|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 14 hours, 41 minutes
|
Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours)
#19387522 - 01/08/14 11:17 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
How could we possibly make the humans have better genes without the process of eliminating those with bad genes?
I've been reading some Richard Dawkins ans he proposed an extremely intelligent way of doing so. It would be extremely hard to implement, but it is plausible.
The easy answer: Nobody becomes a parent before the age of 40.
The principle of this is very simple. We all have a copious amounts of genes and DNA in our body, the thing is, we don't know whether they are good or bad until we get sick and die young or die old old age. If you prevent everybody from having kids before they reach the age of 40, everybody carrying bad genes that help develop deadly diseases at a young age would die before they have a chance of reproducing. That way, they wouldn't spread the gene and eventually, it would be taken out of the equation. Dawkins claimed that if this were implemented worldwide, the average lifespan of human could be well into the 100s of years old. Healthy individual would reproduce.
Of course some will inevitably die at 41 years old after they had kids, but that only means that the kid will be at a higher risk of contracting the same disease only in his forties. If he contracts it earlier, he won't reproduce.
Doing this would greatly reduce the chance of dying from a disease before you get to 40. Whether its cancer, heart attacks or another disease.
Food for thought, yet again, discuss.
--------------------
|
g00ru
lit pants tit licker



Registered: 08/09/07
Posts: 21,088
Loc: georgia, us
Last seen: 5 years, 1 month
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: Patlal]
#19387529 - 01/08/14 11:19 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
hmmm, i could see the advent of 3d printing having an impact on this. it might get to the point where people can just design and make their own drugs for a low cost. regardless of legality, that would take genetic design to the next level...it doesn't all have to be eugenics and birth control, i think anyone who has done psychedelics knows that certain substances surely effect your DNA long after conception?
actually there is already a game/sim program where people design their own molecules so seems like this is in the works.
-------------------- check out my music! drowse in prison and your waking will be but loss
|
trekie
Metal man


Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 11,085
Loc: Larger cities
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behavior's) [Re: Patlal] 2
#19387548 - 01/08/14 11:23 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
This is a terrible idea . Women over 40 even with IVF have a hard time conceiving and even harder time carrying to term.
Also there have been some studies saying rates of autism and other mentally conditions increase as you get older.
Im all for Eugenics we do it to animals all the time. The way you suggest just wouldn't be good.
Now if we only let the smartest more fit people have kids thats fine with me.
I think anyone on welfare ( long term) should be rendered infertile
-------------------- I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.
|
KremrBigSikter
Spränger Språnger




Registered: 07/23/11
Posts: 3,918
Last seen: 8 years, 3 months
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: Patlal] 1
#19387550 - 01/08/14 11:23 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said: How could we possibly make the humans have better genes without the process of eliminating those with bad genes?
I've been reading some Richard Dawkins ans he proposed an extremely intelligent way of doing so. It would be extremely hard to implement, but it is plausible.
The easy answer: Nobody becomes a parent before the age of 40.
The principle of this is very simple. We all have a copious amounts of genes and DNA in our body, the thing is, we don't know whether they are good or bad until we get sick and die young or die old old age. If you prevent everybody from having kids before they reach the age of 40, everybody carrying bad genes that help develop deadly diseases at a young age would die before they have a chance of reproducing. That way, they wouldn't spread the gene and eventually, it would be taken out of the equation. Dawkins claimed that if this were implemented worldwide, the average lifespan of human could be well into the 100s of years old. Healthy individual would reproduce.
Of course some will inevitably die at 41 years old after they had kids, but that only means that the kid will be at a higher risk of contracting the same disease only in his forties. If he contracts it earlier, he won't reproduce.
Doing this would greatly reduce the chance of dying from a disease before you get to 40. Whether its cancer, heart attacks or another disease.
Food for thought, yet again, discuss.
Women over 40 have a much higher risk of their children getting down syndrome.
I propose that all humans get a little reversible tube-tie device implanted when they're young, and they have to use their wits to figure out a way to become fertile. Like a puzzle game! Everyone loves puzzles! Except for meatheads, so they'll die out.
-------------------- I have pneumonia
|
berdinwall
<3 whooooshhh


