos and drug dens despite this.

Now you can attempt to make the argument that Chinese and Japanese below the average still on average live in ghettos and drug dens. But further inspection in the matter shows it's often times due social stratification, an example of this is with the Japanese Burakumi.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burakumin

Another example of this was with the Warsaw ghetto in Europe years ago. Which was clearly occupied by non-middle Eastern Jews who clearly had a high IQ average relative to the general population.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto

So to state ghettos and drug dens are side effects of low IQ is clearly misrepresentation of history. Which makes me think you are utilizing a logical fallacy thinking style resulting from equating ghettos and drug dens with populations such as African Americans and their low IQ. Despite the fact in truth their high placement in ghettos is due to redlining.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

Which in fact shares similar characteristics to the Roman ghetto methodology placed upon Jews.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cum_nimis_absurdum

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Ghetto

Fuck this is cool. I don't get why people would be afraid of supersoldiers or a race of genetically superior humans though. Do we even know the genes responsible for intellect? Would fucking with those genes from such an early stage really be as simple, or do we know enough of brain development from the fetal stage? I can see this eliminating hereditary diseases for the extremely rich, but influencing brain development is probably still at least decades away

I think you missed the point that was poorly trying to make

He was saying that a low IQ population would naturally create a ghetto, not that ghettos can only be created by low IQ populations

there exists artificial ghettos like those orchestrated by a politcal regime or social dogma

and natural ghettos where the local population doesn't have the competence or will to maintain their community, such as the ghettos in America

I grew up in a ghetto, and I can assure you that the majority of it's inhabitants sabotage it themselves being all too happy to leave it to someone else to fix, because they don't have the will, competence, or accountability to do it themselves

>Muh nazies
Why do people always equate people being genetic superior to genocide?

We don't throw retards down a cliff.

Although I can definitely see how this marks a somewhat important time of China's progress in science,

Doesn't this also mark a new age of segregation?

Couldn't designer babies be genetically-specified for certain tasks throughout vast labor jobs? Imagine a world where we'd divide into the Originals and Genefied (I just coined genetically modified) population and as a result bring back slavery?

Would this happen or would the Genefied take over?...

Sure am glad im born in this age

don't panic yet
it's no different than people's iq increasing due to nutrition

i don't know what you're imagining, but engineered humans won't be too different than normal humans

I can't wait for the european to finish their self-genocide, once the world is under east asian control, grand things will happen again.
I deeply hope subhuman complete genocide to be one of those.

If you didn't work towards increasing your wealth for years already, you deserve to be part of the lower caste, plebeian.

>white genocide

singularity when?

I hope you put your money where your mouth is and do not plan to ever emigrate out of your multicultural paradise.

no, white genocide is real and i believe it so we need to genocide the non-whites asap

Good luck, me i bet on the east-asians and will act accordingly.

Without any ethical problem, what could we do today with a very high budget on genetics engineering ?

We have still no clue where intelligence come from no ? And nothing guarantee that these super-intelligent human would be highly functional, like some autists.

>you don't know the genes tied to intelligence, so there's no need to start experimenting to find the intelligence genes you nazi racist baby-eater

You're wrong though. Whites aren't the problem. Humans are. That's why we need human 2.0.

Human 2.0 already exists. It's called the black man. All we need now is to purge all those failed 1.0 you call "white".

>Human 2.0 already exists. It's called the black man

Lol ok, name on successful black country

Lmao, blacks are like the beta version of humans.

You guys are all brainlets. This is not going to lead to superhumans or designer babies.

For one, we aren't even sure what the majority of the genome does. We haven't found any genes or SNPs related to intelligence, and even if we did we don't know the affects that altering those genes would bring. Maybe altering the wrong ones lead to psychosis and mental illness. We just don't know.

At best, this is going to be able to fix congenital diseases caused by a point mutation.

No you are the brainlet.

This is the opening of Pandora's box. Sure we have no clue about those things as of right now. But we have decided to down this route, who knows what will happen in the future.

>we don't know the affects that altering those genes would bring
There's one way to find out, 外人。

It will lead to designer babies though.

We have the technology to create blonde blue eyed melanistic Asians.

We do not have the facts to create super smart humans, but that's coming at some point.

>new scientist
>unbiased reporting

Where is a trust worthy journal?

>10 foot tall
>tries to move
>bye bye femur
>hello paraplegia thanks to back snapping in 2

>iq of 1200
IQ starts to lose its already diffuse meaning in the range of 190+, what do you think an IQ of 1200 means?
If anything what we could get is some kind of megasavant without the autism.

And genetic engineering is not like playing with LEGO, it's a fuckhuge nonlinear interactive system of proteines, you change a little thing and you can get an abomination.