Hey Pro Lifers................what do you think of CRISPR?

[ABikerSailor]

You know, there is a new technology out there where they can actually modify your genetic sequences and can possibly use it to cure lots of inherited diseases. Only problem is, some of you pro lifers believe that life begins at conception, as soon as the egg is fertilized.

So, my question is, that because this technology has been tested on human embryos (eggs they fertilized to see if it worked), does that amount to doing testing on humans? And, because they destroy the embryos that were fertilized (they can't implant them in a person), does that amount to murder in your eyes? Here's the part of the interview that got my attention and made me ask this question............................

CRISPR: The gene-editing tool revolutionizing biomedical research

So Mitalipov and an international team of scientists decided to use CRISPR on human embryos to correct a single genetic mutation that causes a deadly heart disease called hypertropic cardiomyopathy.

They got healthy eggs from donors and sperm from a man who carries the disease. At the same time the eggs are fertilized, they also get an injection of CRISPR. Mitalipov enlarged the microscopic procedure over three hundred times so we could see it.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Here we have our pipette with sperm inside, which has been already exposed to CRISPR. And this is a egg. And so what we need to do is pierce through, and then we break membrane. And now -

Bill Whitaker: Release the sperm into the egg.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Yeah. And now this is the sperm coming in.

Bill Whitaker: Wow.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Now it's inside there

Bill Whitaker: Just like that, that egg has been CRISPRed?

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: CRISPRed, fertilized.

Bill Whitaker: And you have changed the genetic destiny of that embryo.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Yes, we believe so.

These embryos will never be implanted, but they are grown in an incubator for three days and then checked to see if they carry the disease mutation.

Normally, 50 percent would. Mitalipov says with CRISPR, 72 percent were free of the mutation that would cause the heart disease.



So......................is this research ethical, or should it be banned? They are testing it out on human embryos.

 

[ABikerSailor]

And................if you are against them using this technology like this, what would be your suggestion for researching genetic diseases?

 

[TNHarley]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

 

[ABikerSailor]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

Are you saying that we should stop research on this front to avoid slapping God in the face? What about all the kids and people that could benefit from this? Don't you think that keeping a child from an inherited disease can be beneficial, because if we fix the person with the genetic condition, we eventually will get rid of the condition all together.

 

[TNHarley]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

Are you saying that we should stop research on this front to avoid slapping God in the face? What about all the kids and people that could benefit from this? Don't you think that keeping a child from an inherited disease can be beneficial, because if we fix the person with the genetic condition, we eventually will get rid of the condition all together.

God doesnt care about kids, remember? So why should i?

 

[ABikerSailor]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

Are you saying that we should stop research on this front to avoid slapping God in the face? What about all the kids and people that could benefit from this? Don't you think that keeping a child from an inherited disease can be beneficial, because if we fix the person with the genetic condition, we eventually will get rid of the condition all together.

God doesnt care about kids, remember? So why should i?

So, you think it's okay to fertilize human eggs to see if it worked? I thought that pro life types said that if you kill a fertilized egg, it's equal to killing a person.

 

[WheelieAddict]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

Which god is that?

 

[TNHarley]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

Which god is that?

the one true god!

 

[WillowTree]

Tell me one thing biker dude! If conception did not take place would there be life? Yes or No?

 

[WheelieAddict]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

Which god is that?

the one true god!

God cannot be slapped in the face lol

 

[DOTR]

More evil perpetuated by vile liberals. This started when they "just wanted to do stem cell research". The lesson? As always...never ever ever give a liberal even an inch.

Obama overturns Bush policy on stem cells - CNN.com

 

[Moonglow]

genetic disease is a punishment from the god that loves us.
Fixing that is slapping god in the face.

Actually, God said that is our fault...

 

[2aguy]

You know, there is a new technology out there where they can actually modify your genetic sequences and can possibly use it to cure lots of inherited diseases. Only problem is, some of you pro lifers believe that life begins at conception, as soon as the egg is fertilized.

So, my question is, that because this technology has been tested on human embryos (eggs they fertilized to see if it worked), does that amount to doing testing on humans? And, because they destroy the embryos that were fertilized (they can't implant them in a person), does that amount to murder in your eyes? Here's the part of the interview that got my attention and made me ask this question............................

CRISPR: The gene-editing tool revolutionizing biomedical research

So Mitalipov and an international team of scientists decided to use CRISPR on human embryos to correct a single genetic mutation that causes a deadly heart disease called hypertropic cardiomyopathy.

