Baby 'free of breast cancer gene'

Im not sure if this is the right place for this topic so if it needs moved, feel free Mods

A girl due to be born next week will be the first British baby genetically selected to be free of a breast cancer gene.

She grew from an embryo screened to ensure it did not contain the faulty BRCA 1 gene, which passes the risk of breast cancer down generations.

The woman, who wants to remain anonymous, said: "We felt that, if there was a possibility of eliminating this for our children, then that was a route we had to go down."

Fertility expert Paul Serhal, who led the PGD team, said: "We have now entered a new era of being able to help people who have cancer genes. Not only can we liberate people from the guilt of passing a cancer gene onto their child, we can cut off transmission of the gene once and for all. These are families who have been plagued by this genetic curse for generations. With a wave of a magic wand the job is done, and this is fantastic."

Read : full article here.

Would i be right in saying that - if this pulls off - it would be fantastic news for science, tho more importantly for people who have inherited disorders such as cystic fibrosis and Huntington's disease AND Cancer!

Well the thing is, the technique known as pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is prooving much success.

Personally, im overwhelmed with this news

What do you guys think?, i'd be interested in hearing different opinions on this topic.

Woot woot

IP

reply to post by InfoProvider


It is great news in most ways, but I can't help being wary on a number of levels.

First take a look at this quote:

Fertility expert Paul Serhal, who led the PGD team, said: "We have now entered a new era of being able to help people who have cancer genes. Not only can we liberate people from the guilt of passing a cancer gene onto their child, we can cut off transmission of the gene once and for all. These are families who have been plagued by this genetic curse for generations. With a wave of a magic wand the job is done, and this is fantastic."

1) Does that mean that couples with BRCA-1 in their family should feel guilty (or might end up feeling guilty) if they choose not to use this technology and their daughter ends up with the gene?

2) Do we really want to keep encouraging people to believe that modern medicine, whether it be pharmaceutical or procedural, can be applied like "a wave of a magic wand," free of negative consequence?

3) Are we 100% sure that BRCA-1 does not have any additional role in the body or the genetic makeup of a population?

4) This is not discussed in the article, but given the name of the procedure (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis) I'm guessing that multiple embryos are created in vitro, screened for BRCA-1, and then only those which do not carry the mutation are implanted. This raises the ethical question of what should be done with the remaining embryos – if you are anti-abortion then presumably any action other than trying to carry an embryo to term is murder. I happen to be pro-choice, but it still kind of gives me the willies to think of all those extra embryos being made so that parents can choose the genetic makeup of a child.

This type of practice will develop into human-selective breeding and thus forever altering the natural process which is evolution/natural selection. With a lack of fair balance of traits, this could potentially lead to all of us having the same exact genetic traits (rather than biodiversity). Where we gain on one, we will be losing greatly on another.

[edit on 12/19/08 by Yoda411]

We were given life in this body that is as complex as it is perfect.
We have created our own problems that give rise to disease in our children.
It is the price we pay for our "Advancement in Technology".
You will not cure the problem with the very thing which caused it.
Mother nature knows when she is being modified and manipulated, and she fights back.With vengeance.
In the grand scheme of things, though as human we would like to believe otherwise, not one single life is any more important than the life of a butterfly, or a rodent.
In the grand scheme of things, it will be OUR species eradicated first.
And it will be entirely, of our own doing.