Gattaca is coming

[Pheran]

What do you think? If cost was not a factor, would you customize your child?

http://singularityhub.com/2009...or-not-here-they-come/

Designer Babies - Like It Or Not, Here They Come

Long before Watson and Crick famously uncovered the structure of DNA in 1953, people envisioned with both horror and hope a day when babies could be custom designed ? free of inherited disease, yet equipped with superior genes for good looks, intelligence, athleticism, and more. Now the beginnings of that day have finally come.

The Fertility Institutes recently stunned the fertility community by being the first company to boldly offer couples the opportunity to screen their embryos not only for diseases and gender, but also for completely benign characteristics such as eye color, hair color, and complexion. The Fertility Institutes proudly claims this is just the tip of the iceberg, and plans to offer almost any conceivable customization as science makes them available. Even as couples from across the globe are flocking in droves to pay the company their life?s savings for a custom baby, opponents are vilifying the company for shattering moral and ethical boundaries. Like it or not, the era of designer babies is officially here and there is no going back.

For decades now a technology called preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, has enabled In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) clinics to screen embryos for more than 100 potentially debilitating and often deadly diseases before the embryo is implanted into the mother. A medical revolution has thus unfolded, enabling literally tens of thousands of couples and their babies to sidestep some of the world?s most terrifying diseases.

Take the case of Cindy and John Whitley. Their first child died at the age of 9 months from a deadly genetic disorder called spinal muscular atrophy. Genetic analysis uncovered that the Whitley?s statistically had a 1 in 4 chance of creating a child with spinal muscular atrophy each time they conceived. Unwilling to risk having another child with the deadly disorder, the Whitley?s used PGD to conceive three children, all healthy.

Yet PGD allows scientists to screen embryos for much more than just genetic diseases, and therein lies the promise - and the peril - of designer babies.

Gender was the first major genetic trait beyond genetic disease to be widely manipulated through PGD. The Fertility Institutes is a leader in the field, claiming nearly 100% success in providing couples with a baby of a predetermined gender. Completely healthy and fertile couples from all over the world are coming to The Fertility Institutes everyday to confront the risk, the expense, and the discomfort of conceiving their baby in a test tube, all for the ability to choose the sex of their baby.

Gender selection is a big business. Dr. Steinberg, Director at The Fertility Institutes, claims that they are performing on the order of 10 gender selection fertilizations every week, each for a fee of $18,400. Although In Vitro Fertilizations were originally designed to help parents that were unable to conceive children naturally, Steinberg says that a staggering 70% of their clients have absolutely no difficulty conceiving children, coming to the Institute purely for opportunity to choose the sex of their baby.

Now, in the latest twist in the march towards designer babies, The Fertility Institutes says they will soon be able to offer couples the ability to screen their embryos for eye color, hair color, and complexion. The Institute cannot change the DNA of the donating couple ? if neither the mother nor the father has genes for green eyes, for example, then the Institute cannot give them a baby with green eyes. Yet within the constraints inherent in the DNA of the donating couple, The Fertility Institute is willing to screen embryos for these traits. The Fertility Institute wants to offer several other customizations, and many more are sure to be released in the coming years as the science behind screening for them is developed.

In many countries around the world PGD is heavily regulated and designer babies are strictly out of the question. Yet in a strange paradox, even as the United States is one of the world?s most regulated nations in several areas of medical research and development, PGD is completely legal and unregulated in the United States. Hence, even as the United States is hindered by regulation in areas such as stem cell research, the country seems poised to be a world leader in the designer baby revolution.

At the moment, The Fertility Institutes carries the mantle as the company at the forefront of this revolution, and as such they are a lightning rod for the praise and adoration, but also the bitter and severe anger, of those on both sides of this great moral debate.

The genie is officially out of the bottle, in fact it probably has been for a long time. There is no stopping the designer baby revolution. Even as some countries try to clamp down on it, others will allow it. Progress, if we call it that, will continue unabated. A similar phenomenon has unfolded with embryonic stem cell research in recent years. Even as the Bush administration almost completely strangled US investment and research in this promising field, other countries invested heavily and advances continued.

A new generation of genetically enhanced designer babies is inevitable in the coming decades. Yet for those of us that are merely ?normal?, do not despair. Even as we are outmatched by the next generation genetically, a host of new technologies from chip implants to gene therapy may allow us to keep up, allowing us to enhance ourselves in equally transformative ways. The future will indeed be interesting.