They got healthy eggs from donors and sperm from a man who carries the disease. At the same time the eggs are fertilized, they also get an injection of CRISPR. Mitalipov enlarged the microscopic procedure over three hundred times so we could see it.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Here we have our pipette with sperm inside, which has been already exposed to CRISPR. And this is a egg. And so what we need to do is pierce through, and then we break membrane. And now -

Bill Whitaker: Release the sperm into the egg.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Yeah. And now this is the sperm coming in.

Bill Whitaker: Wow.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Now it's inside there

Bill Whitaker: Just like that, that egg has been CRISPRed?

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: CRISPRed, fertilized.

Bill Whitaker: And you have changed the genetic destiny of that embryo.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Yes, we believe so.

These embryos will never be implanted, but they are grown in an incubator for three days and then checked to see if they carry the disease mutation.

Normally, 50 percent would. Mitalipov says with CRISPR, 72 percent were free of the mutation that would cause the heart disease.



So......................is this research ethical, or should it be banned? They are testing it out on human embryos.

I draw the line at the embryo needs to be in the womb.....that is natural....that is human.

 

[Moonglow]

More evil perpetuated by vile liberals. This started when they "just wanted to do stem cell research". The lesson? As always...never ever ever give a liberal even an inch.

Obama overturns Bush policy on stem cells - CNN.com

Yes, it is much more fun and profitable doing postpartum maintenance of humans than preventive maintenance before gestation..

 

[Moonglow]

You know, there is a new technology out there where they can actually modify your genetic sequences and can possibly use it to cure lots of inherited diseases. Only problem is, some of you pro lifers believe that life begins at conception, as soon as the egg is fertilized.

So, my question is, that because this technology has been tested on human embryos (eggs they fertilized to see if it worked), does that amount to doing testing on humans? And, because they destroy the embryos that were fertilized (they can't implant them in a person), does that amount to murder in your eyes? Here's the part of the interview that got my attention and made me ask this question............................

CRISPR: The gene-editing tool revolutionizing biomedical research

So Mitalipov and an international team of scientists decided to use CRISPR on human embryos to correct a single genetic mutation that causes a deadly heart disease called hypertropic cardiomyopathy.

They got healthy eggs from donors and sperm from a man who carries the disease. At the same time the eggs are fertilized, they also get an injection of CRISPR. Mitalipov enlarged the microscopic procedure over three hundred times so we could see it.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Here we have our pipette with sperm inside, which has been already exposed to CRISPR. And this is a egg. And so what we need to do is pierce through, and then we break membrane. And now -

Bill Whitaker: Release the sperm into the egg.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Yeah. And now this is the sperm coming in.

Bill Whitaker: Wow.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Now it's inside there

Bill Whitaker: Just like that, that egg has been CRISPRed?

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: CRISPRed, fertilized.

Bill Whitaker: And you have changed the genetic destiny of that embryo.

Shoukhrat Mitalipov: Yes, we believe so.

These embryos will never be implanted, but they are grown in an incubator for three days and then checked to see if they carry the disease mutation.

Normally, 50 percent would. Mitalipov says with CRISPR, 72 percent were free of the mutation that would cause the heart disease.



So......................is this research ethical, or should it be banned? They are testing it out on human embryos.

I draw the line at the embryo needs to be in the womb.....that is natural....that is human.

You think the environment you exist in now is natural?

 

[Moonglow]

Tell me one thing biker dude! If conception did not take place would there be life? Yes or No?

Amebas have no problem doing it by themselves...

 

[ABikerSailor]

Tell me one thing biker dude! If conception did not take place would there be life? Yes or No?

That wasn't the question asked. In order for the scientists to figure out if it works, they have to use a healthy egg from a female, and a sperm from a male that has the disease. They then treat the sperm with CRISPR to modify the genetic code and then fertilize an egg with it to see if the disease is transmitted.

They then allow the egg to grow for 3 days and check the cell development to see if it worked or not. Usually, it is a 50 percent chance if the male has the disease. With this treatment, it goes up to being a 72 percent chance of being healthy.

The question was, are you pro lifers in favor of this research, because according to you guys, life begins at fertilization, and if you kill a fertilized egg, that is tantamout to murder according to you?

And, if you allow this kind of research, why? Because they are fertilizing an egg, growing it for 3 days, and then testing it, which destroys it. According to you pro lifers, it begins at fertilization, and they are killing 3 day old kids.

 

[Votto]

 

[2aguy]

Embryonic stem cells have been a failure....adult stem cells have led to some cures...

 

[ABikerSailor]

More evil perpetuated by vile liberals. This started when they "just wanted to do stem cell research". The lesson? As always...never ever ever give a liberal even an inch.

Obama overturns Bush policy on stem cells - CNN.com

Hate to tell you DOTR, but CRISPR and stem cell research are two different things. One modifies the genetic code, the other just grows healthy cells.