Registered: 06/10/12
Posts: 4,276
Loc: West Virginia
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: KremrBigSikter]
#19387573 - 01/08/14 11:29 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
eh...why try to rush evolution?
--------------------
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 14 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: berdinwall]
#19387581 - 01/08/14 11:31 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
berdinwall said: eh...why try to rush evolution?
Because we finally figured out how!
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 5 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: KremrBigSikter] 1
#19387584 - 01/08/14 11:31 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Wait, Dawkins proposed this?
One huge problem with having kids that late is the rage of birth defects goes though the roof. For example, women in their forties have a much higher chance of having kids with Down's syndrome and the rate of autism increases with the age of the father.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 14 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: Patlal]
#19387587 - 01/08/14 11:32 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
I was expecting the pregnancy trouble comments. It is true that older women tend to have more complications, perhaps men should wait until 40 and women until 35.
--------------------
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 14 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: koods]
#19387600 - 01/08/14 11:34 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Wait, Dawkins proposed this?
One huge problem with having kids that late is the rage of birth defects goes though the roof. For example, women in their forties have a much higher chance of having kids with Down's syndrome and the rate of autism increases with the age of the father.
You talk as if 50% of the babies will have a serious disease. WHich isn;t the case.
Plus when you think about it, the affected babies will either die early of not reproduce at all, therefore only the healthiest will reach the age of reproduction, which will in term reduce the complication of older pregnancy.
EDIT: Also, we know how to spot Downs syndrome early during the pregnancy. If its the case, wash it out, start over.
--------------------
Edited by Patlal (01/08/14 11:36 AM)
|
KingKnowledge
Around



Registered: 03/30/13
Posts: 2,876
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 4 years, 6 months
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: Patlal]
#19387603 - 01/08/14 11:35 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
There's no right way to Eugenics.
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: KingKnowledge]
#19387624 - 01/08/14 11:40 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
KingKnowledge said: There's no right way to Eugenics.
Sure. Just call it "genetic counseling centers".
http://www.cornell.edu/video/evolution-eugenics-and-beyond
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 5 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: Patlal]
#19387631 - 01/08/14 11:41 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Check this out. Rate of Down's syndrome per birth by age, second is rate of all trisomy chromosome defects. One in ten in your late forties is pretty significant.
Code:
20 1 in 1,667 1 in 526 25 1 in 1,250 1 in 476 30 1 in 952 1 in 384 35 1 in 385 1 in 192 40 1 in 106 1 in 66 41 1 in 82 1 in 53 42 1 in 64 1 in 42 43 1 in 50 1 in 33 44 1 in 38 1 in 26 45 1 in 30 1 in 21 46 1 in 23 1 in 16 47 1 in 18 1 in 13 48 1 in 14 1 in 10
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 5 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: Patlal]
#19387643 - 01/08/14 11:44 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Patlal said:
Quote:
koods said: Wait, Dawkins proposed this?
One huge problem with having kids that late is the rage of birth defects goes though the roof. For example, women in their forties have a much higher chance of having kids with Down's syndrome and the rate of autism increases with the age of the father.
You talk as if 50% of the babies will have a serious disease. WHich isn;t the case.
Plus when you think about it, the affected babies will either die early of not reproduce at all, therefore only the healthiest will reach the age of reproduction, which will in term reduce the complication of older pregnancy.
EDIT: Also, we know how to spot Downs syndrome early during the pregnancy. If its the case, wash it out, start over.
Tell that to the people who think their little retard is a gift from god.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 14 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: koods]
#19387721 - 01/08/14 11:48 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Patlal said:
Quote:
koods said: Wait, Dawkins proposed this?
One huge problem with having kids that late is the rage of birth defects goes though the roof. For example, women in their forties have a much higher chance of having kids with Down's syndrome and the rate of autism increases with the age of the father.
You talk as if 50% of the babies will have a serious disease. WHich isn;t the case.
Plus when you think about it, the affected babies will either die early of not reproduce at all, therefore only the healthiest will reach the age of reproduction, which will in term reduce the complication of older pregnancy.
EDIT: Also, we know how to spot Downs syndrome early during the pregnancy. If its the case, wash it out, start over.
Tell that to the people who think their little retard is a gift from god.
Nowadays, I think poeple are more inclined to listen to their doctors when something is wrong with their babies., it is true that some of them will survive. Then again, i'm sure the pregnancy level of people with Downs syndrome is pretty low.
And yes Dawkins mentioned it in his most popular book (The Selfish Gene) that he wrote in 1976. But don't worry, he revised it in 2006 and he put asterisks next to the points that have been proven wrong and promptly corrected himself in the endnotes (he didn't even try to defend himself when he spotted mistakes). There was no asterisk next to the 40 year old reproduction cycle so therefore he read it back in 2006 and still thought it to be true. I haven't seen him correcting himself on the subject either.
--------------------
|
seadragon
rawrasaur


