Crispr Technique Heralds Genetic Revolution

Yes, and not the way we might intend.
Don't screw with nature. It has a way of coming back and biting us in the ass.

Yep. If this works out it could be to sex selective abortions as the wheel was to rocket science...

Yes it does. If this works it could be to same s$x abortion as the wheel was to rocket science...

Typical liberal Dumb ass las only sees good but can't see past his nose that this can also be used for extremely horrible evil as well . Of course thinking humans are gods is las's biggest mistake! Take gun powder away and walk into the bush by yourself with a hungry bear or cougar around how much of a god do you think you would be dipshit ! We are only gods in your little mind because we have the upper hand it can change in an instant!!

paul you dim weed...and God created man in his own likeness

do you not read and understand the bible you so worship?????

'Were not playing God WE ARE GOD. And with this genetic engineering, we can all be Gods'

Ah LAS spoken like the true socialist prog that you are.
Did you think that by acquiring something, you become that thing?
If that were true then any tin eared wannabee picking up a musical instrument could automatically expect to be a virtuoso.
I've been saying for years that progressives are so morally & spiritually vacant that all they really want is to be God...and rule.

I'd weep for you las but the only tears I could hope to find would be urine.

Ah LAS spoken like the true socialist prog that you are.

WTF are you talking about? Maybe we can use Crispr to make you not retarded.

"If you like your custom mutation, you can keep it."

ITT, Luddites.

"s$x selective"

You can stop being a jack@$$ for five seconds and recognise that not only are you NOT ever God or a god but that there may be ethical ramifications to this "jaw-dropping" yet possibly life-saving development.

Any cure for any disease means a dead end in profit. The goal is never to cure but to keep disease in check with a life time supply of expensive medicine. Considering the entire sickness industry is on the stock market, I believe your theory makes no economic sense. A cure for any disease would be devastating as the pharmaceuticals would no longer be required.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AazObF_pHSU

You realize you are peddling bullshit, don't you? Polio, and tuberculosis, both huge killers when I was a kid, are both all but gone, and the sole reason both aren't totally extinct, like smallpox (hey, there's another) is stupid third-worlders and anti-vax idiots.

A cure for the common cold would be a huge money-maker, and a repeat seller, since the common cold is a whole constellation of viruses, meaning vaccines, as currently made, are useless. The cold I had last month has conferred on me immunity to that specific bug, but not to others, so I'm still susceptible to colds. Would I pay a hundred bucks for a one-shot cold cure that completely and safely killed the viral infection, and alleviated all the symptoms overnight? Damn right, if it worked and was proven safe. Because the lack of discomfort, and added work productivity would be WORTH IT.

Same, even more so with cancer cures. People develop cancer spontaneously. Even if you invented a drug that achieved a 100% destruction and cure of a given case of cancer in an individual, there would be new cases spontaneously arising in others, and even that same individual might spontaneously develop another cancer in future years. If you were diagnosed with cancer of the pancreas, would you pay $10,000, or even $100,000 for a shot that was sure to cure it? I expect you would, and guess what? Even at a hundred grand a shot, it would be cheaper than the current regime for our medical system, plus the cured patients could go back to being productive taxpayers, and cease being costly consumers of medical service.

Drug company profits would probably soar, because they could sell small volumes of highly effective cures for a huge per-unit profit, even as they were able to reduce the overall size of their production facilities. Their business model might change, but their profitability ought to increase.

Think of it as going from selling 3 million cases of cheap swill beer per month at a profit of 25 cents per case, to selling 5000 bottles of 400 buck a bottle champagne per month at a profit of 300 bucks per bottle. You have just doubled your net profit.

Most of what you're saying is true but I have to nitpick you on TB. TB infects 1/3 of the world and is even present at low but significant rates in the 1st world. There is no effective anti-TB vaccine (BCG vaccine does not work).

The notion that big pharma intentionally hold back cures is laughable. Gardasil alone disproves that.

All good points but what we are talking about here is the ability to eliminate all diseases over a short period of time and eliminate big Pharma as a player in favor of genetic manipulation. At any age if I read it correctly. There will always be a need for some medicine as some things (colds +) are not genetic, but the elimination of disease would be devastating to big Pharma's bottom line. And the book on Gardasil still has a few chapters to be written.

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/stress-and-health-dr-lind/2013/apr/10/us-court-pays-6-million-gardasil-victims/