Are Designer Babies and Animal-Human Hybrids Next?

Are Designer Babies and Animal-Human Hybrids Next?

www.russiatoday.ru

new law which could allow parents to create so-called “designer babies” is being considered by British politicians. But the complex bill, which is meant to reform outdated fertility legislation is causing controversy in certain quarters as religious and disability groups are concerned that imperfect embryos could be discarded.

“Designer babies” are the best embryos, selected over less attractive ones.

British law makers have drawn-up a new Human Tissue and Embryos Bill that’s meant to update old legislation from the 1980s and reflect the most recent human reproductive technology.

Meanwhile, it’s causing controversy. One of the main points of anxiety is that the legislation seeks to introduce the creation of animal-human hybrids for medical research - something which has not been allowed anywhere in the world.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Animal-Human hybrids.....ah......

We are treading on dangerous ground when we start to re-engineer ourselves. Would this qualify as devolution? This is just creepy!


www.russiatoday.ru
(visit the link for the full news article)

This is probably way out in left field and I think I might have read the comment here on ATS. It might be nothing but my imagination, it seems to me that there are quite a few Holly Wood people having twins. Could eugenics already be in play?
Just a thought

Eugenics

INTERVIEW WITH ROBERT K. GRAHAM

Originally published in The Eugenics Bulletin, Winter 1983

Robert K. Graham was co-founder and director of the Repository for Germinal Choice, a California-based sperm bank which stores and distributes the sperm of Nobel Prize winners and other men of exceptional ability. He invented the plastic spectacle lens, and was the author of The Future of Man.

You probably are not as out there as you suggest. With the number of twins being born in Hollywood I would suspect that there is some selective method being used.

What exactly is wrong with "designer babies"?

What exactly is wrong with discarcing imperfect embryos?
I'll keep the perfect ones. The religous nuts can keep the imperfect ones.
In a few generations we will have a more perfect human and they will have the same old same old defects and diseases.

You don't have to be Nostradamus to predict what's going to happen, and sooner than you might think.

As long as we're not all wiped out by that asteroid, I think it's inevitable that as we gain greater understanding and control of our own genetics, whether it's in 100 years or 1,000, people will choose to modify themselves in all kinds of ways. Humans love to do it now with clothing and costumes and tattoos and other various ritualistic modifications.

This will quickly lead to a broadening and divergence of humanity into a variety of new species -- wings, claws, scales, silky fur, multiple eyes, etc. -- some of which won't like each other at all. Add to that mix a variety of intelligent machines, and you've got a very interesting future going.

As SOON as I hear about the first company to go public which is going to create 'designer babies', I'm investing big time.

This is going to be an upcoming multi-billion dollar business.

And I agree with Ohzone, what wrong with it? Let the religious nuts keep theirs and let other people do what they want. Live and let live, right? But then again, when was the last time you ran into a really religious person that agreed with that?

There is (sadly,was) a great polish Sci-fi writer Stanislaw Lem. You probably know him from "Solaris". But not all he wrote was so "boring".
He wrote a lot of more "fun" stuff, often with futurologistic ideas. If you can get your hands on The Star Diaries in "The Twenty-first Voyage" he discusses this possible re-evolution plus some theological issues involved with great sense of humor.

As for twins issue, twins are often a result of fertility treatments. Not necessary eugenics.