![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
ddstory.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsScientists Talk Privately About Creating a Synthetic Human Genome
Wow. It's sooo secret that the NYT has an article on it. Are these guys who are getting so worked up about this aware of what these meetings are about? In a nutshell, it's a bunch of lawyers, who basically have an MA in sociology, and a bunch of business guys who have even less. They all have read a couple of articles in USA Today and think they have a firm grasp on the science they're discussing - and then you've got a bunch of scientists who have no expectations of making the science intelligible to such a crowd and who are only there because of the possibility of grant money. There are several billion nucleotides in the human genome, 5% contain approximately 25,000 genes, half of whose function we are clueless about, and 95% of which are multiple tandem repeats and other garbage which may or may not (and probably don't) have any function at all. We can splice in and remove genes, but you don't attach and remove genes whose function you have no clue about. So what's there to get so worked up about? This is nothing that is close to happening. All the scientists are hoping for is to get their grant money. We know how this works, right?
So what's so "secret" about it? It obviously wasn't secretive enough, what with NYT getting their hands on the story. This is one of the most popular news outlets in the world, so millions of people now know if it. And no scientist is trying to discuss molecular biology with a bunch of lawyers and business guys because that would be silly. They are trying to get grant money, and the lawyers and business guys mistakenly think they are trying to play "Masters of the Universe". Nothing even relative to the proposed subject matter is even seriously being considered at this point in time because that would also be silly. When you read an article about 150 scientists with no lawyers or business guys... a symposium... gathered to discuss something like this, *then* you can take it seriously.
But I get it. I get the ethical concern here. Granted, if this research was truly to the benefit of the sick people on this planet I would already be all for it. But if past experience is any guide, this will probably make no difference to the general population, and will most likely benefit only those with enough cash to pay for genetically designed perfection. Hence I care not a jot. Let them attempt to create "perfection", perhaps their "creations" will be born sporting little designer logos too. All power to them.
That said, the whole thing doesn't make much sense, capitalism-wise. After all, let's say they get rid of sickness - then how would big pharma make profit, and how would hospitals and physicians make a living? I sense a big conflict coming up there.
Wow. It's sooo secret that the NYT has an article on it. Are these guys who are getting so worked up about this aware of what these meetings are about? In a nutshell, it's a bunch of lawyers, who basically have an MA in sociology, and a bunch of business guys who have even less. They all have read a couple of articles in USA Today and think they have a firm grasp on the science they're discussing - and then you've got a bunch of scientists who have no expectations of making the science intelligible to such a crowd and who are only there because of the possibility of grant money. There are several billion nucleotides in the human genome, 5% contain approximately 25,000 genes, half of whose function we are clueless about, and 95% of which are multiple tandem repeats and other garbage which may or may not (and probably don't) have any function at all. We can splice in and remove genes, but you don't attach and remove genes whose function you have no clue about. So what's there to get so worked up about? This is nothing that is close to happening. All the scientists are hoping for is to get their grant money. We know how this works, right?
So what's so "secret" about it? It obviously wasn't secretive enough, what with NYT getting their hands on the story. This is one of the most popular news outlets in the world, so millions of people now know if it. And no scientist is trying to discuss molecular biology with a bunch of lawyers and business guys because that would be silly. They are trying to get grant money, and the lawyers and business guys mistakenly think they are trying to play "Masters of the Universe". Nothing even relative to the proposed subject matter is even seriously being considered at this point in time because that would also be silly. When you read an article about 150 scientists with no lawyers or business guys... a symposium... gathered to discuss something like this, *then* you can take it seriously.
But I get it. I get the ethical concern here. Granted, if this research was truly to the benefit of the sick people on this planet I would already be all for it. But if past experience is any guide, this will probably make no difference to the general population, and will most likely benefit only those with enough cash to pay for genetically designed perfection. Hence I care not a jot. Let them attempt to create "perfection", perhaps their "creations" will be born sporting little designer logos too. All power to them.
That said, the whole thing doesn't make much sense, capitalism-wise. After all, let's say they get rid of sickness - then how would big pharma make profit, and how would hospitals and physicians make a living? I sense a big conflict coming up there.
(no subject)
Date: 18/5/16 12:52 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/5/16 17:09 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 18/5/16 18:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 19/5/16 07:00 (UTC)