General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThree-person baby debate begins in Parliament
Source: BBC
Prime Minister David Cameron said he would vote in favour of the technique which is aimed at preventing deadly genetic diseases.
The UK could become the first country to introduce laws to allow the creation of babies from three people.
The issue has sparked fierce ethical debate and senior Church figures have called for the procedure to be blocked.
However, if there is a "yes" vote in the Commons, then the first three-person baby could be born as soon as next year. It could eventually help about 150 couples a year.
<snip>
Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-31069173
Franken-babies!
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)From a strictly materialistic point of view, we are just chemical machines anyways. And this method is like patching bad software.
But seriously: What's the difference between this and homo sapiens interbreeding with neanderthals?
ann---
(1,933 posts)as I see it, is that there is a third party involved. That's a recipe for disaster, in my view.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)The third party could be treated like a sperm donor that helps a couple get pregnant. That's not that outlandish.
You only need ONE sperm donor in order to get pregnant. Adding genes from a THIRD party is outlandish - to me.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,315 posts)and so, unless there are mistakes in the copying process, everyone has the same mtDNA sequences. This is replacing the mitochondrial DNA that has gone wrong, due to errors in copying, with a version that still does the job that is needed. Why would this cause a disaster?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)The child will have a nucleic mother and a mitochondrial mother, but one father.
It's really very simple to solve any legal issues. The nucleic mother is considered the biological mother.
There could also be a third mother if a surrogate mother is used to carry the embryo to term.