 

[vi edit]

It's misleading. They aren't "genetically enhancing" anything. They are simply doing a selective screening of sperm & egg samples provided by the potential mother & father.

 

[DarrelSPowers]

Woah.

sweet.

 

[Pheran]

Originally posted by: vi edit
It's misleading. They aren't "genetically enhancing" anything. They are simply doing a selective screening of sperm & egg samples provided by the potential mother & father.

That's still a heck of a lot more choice than you get the natural way. Not really misleading either, they clearly state that this is the case. Also, by sticking within those boundaries, the philosophical case can be made that the child is still wholly yours, since it does not contain any "3rd party" DNA or artificial modifications.

 

[Jeeebus]

You want to know how I did it? This is how I did it, Anton: I never saved anything for the swim back.

 

[kedlav]

Originally posted by: vi edit
It's misleading. They aren't "genetically enhancing" anything. They are simply doing a selective screening of sperm & egg samples provided by the potential mother & father.

"Keep in mind this child is still you, simply the best of you"

 

[torpid]

Aside from gender selection, it's still a long way from gattaca where they actually corrected things. I can't wait to wipe the glass at the building in Marin once I'm labeled a de-gene-erate though.

 

[effowe]

I think it's a good idea if you design them to be impervious to diseases and such. When you start messing with their physical attributes, that kind of gets strange.

 

[anxi80]

"they used to say that a child conceived in love has a greater chance of happiness. they don't say that anymore."

Originally posted by: Jeeebus

You want to know how I did it? This is how I did it, Anton: I never saved anything for the swim back.

Originally posted by: kedlav
"Keep in mind this child is still you, simply the best of you"

awesome.

 

[Ruptga]

I think the possibilities are pretty awesome, even if it's somewhat appalling that some people are vain enough to spend 18,400 just to make sure their kid is of a given gender.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Well, I guess I'll just be referred to as "invalid" from here on out.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger
I think the possibilities are pretty awesome, even if it's somewhat appalling that some people are vain enough to spend 18,400 just to make sure their kid is of a given gender.

I don't see that as being very common. Sure, you'll see some of it, but there really isn't a very large percentage of the population with that kind of expedible income laying around.

I do see it as a very viable, and actually financially frugal choice if you have a family history of carrying certain genetically passed diseases and can avoid having a child with the same issues.

The long term cost of healthcare for those diseases (along with the emtional/physical aspect) vs. raising an otherwise healthy child would easily cancel out the initial screening & implantation.

For couples going IVF because of infertility issues, you already have the goods out on the table, why not take the pick of the litter for a little more?

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: vi edit

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger
I think the possibilities are pretty awesome, even if it's somewhat appalling that some people are vain enough to spend 18,400 just to make sure their kid is of a given gender.

I don't see that as being very common. Sure, you'll see some of it, but there really isn't a very large percentage of the population with that kind of expedible income laying around.

I do see it as a very viable, and actually financially frugal choice if you have a family history of carrying certain genetically passed diseases and can avoid having a child with the same issues.

The long term cost of healthcare for those diseases (along with the emtional/physical aspect) vs. raising an otherwise healthy child would easily cancel out the initial screening & implantation.

For couples going IVF because of infertility issues, you already have the goods out on the table, why not take the pick of the litter for a little more?

I'd probably do it. When I have a kid, it won't be when I'm financially stable anyhow and I'll think of that 20k as a good investment for him/her through their life. Although I want my first born to be a boy, I wouldn't do it just for that. I'd like my kids to grow up without my wive's very irritable/sensitive skin (enough where she'll scratch it bloody in her sleep). They better have her dimples, could do without whatever I don't know is in my family. I only have the history going back 2 generations.

EDIT: Just read the article.

gender selection fertilizations every week, each for a fee of $18,400

18,400 for just the gender selection. How much are they going to charge for the other stuff? For people with families with a history of problems, they can probably charge out the womb.

 

[Special K]

Originally posted by: kedlav

Originally posted by: vi edit
It's misleading. They aren't "genetically enhancing" anything. They are simply doing a selective screening of sperm & egg samples provided by the potential mother & father.

"Keep in mind this child is still you, simply the best of you"

I was about to post the exact same quote.

This is a very interesting development. While I think spending $18k to pick the gender of your baby is excessive, screening for diseases seems like a good thing.