Registered: 05/02/12
Posts: 1,281
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 8 years, 5 months
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: Patlal]
#19387810 - 01/08/14 11:53 AM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
BLAMSEMPY BLAMSEMPY!!!!!!! MAKING A WOMAN PREGNANT IN THE GRATEST SIN OF DEM ALL
BLAMSEMPY
|
FrozenHappiness
Professional Cereal Box

Registered: 03/01/01
Posts: 5,330
Loc: Nagoon Lagoon
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: LunarEclipse] 1
#19387880 - 01/08/14 12:10 PM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Outside of a GATTACA type scenario, where we have figured out exactly which genes and genetic sequences do what, and can reliably manipulate them there will always be evolutionary trade offs no matter if there is artificial selection, like in eugenics. Or natural selection, like what happens in the wild.
By gaining some of the characteristics that you have been selecting for, you end up loosing some other important characteristics that benefit the fitness of the organism.
Look at domesticated plants and animals. Domesticated animals have mainly been bred for size, docility. By breeding them this way, and selecting for characteristics that we deem desirable they end up loosing some of their instincts, intelligence, fertility and fecundity. In short many domesticated animals loose the ability to make it on their own in the wild.
Domesticated plants have been bred mainly for increased yields. Now they have almost no ability to compete in the natural world and require consistent human intervention to persist.
This also applies to humans. By selecting for one, or even a few desirable traits in humans you will end up loosing other desirable traits. Say you focus mainly on intelligence. Then you may loose some vitality, or life span, or fertility, or resilience.
Focus on longevity, or immunity to disease, and you may loose intelligence or who knows.
By artificially deciding who can breed when, or who can breed at all, or even who survives you are altering a whole host of unseen things that will likely have huge consequences a generation or two down the line. In evolution there are always trade offs.
The biggest thing we have going for us as a species, evolutionarily speaking, is the size of our global population and our great diversity. Genetic diversity is key. When the shit hits the fan, and we run have far out grown carrying capacity there will be a great die off. In theory the healthiest, smartest, most resourceful of us will survive. Of course that isn't exactly true, given the distribution of wealth and other social factors-- but that is another topic for another thread.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 5 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: FrozenHappiness] 1
#19387905 - 01/08/14 12:15 PM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
So called bad genes are complicated. Think of something like sickle cell anemia. Bad disease if you inherit the gene from both parents, but if you only inherit from one parent, you have a natural immunity to Malaria.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 14 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: FrozenHappiness]
#19387922 - 01/08/14 12:19 PM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
FrozenHappiness said: Outside of a GATTACA type scenario, where we have figured out exactly which genes and genetic sequences do what, and can reliably manipulate them there will always be evolutionary trade offs no matter if there is artificial selection, like in eugenics. Or natural selection, like what happens in the wild.
By gaining some of the characteristics that you have been selecting for, you end up loosing some other important characteristics that benefit the fitness of the organism.
Look at domesticated plants and animals. Domesticated animals have mainly been bred for size, docility. By breeding them this way, and selecting for characteristics that we deem desirable they end up loosing some of their instincts, intelligence, fertility and fecundity. In short many domesticated animals loose the ability to make it on their own in the wild.
