http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/health/tests-of-parents-are-used-to-map-genes-of-a-fetus.html?hp

NYTimes wrote:For the first time, researchers have determined virtually the entire genome of a fetus using only a blood sample from the pregnant woman and a saliva specimen from the father.

The accomplishment heralds an era in which parents might find it easier to know the complete DNA blueprint of a child months before it is born.

Read on. Learn more. It wasn't aliens or the Illuminati (a sad day for the S&S section when I have to preface a post with this).

This changes everything and nothing.

And this helpes us how?

Didzo is quite right. It's a major breakthrough for geneticists, however I fail to understand the comparison between this and a section debating the existence of aliens.

sodbuster62 wrote:Didzo is quite right. It's a major breakthrough for geneticists, however I fail to understand the comparison between this and a section debating the existence of aliens.

Because the human genome was being used in another thread as existence of alien intervention in the genetic construct of our species -- and possibly all life on earth.

I've been involved with the canine genome project. We have learned so much about the origin of dog and are able to establish breed from buccal samples. This is a huge thing for people who own mixes that have been seized and labeled as "pit bulls" when they were things like boxer x lab, etc.

-E-

sodbuster62 wrote:Didzo is quite right. It's a major breakthrough for geneticists, however I fail to understand the comparison between this and a section debating the existence of aliens.

Haveing arguments about the existence of aliens is more fun because we are human. (apparently?)

Haha, yes well I suppose us being human does make us desire and fear the unknown and the mysterious "above." We all look to something: aliens, money, science, or religion. It just a matter of why.

opticbronze wrote:Haveing arguments about the existence of aliens is more fun because we are human. (apparently?)

lol yeah. Humans don't like the unknown.

suffish wrote:

opticbronze wrote:Haveing arguments about the existence of aliens is more fun because we are human. (apparently?)

lol yeah. Humans don't like the unknown.

Yet we constantly seek it. We have whole radio stations sending messages into space hoping to "contact" other life forms. Or whatever those giant dish stations are called.

I tell you this has nothing to do with aliens. You talk about aliens.

Next time, I'll tell you the thread has nothing to do with molemen from the hollow center of the flat Earth.

Don't be silly. The subterranean chasm is the home of the crab people.


Also...

This is important because it allows us to identify genetic diseases early on during development. That lets us begin treatment before the child is born, or if the defect is severe, terminate the pregnancy at an early stage.

SporeMasterSlyth33 wrote:This is important because it allows us to identify genetic diseases early on during development. That lets us begin treatment before the child is born, or if the defect is severe, terminate the pregnancy at an early stage.

This is a very good point. The article also mentions the fact that it gives rise to the controversy of selective breeding or a rise in abortion.

There are clear advantages and disadvantages. Either cure a life of imperfections . . . or eradicate it before it ever has a chance. The question is, which one will be used?

Mr. BlackBird, were you making fun of me? I can't tell. . . .I'm really bad with sarcasm. . . either that or I'm overly self conscious.

Probably depends on the specific defect and the religious beliefs of the parents. Some will carry a fetus to term regardless of the severity of the defect (including those likely to result in infant death), others will only terminate the most severe defects, and still others will want only largely defect-free children.

I can understand all sides of the argument.

SporeMasterSlyth33 wrote:Probably depends on the specific defect and the religious beliefs of the parents. Some will carry a fetus to term regardless of the severity of the defect (including those likely to result in infant death), others will only terminate the most severe defects, and still others will want only largely defect-free children.

I can understand all sides of the argument.

Asperger syndrome is identifiable in my family for 5 generations now on both sides. It's pretty sure we've a genetic propensity to it and just as sure we don't count it as a "defect". But there are people who want to avoid any experience with autism in their families.

On a grimmer note, I'm a CF carrier (as is about 1 out of 20 white people) and one of my sons has it (with very little ill effect and he's in his early 30's) and the other is a carrier. Both of the them have had genetic testing done on their wives and also on the developing fetus' amniotic fluid. They certainly would've liked a method of testing that avoided amniotic punctures.

My ex is a Tay-Sachs carrier. Some things one carries can be pretty terrifying when you're having kids, and the opportunity to know the outcome as early as possible spared my kids worrying about the the CF and Tay-Sachs status of their children before it was an issue. They could let go and enjoy the pregnancy and birth prepared for the outcome.

I do know people who've aborted for what I, personally, would consider cosmetic reasons. One of those couples also had early surgery done on both of their son's faces to assure they would have "regular" features, in their minds assuring their "edge" in the future.



The line between hygiene and eugenics can be a thin one. But still, it's better to know.