• Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    To all the commenters saying this guy was a saint for doing what he did, would you say the same thing had the outcome been disastrous? Babies born without HIV, but with constant excruciating pain or mental deficiency?

    He took an extraordinarily reckless and permanently life-altering, for good or bad, risk with children’s lives.

    edit: spelling

    • Snowclone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 minutes ago

      A lot of geneticist are DEEPLY against trying these things. This guy’s lucky so far in that his actions haven’t caused serious problems, we really don’t know how adjusting genetics can backfire, but according to the professionals the risks are very very high.

    • Mustakrakish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Sure lets just torture all the poor people so a handfull of rich fucks can afford stem-cell-zinfandel, never mind that 100,000 people were tortured and killed, at least we discovered a new anti-wrinkle cream. If you don’t think that’s what it always is in practice you’re delusional. Shit like that is just as likely to cause mass disease or our extinction than it is to discover something useful, perhaps even more so

    • VitoRobles@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      This is the moral dilemma.

      The whole Grimdank universe of just randomly testing things on people to make humans genetically more superior will absolutely improve life for future humans. No question. On paper anyways.