• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK becomes first country to allow three-person embyros.

  • Thread starter Deleted member 231381
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bunch of people ITT not reading this thread.

This is not law (yet). It still has to pass through the House of Lords. It's probably going to do that, but don't count yer chickens.

This applies only in the case of Mitochondrial Disease, whereby a genetic defect of the mother (and only the mother, the father's DNA is irrelevant in this case) is passed down to the child, which severely reduces the child's cells' ability to produce energy, which presents a whole heap of problems. The solution: replace the dodgy bit of DNA with a working version from someone else.
 

FLAguy954

Junior Member
Why is this necessary? Why can't they screen potential embryos for the genetic issues and only implant non-affected ones?

These posters below me answer your question quite well:

Mitochondrial diseases aren't like other genetic diseases, they're really hard not to inherit in some form. Rather than checking if they're there or not, because they will be, the screening process becomes more one of finding an embryo which has an acceptably low number of mitochondrial flaws that any defects are manageable or non-expressed. Having to do that, and do it every generation, is a lot more difficult and costly than having a procedure you know will work, and means that the kid won't have to get the same thing done when they're an adult.

Because if the mother is the carrier for the mitochondrial disease, she will never be able to have a healthy child: all mitochondrial DNA is maternal. The paternal mitochondrial DNA is either lost or destroyed during fertilization. This technique is a way for female carriers to break the cycle and have a healthy child.

Bravo UK, now when is America gonna jump on board?...
 
This is all well and good but everyone here has failed to mention that by law the doctors would be required to whistle the Threes Company theme during the birth, now is it really worth it?
 
Sooo... does this mean legal polygamy is approaching? I hope so. It would be cool to manufacture a kid from four different genetic specimens.

/s

not really
 
This has nothing to do with "designer" baby, or the possibility of creating a designer baby. Things like height, weight, eye color, hair color, IQ, personality, and traits of a person are related to hundreds of different sections within the chromosomes. There's no set pattern to identify the genetic make-up.

Even diseases like Cystic Fibrosis and Tay Sachs have over a 100 or so possible mutations on certain chromosomes to cause a person to be affected by it. There are still De Novo cases of these diseases. So it's not always possible to test for the disease through fetal testing or IVF/PGD testing.
 

Wilsongt

Member
I see a lot of people don't understand how mitochondrial dna works. This will do nothing to really alter the child. It will still be genetically the biological parents child in terms of characteristics, the only difference is the mitochondria.
 
sVQWDIRl.jpg


All according to keikaku
 

Slavik81

Member
No, the mitochondria is not genomic DNA. It's basically a bacterial DNA that has a symbiotic relationship with the cell.
In what way is it bacterial?

I'm pretty sure just like with thalidomide there will be absolutely no unforeseen consequences.
I'm not a biologist, but from my understanding, this procedure is not remotely new. It's been repeated many times over decades, and it's well-understood biologically. The only new part is allowing it to be done on human eggs. And it's only going to be done in cases where the children would otherwise suffer from terrible diseases.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
In what way is it bacterial?

It's not strictly speaking bacterial, but essentially mitochondria are unique in that unlike every other cell in your body, they have their own unique DNA sequence, called mtDNA, which has its own independent genome and is different to the rest of your DNA. The way that mtDNA is structured is much more similar to bacterial plasmids than it is to normal human genomes, in particular similar to the SAR11 clade that they probably developed from.
 

Wilsongt

Member
In what way is it bacterial?


I'm not a biologist, but from my understanding, this procedure is not remotely new. It's been repeated many times over decades, and it's well-understood biologically. The only new part is allowing it to be done on human eggs. And it's only going to be done in cases where the children would otherwise suffer from terrible diseases.


It's believed to be bacterial in origin, just like plant chloroplasts.
 

GothPunk

Member
People need to think of this like organ or blood donation. Except instead of donating a kidney or some platelets, they're donating healthy mitochondria.

This kind of technology has been around for a long time and actually is rather simple.

Also saying that this would only be available to the rich is ignoring the fact that this is the UK, with our 'socialist' NHS that offers some patients IVF (after consultantion with a clinical commissioning group). It's feasible that this technology could also be offered via the NHS in time - i.e. 'free' to the patient.
 
Threesomes redeemed?

In all seriousness though proud to live in a country where this progressive stuff can happen without a major shitstorm.
 

Phobophile

A scientist and gentleman in the manner of Batman.
This would be a boon to the British gene pool. Fucking the same villagers for a millennium hasn't done wonders for them.
 

GothPunk

Member
This would be a boon to the British gene pool. Fucking the same villagers for a millennium hasn't done wonders for them.
Nope. The mitochondria are separate from our DNA, which is all that this procedure addresses. So they'll remain just as genetically diverse, for better or worse. :p
 

Phobophile

A scientist and gentleman in the manner of Batman.
Nope. The mitochondria are separate from our DNA, which is all that this procedure addresses. So they'll remain just as genetically diverse, for better or worse. :p

Oh well. That's what I get for only having 1 year of biology under my belt. :p
 

iNvid02

Member
around 22k genes from the parents and 37 mitochondrial from the female donor, a tiny amount that will do a world of good hopefully
 

Arkos

Nose how to spell and rede to
Heard this on the old radio and said "awesome" out loud. I know it's fraught with moral implications, but damned if it isn't cool. And now we can have those moral conversations with some real weight behind them. GG Brits
 

Wilsongt

Member
Heard this on the old radio and said "awesome" out loud. I know it's fraught with moral implications, but damned if it isn't cool. And now we can have those moral conversations with some real weight behind them. GG Brits

Only moral from people who don't understand basic biology which is most of America. I feel this will go the way of stem cell research here.
 

Guileless

Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
I think the blond and blue-eyed part is relatively unlikely. I think one of the things that parents hope to see most in their children is a little of themselves. At worst or best depending on how you see it as that the 1% pick only the best traits already present in themselves for their children. Still, that's a long, long way from what this does.

This specific procedure is a long way from that. But it further cements the idea that human embryos are commodities we can and should create and destroy for our own instrumental ends. Pair that mindset with the relentless logic of the market and consumerism, and I would not bet against designer babies.
 
Threesomes redeemed?

In all seriousness though proud to live in a country where this progressive stuff can happen without a major shitstorm.

As poor as our political system can be at times, it's true.

Heck, our conservative government pushed through gay marriage and there was barely any fuss. It just happened.


Also, lol at bump.
 

kyser73

Member
So when the HOL shuts this down, we will see the reverse of all of these posts?

You know that at best the HoL can delay the passage of legislation by a year, and can be overruled by the Commons, right?

The HoL's main function these days is akin to a posher, more sleepy/drunk Select Committee.

Although I'm no longer in the UK, I'm glad to see that solid thinking and non-hysterical debate still feature strongly on both sides of the ethics discussion on this subject.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom