Eradicating Diseases

[RedDenver]

12 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I suspect many anti-science hippies would rather have millions killed by malaria than ever admit GMOs are safe and necessary.

I know what you're driving at (the anti-vax insanity), but that doesn't mean GMOs are safe or necessary. I'd never want to declare a giant class of possible results as all safe but rather take it one case at a time. And "necessary" is difficult to pin down, for example:

Doubts About the Promised Bounty of Genetically Modified Crops

Quote

 

The controversy over genetically modified crops has long focused on largely unsubstantiated fears that they are unsafe to eat.

 

But an extensive examination by The New York Times indicates that the debate has missed a more basic problem — genetic modification in the United States and Canada has not accelerated increases in crop yields or led to an overall reduction in the use of chemical pesticides.

 

Quote

 

Twenty years ago, Europe largely rejected genetic modification at the same time the United States and Canada were embracing it. Comparing results on the two continents, using independent data as well as academic and industry research, shows how the technology has fallen short of the promise.

An analysis by The Times using United Nations data showed that the United States and Canada have gained no discernible advantage in yields — food per acre — when measured against Western Europe, a region with comparably modernized agricultural producers like France and Germany. Also, a recent National Academy of Sciences report found that “there was little evidence” that the introduction of genetically modified crops in the United States had led to yield gains beyond those seen in conventional crops.

 

At the same time, herbicide use has increased in the United States, even as major crops like corn, soybeans and cotton have been converted to modified varieties. And the United States has fallen behind Europe’s biggest producer, France, in reducing the overall use of pesticides, which includes both herbicides and insecticides.

 

 

[Making Chimichangas]

I am 100% in favor of CRISPR and gene editing.  Imagine a world where you can take whatever you don't like about yourself, and change it...

[RedDenver]

1 hour ago, Making Chimichangas said:

I am 100% in favor of CRISPR and gene editing.  Imagine a world where you can take whatever you don't like about yourself, and change it...

Because if cosmetics, dieting, liposuction, and cosmetic surgery have taught us anything, it's that changing your appearance will definitely fix what you don't like about yourself.

[JJ Husker]

Isn't this basically the cause story for every zombie/end of humanity movie ever made? Scientists introduce some new drug or vaccine or treatment and then the unintended consequences begin to wreak havoc. I am saying this only half in jest. I mean it sounds awesome on the surface to eradicate malaria but I doubt it's that simple. We basically had malaria all but eradicated before DDT was outlawed.

[Landlord]

11 hours ago, Moiraine said:

We already had a general thread on it where we discussed the definition of GMOs and for some reason someone again had to post here that we've had GMOs since the dawn of time when we were walking with dinosaurs instead of commenting on the genetic engineering used in the OP's linked story.

 

Actually.... around 60 million years separate the last dinosaurs from the first humans, so technically, you're wrong!

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Making Chimichangas said:

I am 100% in favor of CRISPR and gene editing.  Imagine a world where you can take whatever you don't like about yourself, and change it...

 

Imagine a world where wealth not only dictates your social standing but also whether or not you're born 'pure'. Where only the rich and able get to eliminate all chances of disease in their children, as well as giving them faster metabolisms, more attractive features, smarter brains, stronger hearts, and the poor become an even lower class.

 

Imagine a world where a nefarious ideology in charge of the government gets to determine what color/size/attributes new babies must adhere to and modify them as such without consent.

 

Also imagine a world where aging has been eliminated and disease conquered.

 

All realistic possibilities within the next 50 years honestly. 

[Big Red 40]

5 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

Actually.... around 60 million years separate the last dinosaurs from the first humans, so technically, you're wrong!

 

 

 

 

 

Imagine a world where wealth not only dictates your social standing but also whether or not you're born 'pure'. Where only the rich and able get to eliminate all chances of disease in their children, as well as giving them faster metabolisms, more attractive features, smarter brains, stronger hearts, and the poor become an even lower class.

 

Imagine a world where a nefarious ideology in charge of the government gets to determine what color/size/attributes new babies must adhere to and modify them as such without consent.

 

Also imagine a world where aging has been eliminated and disease conquered.

 

All realistic possibilities within the next 50 years honestly. 

The first 2 paragraphs I can definitely see happening .

Money will also control the bold though. Billions of dollars are being made by companies now, pushing pills and treatments for everything, that would be lost if actual cures were made available . I think they would take over the market on cures too and price them out of range for average citizens, benefitting only those wealthy enough to afford them . 

[BigRedBuster]

I have no fears of GMO in crops like corn, soybeans, tomatoes...etc.  There's something that makes me uncomfortable about creating a wild insect and releasing it into the wild to basically make another species extinct.  

I fully recognize that millions of people would benefit from eradicating Malaria.  

 

What unintended consequences will come of making these mosquitos extinct in those parts of the world?  What other animals feed off of them that this sets a bad chain reaction into motion?

[knapplc]

The best use of CRISPR technology would be to bring back the dinosaurs. Or just make some super crazy interesting creatures.

 

[RedDenver]

7 hours ago, Landlord said:

 

Actually.... 

 

[Moiraine]

CRISPR is what I imagine the British call a toaster.

[NM11046]

4 hours ago, Moiraine said:

CRISPR is what I imagine the British call a toaster.

Well since crisps are what they call potato chips, a crisper must be the fryer?

[Big Red 40]

I cant help but wonder if they already have the cures for some of man kinds biggest problems, but wont make available for monetary reasons. I mean can you imagine if they actually could CURE things like Obesity, Cancer, HIV, Diabetes, Heart failure etc etc? Great for humanity right? Not so much for the multi billion dollar industries who thrive on peddling pills, potions, and offering largely ineffective treatments for those issues. Actual cures could cripple or eliminate those industries.Thoughts?

[Landlord]

On 7/4/2018 at 12:11 AM, Big Red 40 said:

I cant help but wonder if they already have the cures for some of man kinds biggest problems, but wont make available for monetary reasons. I mean can you imagine if they actually could CURE things like Obesity, Cancer, HIV, Diabetes, Heart failure etc etc? Great for humanity right? Not so much for the multi billion dollar industries who thrive on peddling pills, potions, and offering largely ineffective treatments for those issues. Actual cures could cripple or eliminate those industries.Thoughts?

 

 

One of the things that's exciting about CRISPR is how insanely cheap and accessible the technology is, so in a hypothetical scenario where someone successfully programs CRISPR proteins to cure these sorts of things, it wouldn't be great for the multi billion dollar industries, but if a 'little guy' gets it it would be beyond great for them to distribute it to the public in an accessible and cheap way. 

[schriznoeder]

 

[Moiraine]

26 minutes ago, schriznoeder said:

 

 

 

I wonder what the breakdown of anti-vaxxers by political leaning is, because I know some crazy hippies are anti vaxx but I also know a religious Republican fanatic who is anti vaxx.

 

Okay I looked:

 

Quote

 

Education level, gender and income don’t seem to make too much a difference in how Americans view vaccinations. But age does matter: 41 percent of young adults say that parents should have a choice about vaccinating their kids, while just 20 percent of seniors say the same.

 

Republicans and independents are more likely than Democrats to advocate against required vaccinations.

 

Thirty-four percent of Republicans and 33 percent of independents told pollsters that parents should be able to decide about vaccinations, versus just 22 percent of Democrats who said the same.

 

 

This was written in 2015. I'm guessing the % of Republicans is higher now after Trump opening his mouth.

 

The difference in ages really annoys me. Old people had their brothers and sisters die of polio, and the younger people are too stupid to listen to them and understand what life could be like if people stop getting vaccinated. And it doesn't even take everyone stopping. We're all safer if everyone does it.

 

My mom once got into an argument with someone who said polio could've been stopped with nutrition. First and only time she was ever mean(ish) to someone over the internet.

 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna298606