Domesticated plants have been bred mainly for increased yields. Now they have almost no ability to compete in the natural world and require consistent human intervention to persist.
This also applies to humans. By selecting for one, or even a few desirable traits in humans you will end up loosing other desirable traits. Say you focus mainly on intelligence. Then you may loose some vitality, or life span, or fertility, or resilience.
Focus on longevity, or immunity to disease, and you may loose intelligence or who knows.
By artificially deciding who can breed when, or who can breed at all, or even who survives you are altering a whole host of unseen things that will likely have huge consequences a generation or two down the line. In evolution there are always trade offs.
The biggest thing we have going for us as a species, evolutionarily speaking, is the size of our global population and our great diversity. Genetic diversity is key. When the shit hits the fan, and we run have far out grown carrying capacity there will be a great die off. In theory the healthiest, smartest, most resourceful of us will survive. Of course that isn't exactly true, given the distribution of wealth and other social factors-- but that is another topic for another thread.
Good point of view. Then again, were are not manipulating any genes at all, we are simply delaying reproduction. Therefore nothing has changed except that the ones who carry early onset disease don't get to reproduce if they don't survive.
Now off course, some of these people might carry extremely good genes. They might have been geniuses that fell victim to a heart attack at a young age. So technically he hasn't spread his early onset diseased genes AND his superior intelligence. BUT! Since we are already 7 billion people on the planet, his highly intelligent gene is probably shared by millions of other human on earth. Genes are virtually immortal. Perhaps the gene he inherited comes from his granfather from 3000BC. If the guy had 3 kids and they had 3 kids too, then the gene is pratically everywhere. By setting an age for reproduction, the genes that will end up elimiated has to be the diseased ones. The rest will continu to spread.
--------------------
|
Patlal
You ask too many questions



Registered: 10/09/10
Posts: 44,797
Loc: Ottawa
Last seen: 14 hours, 41 minutes
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: koods]
#19387940 - 01/08/14 12:23 PM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: So called bad genes are complicated. Think of something like sickle cell anemia. Bad disease if you inherit the gene from both parents, but if you only inherit from one parent, you have a natural immunity to Malaria.
Extremely complicted. A single gene does asolutely nothing. it needs a large group of other genes to be able to build a body. The problem is that within that group, unwanted genes slip in. The problem is, we don't know of their presence until they show themselves years later as a health problem. That's why if we wait a few years to make sure they aren't present in the body, we can safely and gradually begin to eliminate them.
Of course, the late acting problematic genes still spread like wildfire, but you can't control everything. Past a certain age, women can't have kids, so its better to have a kid with a late acting diseased gene than no kids at all.
--------------------
|
EdibleStereos
Healthy Body, Sick Mind


Registered: 01/02/13
Posts: 4,899
Loc: South Africa
|
Re: Eugenics: How to do it the right way (without mass murder and insane behaviours) [Re: koods]
#19387948 - 01/08/14 12:25 PM (10 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
This is stupid. This won't work.
In nature natural selection prunes genetically physical weakness, as well as provides benefit for smarter animals to survive as well.
This idea only will produce people who live longer, not smarter or more physically sound. Eugenics is more about creating a smarter more physically adept humans.
I am in favour of eugenics, but this idea sucks. The last thing we need is longer living humans that arent necessarily smarter/physically stronger. The population is already becoming an issue, this would make it worse.
|
|