 

[jteef]

Originally posted by: vi edit

Originally posted by: ADDAvenger
I think the possibilities are pretty awesome, even if it's somewhat appalling that some people are vain enough to spend 18,400 just to make sure their kid is of a given gender.

I don't see that as being very common. Sure, you'll see some of it, but there really isn't a very large percentage of the population with that kind of expedible income laying around.

I do see it as a very viable, and actually financially frugal choice if you have a family history of carrying certain genetically passed diseases and can avoid having a child with the same issues.

The long term cost of healthcare for those diseases (along with the emtional/physical aspect) vs. raising an otherwise healthy child would easily cancel out the initial screening & implantation.

For couples going IVF because of infertility issues, you already have the goods out on the table, why not take the pick of the litter for a little more?

you have no idea how much somebody would pay if you could give them a sizable % probability that they'll have the best soccer player in the school district, for instance. The technology isn't really that expensive, so it will get cheaper and common. I view it with tremendous potential for advancing medicine and humankind. I doubt the US will be the first country to embrace it but I think at least one will in the next 20 years.

 

[ZzZGuy]

Any country which provides any amount of public funding to medical care should subsidize genetic screening of people with genetic disorders that can be passed to their children. It's a investment for the future to reduce the number of people on disability, take a burden off of health care and more productive people in society.

It should not be used for gender selection or picking what hair color your children have. There will also be a major controversy if a genetic marker(s) is discovered for homosexuality, I would consider removal of said genes or avoidance of the egg to be as frivolous as hair color selection, but this is a whole other thread to discuss.

 

[AreaCode707]

Mixed feelings. I have an inherited genetic disorder (rheumatoid arthritis). While I would never want my kids to have it, and don't intend to have kids, I also would want somebody like me to be at an extreme disadvantage because they have it.

It's humane to try to avoid disease for people when possible, but if avoidance winds up severely penalizing the least fortunate then it's not very humane overall.

 

[Imported]

Don't mind screening out genetic diseases. Eye/hair color, physical appearances, etc. shouldn't be touched in my opinion.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Imported
Don't mind screening out genetic diseases. Eye/hair color, physical appearances, etc. shouldn't be touched in my opinion.

I guess to me it comes down to the very basic concept of - they aren't changing anything. Simply scouring what's already there and looking for specific markers.

It's not like they are a "sperm to order" shop and whip up some sort of synthetic genetic material on the fly based on what you want. They simply take what is given and pick through it looking for those traits.

If I don't have the genetics to be 7' tall or don't have any blue eyes or blond hair in my family, it's pretty unlikely they are going to find those from my swimmers. So it's not like I can make something out of nothing.

And even then, once the embryo is implanted there are still risks that can develop and once the child is born a whole host of enviromental and social factors can greatly alter how a child's health flourishes.

 

[vi edit]

The one philospohical issue I have with this are in countries/cultures that have population issues either to high or too low. For some reason we have this primal need to have a first born son as if it's some kind of badge of honor.

In countries like China where they limit child births people are going to be doing this and going for boys all the time. This leads to no women. Now you have 750 million men fighting over 250 million women. That doesn't compute. I guess it's a natural way to limit population birth given that you can only have so many women knocked up at a time.

Or in countries that are under developed and NEED more births, if people keep going for boys, you run into a similar issues. More men to women = lower birth rates because of gestation times. You simply do not have as many women giving birth.

Where I do see it as a possibility is in a family that has say...3 girls and they want (and can afford...no octomom scenario) this to ensure a boy on the fourth time around. Or on the opposite end, multiple boys and want a girl. I have no real argument against that and can't really think of a logical one.

 

[0roo0roo]

humans need a bit of improvement, i say go as far as u can.

 

[CalvinHobbes]

I'm looking forward to when the can create babies completely in the lab, they're conceived and birthed in the lab. That will be cool.

 

[xcript]

Originally posted by: CalvinHobbes
I'm looking forward to when the can create babies completely in the lab, they're conceived and birthed in the lab. That will be cool.

Yeah, then we can use the damn tanks as fodder against the silicates in the 2047 AI war.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: torpid
Aside from gender selection, it's still a long way from gattaca where they actually corrected things.

Working on it.

However, as someone who is working in biotech, I agree that screening should be limited to heritable diseases, not purely cosmetic factors. Of course, even that has grey areas, like obesity.

 

[lifeobry]

Ahh the wonders of technology.