259
US doctors rewrite DNA of infant with severe genetic disorder in medical first
(www.theguardian.com)
So glad to be seeing the fruits of CRISPR in my lifetime
this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
259 points (97.4% liked)
science
18776 readers
1057 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I did not have Gattaca on my bingo card…
Great for the kid, though. I wish them a long and prosperous life.
Yeah I don’t see how this won’t happen now. As soon as parents are given the option to prevent systemic genetic diseases like congenital blindness, the next question will be, “do you want them to be a bit smarter?” Very few parents are going to say no.
The problem is intelligence doesn't automatically mean better life, especially not in a country like the US.
In a sane society genetics would mean zero difference in average QOL...
Well, if the parents are affluent enough to pay for a non-curative genetic editing I'd say that'll help.
It's sad how true this is. Seems like a lot of dumb people out there having a good time.
It is the single greatest correlate for life outcomes. Higher income, longer lifespan, lower addiction, higher employment, higher wealth, lower crime, better physical health on every metric, and lower rates of fatherlessness. These effects all compound the next generation too. There is nothing else in sociology which comes even close to IQ in predicting life outcomes. Not income, race, location, education, or fatherlessness.
Of course nothing guarantees a “better” life.
Well that's just bullshit and I looked it up to be sure it was.
Income is the best life outcome. I did find that high IQ is more correlated with depression and suicide however.
Did you look it up on Instagram? Which part is bullshit? Be specific so I know which evidence you’d like me to produce.
Let’s start with income. Here are dozens and dozens of citations showing that IQ is the single most important correlate for income. Do you know what income is highly correlated with? Low crime, high employment, long life span, better health, and a hundred other important quality of life factors. Are you disputing that too?
I’m not sure if you don’t understand what I’m writing or if we’re talking past each other. To put it plainly, IQ is the single greatest determinant of income. Income is one of the (and arguably the) greatest determinant of a host of other life outcomes.
... Did you read your own link?
Not only are mostly all of the "citations" (hyperlinks) to this random website you linked just news articles (many of which don't have actual citations or referenced research papers that are from the 21st century, or are articles from the 20th century), but some are heavily biased (quoting Jeff Bezos in the Washington Post, which he owns).
Even the website auther themselves sometimes admit to their flawed analysis, such as equating SAT scores to IQ rather than an actual IQ test. Quote:
Cognitive ability: For the first time ever, we just happen to have publicly known IQ data on every single living self-made person who was ever ranked as the richest American. As mentioned above, Bill Gates reportedly scored 1590 on the pre-1995 SAT, equating to an IQ of 170 (see chart at bottom of this article).
Jeff Bezos told The Washington Post he scored 1450, which equated to an IQ of 146.
According to biographer Walter Isaacson, Elon Musk scored 1400 on the pre-recentered SAT, equating to an IQ of 142.
According to his sister Doris, a woman administered an IQ test to Buffet at age 10 and he scored a couple points above 150. However back in 1940, most IQs were still calculated using the age ratio method meaning a 10-year-old who performed as well as the average 15.2-year-old, was developing at 152% his chronological age and thus assigned an IQ of 152. Although this method (normed entirely on whites) formed a Gaussian curve from IQ 50 to 150, the mean and SD were 101.8 and 16.4 respectively, a little higher than on most modern scales where the mean is set at 100 and the SD at 15.
Converting to the modern scales gives Buffet an IQ of 146 (U.S. white norms; also 146 on U.S. norms).
Or here, quoted:
But Stanley suspected a self-reporting bias was inflating the numbers since “A students” were more likely to recall their score than “C students”.
But most damming of all, is that this whole weird blog website is talking about a correlation between income and IQ, NOT that IQ determines income.
Correlation isn't causation. And it's no surprise that people who can go to good schools, don't have to worry about food, etc, do better on a test, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are inherently biologically more intelligent.
Okay so I'm asking you for the second time: what are you disputing? What are you arguing? You call bullshit without telling me what you think is wrong, forcing me to try to rebut a ghost. Given the fact you refuse to articulate what you're arguing, I surmise you know I'm correct and you won't be specific because you know I'll produce peer reviewed research.
You just didn't read my response at all, did you?
You didn't produce peer reviewed research, you produced a blog that links to a bunch of news articles and hearsay.
This is what a research paper is.
And even then, you have to them check it's peer reviewed. Just because it's published doesn't mean it is. This is but one example that refutes your original point as well btw.
yeah sure, that's why so many autistic people are living just amazing lives
The catastrophe will be when we realize yet again that the human genome is not like a config file.
the trumpists are attempting eugenics the old fashioned way, gattaca would be an upgrade
It'll take at least a generation for Gattaca to be in full swing
Based on what? The US discussing legalising genetic experimentation for military uses is the pathway to Gattaca.
Not saying you're wrong, curious about your time-line
Just a general timeline for technology to become ubiquitous. Starts small, for the rich or "for nerds"; begins to take over, now seen as "normal"; eventually you're the weird one for not having it.
Microwave ovens & the Internet are the two I can think of in my lifetime, I'd say an average of about 20 years for the cycle to complete, so about a generation.
that cycle will get shorter and shorter until the world is radically changed every couple of days….
i don't think that's true, there's limiting factors like working hours
A baby (and more people after) not dying is an afterthought to you, you are mostly concerned with a fucking SciFi flick not coming true somehow.
Grow up, seriously.
This tech will save and improve a lot of peoples' lives. It will be also be used frivolously by the rich to 'improve' (or actually fuck up) themselves just like they use current medical tech. Meanwhile some poorer people that need it to survive will be denied it.
These are political issues, long existing, not problems with this medical development.
I would suggest they're more in touch with the science. It haunts science, we know we must do it for the benefit of humanity, but with the knowledge - the powerful and capital will use it for themselves.
I would suggest they’re more in touch with the science.
How so?
It haunts science, we know we must do it for the benefit of humanity, but with the knowledge - the powerful and capital will use it for themselves.
The solution is not halting technological advancement(especially medical technology) but to try and change our political systems.
I’m glad they’re finally using CRISPR for medical applications
But wait, are we supposed to celebrate this or boycott the kid for being a GMO?
This is awesome news.
Pretty sure a Chinese scientist got two years behind bars for doing the same thing