I would question the source. It sounds more like sensationalism than science. Look at some of the other articles referenced on the page also.
I donāt think the two are comparableā¦ones genetic defect other is a transmitable diseaseā¦
They havenāt reversed genes.
Better to go for symptoms
2 Likes
But Iām assuming they could reverse engineer see what exactly does what and elemenate the negatives leaving you with the possible of a new higher intelligence geneā¦of course this might as well be SciFi at this stageā¦thatās a lot of workā¦
1 Like
My daughter one cf gene from Canada
All terrotorial
Very strange
2 Likes
Does your daughterās Canadian gene make her say āthank youā to ATM machines?
2 Likes
Read more Kurt vennegot
I donāt agree with gene alteration. First of all, just because you have a gene for something doesnāt mean it will ever develop. Secondly, genes are incredibly complex and affect one another in a multitude of ways. You never know how altering one gene may change every other one or the body. Some genes code for multiple different things. Itās just not something we should mess with.
I think we should throw everything at finding a cure for sz, including the kitchen sink.
The last great breakthrough for sz was Thorazine. That was in the 50s. Since then neurochemistry has seen incredible discoveries which have enhanced manās understanding of how brain chemistry functions. But we are still here waiting for the cure to come.
If aliens exist somewthere in the vastness of the universe and they have the cure for sz, I would gratefully receive it.
2 Likes
I donāt think neurochem has achieved an understanding of sz. They still donāt know whether the dopamine hypothesis is how it happens. And medications have stagnated after the original discovery of neuroleptics. If you look at the drugs we use today they all work by crude mechanisms, a complete or incomplete blockade of the D2 receptor. Of course you have the discovery of the atypicals, but those work much the same as the first generation aps. And of course clinicians mostly have a vague understanding at best of how these medications work (when they do indeed work). I think we need more innovation and that there hasnāt been enough already, hopefully some inventive mind pulls us out of this rut.
2 Likes
hahā¦ I like this topic.
Meh dude genius is rare. I keep trying to define it. This is the best Iāve came up with.
āA genius doesnāt settle for less than perfection in his work. It may be an ideal, but the genius makes it attainable. In it being attain-ably perfect and real, the genius succeeds. Therefore the work is genius. Therefore the genius is genius.ā
Also though.
āThere is not a thing āin thoughtā that a genius sees as needed to be doneā¦ that they donāt do. The genius takes on any mental workload it seesā¦ and why? because it canā¦ it is genius.ā
@flybottle what say you?
strove for perfection
1 Like
I welcome the ability to edit our genes. Imagine a world without genetic disease. Sure we break a few eggs but the science we could learn would be astounding. We could do one up imagine making humans better. Imagine if the DNA strand could be changed where we can start to use synthetic materials so we could have humans born with the processing power many magnitudes greater than our super computers. The first million are probably going to be born defective in some way though.
I could remember phone numbers for days in the combat zone. We would do physical training and memory drills and made lots of reports and studied even in the combat zone. We were four miles from Pakistan in 2003 and we killed alot of terrorists.
The human genome was 100% mapped in 2003, and was met with elation from the scientific community. However, ethicists also found it disconcerting. I call it the modern-day version of splitting the atom. Gene āeditingā has the potential to benefit and harm society. Yes, gene editing may prevent cancers and birth defects, but it may also influence prospective parents to opt for an abortion.
1 Like
This is a great debate, but I donāt think that this type of technology applies to us that already have the disease. Maybe for future generations but i donāt think they can do it to a 40 year old man thatās been sick for 15 years.
Sadly itās the opposite. As you know, a part of schizophrenia is serious cognitive impairment.
As for the statement that eradicating genetic diseases can eradicate geniuses - what a load of stupid rubbish! The nonsense these neo-liberals will find to stop human advancementā¦
As far as I know the human genome is not mapped fully, there are genes sitting at the end near the telomeres that have yet to be mapped. Itās a matter of it being incredibly difficult to map those genes or something, Iām not fully into the details.
1 Like
Genotype for a condition like CF has been around a long time. They have two genes that express it. My daughter has a common and rare one. The rare one keeps her healthy but not candidate for new treatments yet
Anyway thatās my story and Iām sticking to it
