(11-27-2018 01:52 PM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(11-27-2018 01:42 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Can it be done retroactively for intelligence? Just sayin

Test Subject?



You'll be able to tell if it works, she'll become a Republican.....

The subject at different stages of treatment:
(NSFW)











Final result:


Full results can be found here>>>

Was only a matter of time before CRISPR entered this stage of use... It'll be an interesting topic of discussion for the next decade or so. Remember the big tado with stem cells?

(11-27-2018 01:57 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(11-27-2018 08:40 AM)miko33 Wrote:  I'm highly skeptical. It's still going to take some time to be able to figure out all the interactions between the genes before you can make designer babies. I think some traits would be simple - like making all kids with blonde hair and blue eyes. However, designing a baby with intelligence would probably be HIGHLY complex. I think high intelligence in the majority of people today is more a product of environment than raw genetics. Those who do have that genius level intelligence have a very high probability (IMHO) of having Aspergers, Autism or some other mental defect.

Take your typical Asian kid going to college. People assume that they are naturally more intelligent. In reality, the Asian families who produce these "little Einsteins" do so predominantly thru environment. They are taught at a very young age to work hard for their grades and there are tangible repercussions for falling short - especially for those in their first or 2nd generation in the U.S.

Some things really can be fixed as changing a nucleotide pair in the DNA. A single letter difference can eff a lot of things up, that's why living cells have mechanisms to repair mistakes in the DNA.

Other things like smarts, looks, and athletic ability are polygenic traits on many different loci and I doubt we'll understand those any time soon.

If you could have genetic and phenotype data on every living person it might still be very difficult to understand how polygenic traits work together. Genome-wide association studies already have huge sample sizes just to try and find simple relationships between SNPs and certain health issues.

And some of the items are flipped on and off by environmental factors which adds a further complication.

(11-27-2018 03:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(11-27-2018 01:57 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(11-27-2018 08:40 AM)miko33 Wrote:  I'm highly skeptical. It's still going to take some time to be able to figure out all the interactions between the genes before you can make designer babies. I think some traits would be simple - like making all kids with blonde hair and blue eyes. However, designing a baby with intelligence would probably be HIGHLY complex. I think high intelligence in the majority of people today is more a product of environment than raw genetics. Those who do have that genius level intelligence have a very high probability (IMHO) of having Aspergers, Autism or some other mental defect.

Take your typical Asian kid going to college. People assume that they are naturally more intelligent. In reality, the Asian families who produce these "little Einsteins" do so predominantly thru environment. They are taught at a very young age to work hard for their grades and there are tangible repercussions for falling short - especially for those in their first or 2nd generation in the U.S.

Some things really can be fixed as changing a nucleotide pair in the DNA. A single letter difference can eff a lot of things up, that's why living cells have mechanisms to repair mistakes in the DNA.

Other things like smarts, looks, and athletic ability are polygenic traits on many different loci and I doubt we'll understand those any time soon.

If you could have genetic and phenotype data on every living person it might still be very difficult to understand how polygenic traits work together. Genome-wide association studies already have huge sample sizes just to try and find simple relationships between SNPs and certain health issues.

And some of the items are flipped on and off by environmental factors which adds a further complication.

For those curious:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

(11-27-2018 01:57 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(11-27-2018 08:40 AM)miko33 Wrote:  I'm highly skeptical. It's still going to take some time to be able to figure out all the interactions between the genes before you can make designer babies. I think some traits would be simple - like making all kids with blonde hair and blue eyes. However, designing a baby with intelligence would probably be HIGHLY complex. I think high intelligence in the majority of people today is more a product of environment than raw genetics. Those who do have that genius level intelligence have a very high probability (IMHO) of having Aspergers, Autism or some other mental defect.

Take your typical Asian kid going to college. People assume that they are naturally more intelligent. In reality, the Asian families who produce these "little Einsteins" do so predominantly thru environment. They are taught at a very young age to work hard for their grades and there are tangible repercussions for falling short - especially for those in their first or 2nd generation in the U.S.

Some things really can be fixed as changing a nucleotide pair in the DNA. A single letter difference can eff a lot of things up, that's why living cells have mechanisms to repair mistakes in the DNA.

Other things like smarts, looks, and athletic ability are polygenic traits on many different loci and I doubt we'll understand those any time soon.

If you could have genetic and phenotype data on every living person it might still be very difficult to understand how polygenic traits work together. Genome-wide association studies already have huge sample sizes just to try and find simple relationships between SNPs and certain health issues.

This is why I chuckle when I hear that we either have a lot of "junk" DNA or that we are over 99% compatible with chimps. No one accounts for the permutations required when traits require multiple genes to interact for expression.

Won’t make a difference. AI will get us first anyway....

(11-28-2018 09:26 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Won’t make a difference. AI will get us first anyway....

Maybe you, not me. It can be largely avoided.

It kinda annoys me that I can’t go into the grocery store and 100% of the time buy a bag full of crisp, sweet grapes. Are these scientist solving that dilemma? Hell no they’re not.

Instead they’re out here trying to be the first jerk on the planet to make the Terminator movies a frickin reality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro