Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Five Couples Have Lined Up for CRISPR Babies To Avoid Deafness (newscientist.com) 111

Posted by msmash from the shape-of-things-to-come dept.
Five Russian couples who are deaf want to try the CRISPR gene-editing technique so they can have a biological child who can hear, biologist Denis Rebrikov told New Scientist. He plans to apply to the relevant Russian authorities for permission in "a couple of weeks." From a report: The case for using CRISPR for this purpose is stronger than for trying to make children HIV-resistant, as attempted previously, but the risks still outweigh the benefits, say other researchers. "Rebrikov is definitely determined to do some germline gene editing, and I think we should take him very seriously," says CRISPR expert Gaetan Burgio at the Australian National University. "But it's too early, it's too risky." Both would-be parents in each couple have a recessive form of deafness, meaning that all their children would normally inherit the same condition. While the vast majority of genetic diseases can be prevented by screening IVF embryos before implantation, with no need for gene-editing, this is not an option for these couples. Several reports have suggested that -- if it can be done safely -- editing the genes of babies might be justified in this kind of situation.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Five Couples Have Lined Up for CRISPR Babies To Avoid Deafness More

Five Couples Have Lined Up for CRISPR Babies To Avoid Deafness

Comments Filter:

  • in soviet russia we edit you!

  • There are millions of children in the world! (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Millions of children in this world don't have parents to care for them and can hear perfectly fine. ADOPT YOU IDIOTS.

    • Millions of children in this world don't have parents to care for them and can hear perfectly fine. ADOPT YOU IDIOTS.

      How many of those children have you adopted?

      Adopting orphans is a very honorable thing to do and I applaud anyone that does it; however anyone who hasn't adopted someone themselves would be a little hypocritical to suggest that others should adopt rather than have their own kids.

      • How many of those children have you adopted? ... a little hypocritical ...

        "Because I cannot adopt a child, I cannot promote the cause of adoption for others." Check.

        Imagine this child growing up. "I lay in my crib crying all night for attention, and neither Momski nor Dadski ever come change me or feed me or even just comfort me. They must not love me at all."

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Bring popcorn for watching this one play out in the courts. I remember the hissy fit the "politcally deaf" activists threw when cochlear implants for children were approved. Not very oddly, it was the same neo-Marxist fools who insist that scientifically speaking there is no such thing as gender, and that the identity of the deaf political group must be protected from able-ist discrimination.

        Most parents *of course* want their children to be able to hear. While they can have full lives with deafness, it's

    • Background: US-based. My spouse and I adopted our two children, domestically (Kentucky, Ohio). A lot of people operate on the assumption that in adoption there's a huge "supply" (I'm loathe to use that word when it comes to humans) and insufficient demand. The reality is quite different. Firstly, there are not "millions" of babies up for adoption. That's simply not the case. Secondly, international borders complicate adoption very significantly to the point where in many cases it's not a meaningful op

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ranton ( 36917 )

        Firstly, there are not "millions" of babies up for adoption. That's simply not the case.

        When people who know what they are talking about are recommending people adopt instead of have their own children, they generally mean adopting older children. There is a surplus of 6 year old kids whose parents are dead or more likely unfit to be guardians. My wife has a high school friend who has adopted three children when each of them were around 3-4 years old. They are foster parents who ended up adopting after a few years.

        I pass no judgement because I chose to have my biological children, but claiming

  • As often seems to be the case with deafness... no risk is too great for ones child to avoid the embarrassment of having a deaf kid.

    • As often seems to be the case with deafness... no risk is too great for ones child to avoid the embarrassment of having a deaf kid.

      That's an interesting... emphasis to have.

      Me, I'm mildly curious as to whether mainstream SJWs will ever begin to really take up the cause of deaf people who say that these things (along with cochlear implants) constitute an assault on deaf culture [wikipedia.org]. Seems like a bridge too far, but then again these are strange times.

      Speaking as a parent, there's no way in fucking hell I would deny an entire sense my child, regardless of whether or not I had it myself, regardless of whether or not it had any daily util

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jythie ( 914043 )
        Thing is, it isn't just about giving someone a sense the would not otherwise have or the subculture around it. CRISPER aside, the implants have non-trivial risks, including potential for chronic pain or even more serious long term health issues, and they tend to be one-shot attempts. So the question is, just how much risk would you ask your small child to take in order to hear? But parents seem to have an 'any risk is acceptable, are I not a good parent for wanting my kid to be able to hear like a norm

    • It seems like deafness is one of the disabilities [sic] that electronic miniaturization has been able to address most effectively. Modern hearing aids have bluetooth volume control and double as cell phone and music earbuds. Hopefully CRISPR is safe, but if you were on the fence, it seems like you have really good non-retroviral (?) options.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jythie ( 914043 )
        Non surgical aids are a great solution, but a lot of parents opt for implants as soon as the can, which still have issues with damaging the kid in lifelong ways.

    • Yes, what do deaf people know about what it's really like to go through life deaf?

