in 20 years genetically unaltered children will be considered disadvantaged?

Question

the future is likley to become divided between modified or post humans and natural humans what do you think will happen to our social structure.

Answer 1

Yes, I suspect that is what we are headed toward. The rich will design their children to be society's standard of beautiful, and the poor will just have to have babies the old fashioned way.

Answer 2

I suspect that in the long term there may be some truth in that. However, I doubt it will be as soon as 20 years. Most of us do not favour GM crops, I wonder how society would view GM children?

The ethical considerations about altering an individual without his/her consent must be quite complex. Is there an individual to even consider if the alterations are made to an egg before it is fertilised?

Assuming it happens at some point... Perhaps the consequence will be an exaggerated version of what we have now. The (genetically enhanced) haves will prosper even more and the have nots will fall behind.

Or, the consequences may be more subtle than we can conceive.

At first sight it would seem acceptable to genetically engineer away hereditary diseases, but would the next step be a genetic enhancement? If so, what and how would society decide what is desirable?

Will the genetic modification be pre or post birth?
Will the modification be inheritable?
How will it affect the next and subsequent generations?
If a genetic alteration offered no long term evolutionary advantage, would it simply be lost?

An extraordinarily complex subject.

An addition:

I have just noticed Skylolo's comment that "Nothing that God does not want will happen." What an extraordinary comment. So god wanted Hitler and the holocaust, the great plague, tsunamis and earthquakes, etc. What a despicable creature your god must be.

Answer 3

Not in twenty years. Fifty maybe.

Just think, no sick babies anymore. How immoral.

I shouldn't think it would be all that common, because most of the worlds conceptions are accidental. You'll probably only get it where the family already has some kind of genetic issue and they're already having treatment. Otherwise it's a bit of a palaver. I expect routine genetic screening to be all the rage though.

Sex selection has already become a major problem in China though. So expect some nasty wars to get rid of the surplus single male population

As for widening the class divide, it probably will. The higher your social class the higher your IQ is (as a general rule). We already reward the genetically better off. Nothing will change that.

Answer 4

I think it's just plain discrimination, the rich will have all their babies specially cooked in a tank , and the other classes will have to deal with the actual faults of being human. Where's the equality and being human in that? I mean if there's actually a way to get rid of diseases and illnesses that start at birth then it should be opened to all. No doubt the beautiful people will gouge up all the remaining wealth as the gap between the classes widen. It degrades nature, every child is born with their own hidden and special talents, and ordering them undermines the purpose of making us special in our individual ways. So much for individuality and self esteem. There's enough things people discriminate each other on and the last thing we need is the superior DNA schtick. It gives the struggling minority less opportunity to succeed as people become more and more obsessed with perfection and forget about humanity. Just like in the book Brave New World by Aldous Huxley.

Answer 5

Watch the movie Gatica to see just what is in store.

You will know we are on this path when insurance companies start looking at your genome to determine if they should insure you.

Right now we are already divided into the techno-haves and the techno-havenots. For the next 20 years, that will be the biggest distinction between the social classes. Those who have unlimited access to information and those who do not. Genetic discrimination will eventually weave it's way into the main stream but I think we have a long way to go before that is the reality.

Answer 6

You are watching too much Star Trek. 20 years? I doubt it. You should take a look at all the scientific predictions of the past and see how foolish they look. I think you are getting ahead of yourself on this one. And really, modified? You can do nothing to "modify" humans. Steroids for instance create temporary beneficial changes but long-term detrimental changes in the physical body and they also create behavior changes. There will not be any man-made genetic alterations that are beneficial for mankind. Bank on it.

By the way, have you seen recent photos of that French woman who had a face transplant? What a nightmare.

Answer 7

You're not on my masters course are you (MSc Biomedical Science)? I've been set this assignment over the vacation and have been gathering ideas on it.

Did you see the "biotech revolution" documentary on "Visions of the future" by futurist Prof. Michio Kaku? It was on BBC4 last month (and thankfully some kind youtuber posted all three episodes http://www.youtube.com/AcademicRene ).

Yes I haven't answered your question myself, it's just the sheer coincidence of it made me answer. Watch the documentary, and I'll also be watching this question.

edit: Steven...
So you are prepared to live in a world where people die a slow and painful death? Has anyone close to you ever been ill with cancer; everyday is excruciating pain! I don't wish it upon you, but when it happens I think you'll change your mind. Humanitarian of the year huh?

added...
I always maintained that religion prevents progress ... classic example here. Reminds me of when choloroform was used to relieve the pains associated with birth, and the church's opposition to its introduction citing it's god's punishment to Eve.

Answer 8

a million. i think of timelessness is somewhat significant while naming a newborn. and that i accept as true with what you purely pronounced, i understand i'd make a wager approximately their age in accordance with their call. 2. My favorites frequently fall into: e) timeless Names: Names that have been in use somewhat continuously for the final a hundred years and would't be dated to a particular decade. (examples: Elizabeth, Katherine, Miriam, Rachel, Caroline, Lydia, James, William, Victor, Samuel, furnish) 3. Worst selection for a newborn: f) Oddball Names: Names that are so uncommon they are able to't sense primary of any era and for this reason have the a number of timelessness of the class above. (examples: Demetria, Rosamund, Evadne, Gawain, Abdiel, Piers) ?

Answer 9

Ive thought about this as well. I feel its pretty obvious between over zealous social conditioning in schools, the WASL tests and new discoveries in science we are on the verge of creating a super-race. There will be a huge divide and will take several generations to fully institute if we last that long.

Answer 10

The scientific community are quick to condemn religionists for their faith yet we are always coming across these kind of statements about the 'future', but this is simply blind faith, it is a postdated cheque that in the 'future' we will do so many things, it is essentially science fantasy. On one hand they they condemn religion as pie in the sky etc. whilst on the other hand they themselves indulge in the same kind of blind faith. Science means hypothesis, demonstration & result, yet we are expected to accept so much pie in the sky because it is presented in the name of science. Like darwin's theory, even though it is being presented as fact in the schools etc. it actually remains a speculative theory, blind faith, we don't have the facts now but in the 'future' we will have. These people are blundering about in the dark and doing so much damage to our society with their post dated cheques. Who will accept such a bluff, today I don't have the funds but tomorrow.........nonsence. There is nothing wrong with faith, every single subject begins with faith, we have to approach a qualified teacher of the subject then we can aquire knowledge. It is not that it is meant toremain on that platform, faith is meant to progress to the platform of knowledge. At the same time we should be aware of when we are being bluffed as in your question of speculative interpretation.

Answer 11

Have you read the Beggar's Trilogy by Nancy Kress? The books are fasinating and very entertaining as well. Purely fiction but they raise very interesting points about the subject of "designer babies".