Geneering Protocols - a discussion

[Quantum Quack]

Simply put:
"If you can't restore the organism back to it's original genetic structure don't change it"

The reason I suggest this protocol is that I fear that once an organism is changed there is simply no going back. That if a mistake is made there is no real remedy. So until an ablity exists to restore the genome, it is strongly recommended that we don't alter that genome and stuff up millions of years of evolution with out the ability to repair any mistakes we make.....
"if you can't fix it ...don't break it."

Care to discuss?

 

[Idle Mind]

Repairing the genome once it's been altered in order to revert it back to it's original state is basically impossible in multicellular organisms. This is because in order to do so, you would have to change the genome in every cell.

However, once an organism is modified, it isn't immediately introduced out into the wild. There are lab stages where it is contained, unable to breed with any other species (most prevalent in plants). This ensures that if there were problems, the organisms could either be destoyed, or quarantined until they expire naturally.

 

[Quantum Quack]

when dealing with the human genome, can it ever be experimented and quarantined in a lab in a way that ensures the ongoing long term integrity of the human genome?

 

[superluminal]

QQ,

Are you thinking of some harmful mutation that might make it's way into a human population?

 

[Quantum Quack]

not really..... just thinking that until we have the ability to restore the genome we shouldn't take a chance with changing it.....just seems the wisest path.....of course genome restoration is impossible at present....and that is exactly the point I am attempting to make....

 

[Quantum Quack]

just to add to the above:
The genome may be flawed in it's natural state, but the question I have is that maybe tampering with it with out full knowledge of the consequence could be disasterous in the long term. So it seems to me that until we have the ability to salvage or recover from a possible mistake we should think more than twice about screwing around with it.

 

[superluminal]

It's a problem for sure. There are theories that we may not see other intellegent life in the universe because they hit some technological point and wipe themselves out. I'd bet on either uncontrolled nanotechnology or bioengineering as the most likely self-destructors of all. Way worse than simple nuclear weapons... It actually seriously worries me...

 

[Quantum Quack]

I believe that the age of genetic engineering is by far a greater potential threat to humanities future than any other age before it.

Once the genome is under human management instead of natures management we will never be able to stop engineering oursleves until we cease to exist. In a thousand years humanity would become unrecognisable if we exist at all. IMO

I think this can be avoided as a possibility only if we have the nouse and the wisdom to lean first how to stop before we run.....sort of thing.

 

[superluminal]

QQ wrote:

Once the genome is under human management instead of natures management we will never be able to stop engineering oursleves until we cease to exist. In a thousand years humanity would become unrecognisable if we exist at all. IMO

Maybe. And I totally understand the dangers, but is this a problem if handled right? Is there anything inherently wonderful about our current incarnation and form? I could use a whole host of improvements in my physical (and mental ) construction!