      • If my son had the chance to have a sense I did not have because of some disorder I was born with, I would not hesitate to give it to him. That is disregarding the day to day utility of hearing, disregarding the ability to more easily form connections with hearing people, and even disregarding the experience of music. There is simply no way in fucking hell that I am ever making his perceived universe smaller because mine happened to be smaller than normal, and in making that decision I wouldn't care how many
        • (Err, I just realized you weren't the OP, jythie. Both j names. Not totally sure what your positions are; bulk of my post was aimed at what he said though. )
    • If it were only embarrassment, that would be bad enough. Ever slept through an alarm and messed up your day? Ever ignored a fire alarm and enjoyed the ensuing excitement of burning alive? How 'bout missing that ambulance siren while driving and causing an accident? Sitcoms are rife with misunderstandings over something said, but real life misunderstandings due to deafness are rarely so humorous. These are just a few of the realities we deaf people face on a daily basis. Add in the embarrassment of sim

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jythie ( 914043 )
        On the other hand, I've met people for whom implants have gone wrong. There are plenty of solutions for alarms and other signals.. there are not really solutions for stabbing pain, permanent static, or any number of random tones. This is really something adults who can weigh the options should do, not small children having the decision made for them since they will have to live with it likely long after the parents are dead.
  • and to be able to SHOOT frickin' LASER BEAMS out of their EYES!

  • But... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    is this really that much different then "We are both really dumb and want a smart baby?". Note I have a problem with neither, actually I think it's a good idea. No reason not to raise the global IQ if possible.

    • is this really that much different then "We are both really dumb and want a smart baby?". Note I have a problem with neither, actually I think it's a good idea. No reason not to raise the global IQ if possible.

      No reason not to have more tall, strong people with big muscles and good looking to boot. How about lower risk for cardiovascular problems and cancer?

      The problem is, everyone will want a lot of the same things and human diversity will be depleted. That's a big problem when certain diseases pick up and wipe everyone out because eventually large percent of the population shares large genetic overlap.

      • Well in Brave New World they did keep a preserve of Wild Type humans around...

      • The problem is, everyone will want a lot of the same things and human diversity will be depleted.

        Not really. To some extent yes but it won't be as bad as all that. Dr. Seuss covered this pretty well in The Sneeches [wikipedia.org]. Also, I think you'll find that the majority of Chinese, for instance, will not be opting for blond hair. (Which is a pity because my first girlfriend was 1/4 Japanese with blues eyes and blond hair and I have to say holy shit is that a nice combination, aesthetically speaking.)

      • This is the problem with any kind of eugenics. There are traits most of humanity can agree on would be good; and lower risk of cardiovascular disease obviously falls in to that category. But tall and strong with big muscles, well okay. So is this just some new generalized form of Übermensch?

  • It's in fashion yet? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Seems like having kids is a welcomed fashion, parents can use them as accessories with their trophy wives (or husbands), and those new cars, I can't wait to see when babies with flippers will be popular again in summer : /

    Seriously, people are asking for weird problems.

  • Slashdot, 2029 (Score:3)

    by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Friday July 05, 2019 @02:21PM (#58878806)

    One Japanese couple, with a lower-than-average-IQ father and a flat-chested wife, want to try the CRISPR gene-editing technique so they can have a pair of biological super-intelligent daughters with huge racks, biologist Toyota Nissan told New Scientist. He plans to apply to the relevant Japanese authorities for permission in "a couple of weeks." The daughters are to be named Kei and Yuri.

    • Meh, that's what Google and plastic surgery is for. CRISPR to improve their natural muscle tone and make them crack shots ... now you're talking.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      Gene editing will go awry and give them a male Einstein with Dolly-Pardon-sized breasts. And tech support will ignore the parents' calls. [slashdot.org]

  • They can't do that! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Shane_Optima ( 4414539 ) on Friday July 05, 2019 @02:23PM (#58878826) Journal
    They can't do that! Don't those silly Russians and Chinese know that the bioethecists have advised extreme caution here?! /s

    Yeah, everyone with a modicum of sense predicted this. Exactly this [slashdot.org]. The public at large will not damn parents for wanting these things. And after a decade or so of this, it's going to be a short enough jump to higher IQs and whatnot. There will be side effects and shorten lifespans and lurid headlines along the way, but you can't stuff this genie back in the bottle. It's coming. When are we in the west going to start talking sensibly about it?

    • You are using what is called a slippery slope fallacy. That is, if they allow X, then they will allow Y.

      Other examples of this include things like:

      If we allow gay marriage, the next thing we know, people will want to marry their dogs, or their cats, or what about their pigs?

      If we give in every time our baby cries, he will always pitch a fit to get what he wants, and he will end up in prison because we never set limits.

      -

      This is total bullshit and has always been total bullshit. There is NO SUCH THING as a

      • The slippery slope fallacy is only a fallacy, well, when it's actually a fallacy. Very frequently, it is not.

        When social security numbers were introduced, there was a huge backlash on privacy grounds and lawmakers insisted that it would only be used for social security purposes, never as a general national citizen ID number. Whoops. Turns out that slope was indeed a slippery one.

        More generally, it turns out that a lot of the informal logical fallacies of debate (emphasis on informal) are of very limi

    • There will be side effects and shorten lifespans and lurid headlines along the way, but you can't stuff this genie back in the bottle.

      If they have a gene modification to lengthen lifespan, I'll take it.

  • KHHHHAAAAAANNNNN! (Score:3)

    by sdinfoserv ( 1793266 ) on Friday July 05, 2019 @04:20PM (#58879398)
    Here comes the Eugenics war.... 1 generation late. StarTrek predicted it would happen in the 1990's.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

  • I can see this having tremendous side-effects.

  • Not genetically fit and selfish... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    In my opinion, these folks aren't genetically fit to be having children. They have a known genetic defect, which may or may not have other effects throughout the body. Is it right to inflict some experimental treatment on another human in a selfish desire to reproduce despite full awareness of your genetic faults? What if the CRISPR process somehow causes other unintended genetic changes? The parents aren't the ones who have to live with the consequences of this genetic modification, after all. Tal

Slashdot Top Deals

When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the plane, the plane will fly. -- Donald Douglas

Close